Is a new camera worth it?

[toyotaae86lg]

Hey DISers, i'm very skeptical about getting a new digital camera. I've been researching this for the past 6-8 months. Right now I have a Kodack CX630 3.0 Megapixel digital camera. I like it and it takes great pictures. We used it last year for our disney trip and the pics came out great. I printed them off our computer and made an album. If I do get a new camera it's going to be a Casio EX-Z600 6.0 megapixel camera with a 2.7 lcd screen. The camera is just a much better camera than my kodak. I've found the casio for $250 where it msrp's for $299.99. I just don't know if it would be worth getting a new camera where I have a perfectly good kodak to use in my trip in 2 months. If I did get the new camera I know it would probably be worth it but it's $250 more I have to spend on this trip plus a case, plus another battery....an input on this

 

[Donald is #1]

If you are happy with your current camera, then stay with it. Why spend money if you are already happy with the one you have.

 

[toyotaae86lg]

That is originally what I figured, you know. My kodak works. But then I think of what great pics the 6 megepixel will give me so....I think i'm going to stick with my kodak though..

 

[aviva5675]

It sounds like one of those things-what you have is perfectly good and you like it but you really want a new camera and the trip is your/ an excuse to get it! It all comes down to if you can afford the $250 or not or would be thinking of getting a new one now even if there was no trip. The model you have, like you said, will do a great job for you. Sounds like you're ready to move up tho!

 

[oogieboogie]

the question is: Do you really need 6 megapixels? If you're going to be printing and enlarging and cropping these pictures, sure, go get the 6mp. But if all you're printing out is an 8x10 at the max, then I really don't see why you would get it.

It's a nice to have but at $250 more... well... to me it's just a nice to have.

 

[lindakmonty]

if you're not going to enlarging them I'd stick w/your Kodak...but I know how you feel about wanting a new one, I have several cameras myself

 

[Donald is #1]

If you are happy with your current camera, then stay with it. Why spend money if you are already happy with the one you have.

OK, now is when I admit, that even though I gave you the above advice...I have been known to buy a new camera because I want it not because I really need it. That being said, if you want the new camera because it is new & better and if you can afford it, then I say go for it. But it you are not sure or if the cost of the camera may cause you some hardship, then stick with your current camera that you are happy with.

 

[Pugrpooh]

Well, I bought a new camera. We have a 3.2 megapixel Canon Elph which takes great pics. It's small enough to fit in your pocket and easy to use. But after our trip to WDW in April, I started looking into other cameras. The newer models have more shooting modes (for low light, etc.) and there were times like on the safari or trying to take pics of DD on rides, etc. where I wanted more zoom.

I ended up getting a Sony DSC-H5 with 7.2 megapixels and a 12X optical zoom. It also has a 3" LCD screen. It's not small enough to fit in my pocket, but I'm looking forward to using it on our trip next month, especially to take fireworks shots and where I can zoom in.

I didn't want to just buy an updated version of the Canon Elph, since ours takes good pics still, but both cameras have their good points and bad.

 

[we3disneygo]

we have a kodak 3.1 pixal , my step dad just got a new model 5 pixal's , the pictures are really great!!! we were going to get a smaller camcorder but now we want a new camera!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! after all it's our last trip..........

 

[bevtoy]

Cameras (some time in 2007) are supposed to have 8 megapixels (due to a new technological advancement.) and are "supposed" to also be around 200 dollars, I am anticipating this and going to wait to purchase a new one, hope I didn't get a bad tip. I am trying to remember where I read it, maybe Kim Kommando?

 

[Bell30012]

Being a true techno-geek I used our last Disney trip for an excuse to upgrade to a 5.0 megapixel camera (Kodak 4900 EZ Share). We did take over 700 pictures in only 7 days of Disney.

Since then I've gotten away with moving up to an 8.0 megapixel camera (Nikon Coolpix 8700) but I've discovered something... It's cheaper to send your pictures to Walmart's photo via the internet and print them for 19 - 29 cents each versus the amount of ink it will take to print out on your own...

Several drug stores are also as cheap but you have to actually bring the memory card into them. On a 4 X 6 photo anything over 4 or 5 megapixels is overkill anyway but you never know when you may want to poster one of those awesome pictures like the one in front of Cinderella's castle...

 

[marconat]

I bougth a new camara for my next trip, but that's only because mine was starting to give out... but I still love my old one and I'm trying to get it clean out, to see if that was the problem, if so, I'll give it to my son. And plus it was 15 years old, but still very good Canon 650, but now I have a Canon EOS digital Rebel and all of my old zooms and flash fit on it, so that was a plus.

 

[penguin087]

If you like the Kodak stick with it. Look at it this way. By the time the Kodak quits on you you'll probably be able to get an 8mp (or maybe even 10!) for what you are about to spend on a 6mp.

 

[ukcatfan]

Do not get too hung up on how many MPs a camera has. The optics, quality of the sensor, and quality of the internal processing are much more important. I have seen 2MP pics that blow away 5-8MP ones from cheap cameras.

bevtoy- Do you mean that 8MPs will be under $200 by 2007 or just that they would be available at all? There have been consumer level 8MP cams available since around 2003.

I also have to say something about Kodak. Many people love them, but if really compared to brands like Canon, Panasonic, Sony, Nikon, etc. they have very few models that keep up with the pack. They get all their business by pushing their ease of use. What people do not realize is that virtually every new camera can be just as easy to use. The docking station is a joke. The USB cable that comes with every camera does the exact same thing and is free. Kodak is still the king at making traditional film, but they missed the quality boat when going to digital and are probably way too late to catch up.

 

[WillCAD]

Don't look at the camera - look at yourself. Are you going to wind up buying a new camera? If so, buy it before your trip. If you're likely to hold onto your current camera for another year or two before you actually buy a new one, then forget about the new one for now.

 

[Raistlix]

Another major consideration in the decision to get a new camera should be shutter lag . How many memories have you missed recording because you pushed the button and had to WAIT and WAIT for the camera to actually take the picture? If you are taking pictures of children this is a big problem with most digitals. I carry my big honkin' Nikon D70 in the park with me (I'm there now). It may be a bit heavy but I never miss a shot because of shutter lag . So consider looking at how you use your camera and how you plan to use it. Then look for a camera with the specifications that suit how and what you shoot!

 

[bevtoy]

Do not get too hung up on how many MPs a camera has. The optics, quality of the sensor, and quality of the internal processing are much more important. I have seen 2MP pics that blow away 5-8MP ones from cheap cameras.

bevtoy- Do you mean that 8MPs will be under $200 by 2007 or just that they would be available at all? There have been consumer level 8MP cams available since around 2003.

I also have to say something about Kodak. Many people love them, but if really compared to brands like Canon, Panasonic, Sony, Nikon, etc. they have very few models that keep up with the pack. They get all their business by pushing their ease of use. What people do not realize is that virtually every new camera can be just as easy to use. The docking station is a joke. The USB cable that comes with every camera does the exact same thing and is free. Kodak is still the king at making traditional film, but they missed the quality boat when going to digital and are probably way too late to catch up.

What I mean is that some new developement iin technology (a new chip) will make 8 mega pixel (already available cameras) drop dramatically in price into the 200 dollars (maybe a bit more) price range. I hope its true. The malls here have viewers you can look through for 25 cents that claim to have taken pictures with 25 megapixels, they are stunning. Far superior to most photos. I want 8 megapixels with a 10X or greater optical zoom.
That zoom is very important to me.

 

[seashoreCM]

You probably won't notice the difference that more than about 4 megapixels makes if you just print 4x5 or 4x6 inch snapshots.

But more megapixels could make up for less zoom because you can select the middle of the picture and enlarge that to 4x5 or 4x6 before blurriness or graininess becomes visible.

Zoomed pictures are more sensitive to blur due to less than steady holding of the camera. Here there is no difference between enlarging the middle of the picture versus having more zoom in the first place.

Somewhere, I don't know exactly where, there is a point of no return when it comes to megapixels because of limitations in the lens. Many digitals nowadays have enough lens aberrations in the picture corners to bring the effective megapixel quality there under 3.

Feeble flash is another still common shortcoming of point and shoot cameras both film and digital. You might do a birthday or character meal and the people at the far end of the table come out dark.

Disney hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/disney.htm

My only zoom camera (a Pentax film camera) broke so now I will be buying a new one, probably a Canon Elph digital, probably 6 megapixel.

 

[Bell30012]

Granted some people may not like Kodak EasyShare cameras but when three of the photographers in our family are aged 3, 8 & 9 I enjoy the fact that the cameras are easy to use. The 4900 (5.0 megapixal) was our second Kodak EasyShare. The first having been a 3900 (4.0 megapixal) both cameras are still used by our children.

The docking stations are very handy for using with stand-alone photo printers.

Here is a link to an awesome deal on a 4.0 megapixel Kodak http://www.officedepot.com/ddSKU.do?level=SK&id=544290 from Office Depot for only $100

 

[ukcatfan]

Granted some people may not like Kodak EasyShare cameras but when three of the photographers in our family are aged 3, 8 & 9 I enjoy the fact that the cameras are easy to use. The 4900 (5.0 megapixal) was our second Kodak EasyShare. The first having been a 3900 (4.0 megapixal) both cameras are still used by our children.

The docking stations are very handy for using with stand-alone photo printers.

Here is a link to an awesome deal on a 4.0 megapixel Kodak http://www.officedepot.com/ddSKU.do?level=SK&id=544290 from Office Depot for only $100

I can see your point for kids that young and how easy it is for them. My 12 and 8 year olds have no problems with our Canons though. My thoughts on Kodak are directed towards the adults. How much more difficult is it to pull out your memory card and stick it in a printer than it is to dock a Kodak? Is that three seconds saving worth the extra money you pay for a docking printer? To me, no way.

Also, if you are just transferring files, you are better off using a card reader no matter what brand you use. Every camera that is docked, connected, etc. is using the battery power to transfer those files. Every battery has a limit to the times it can be recharged before becoming trash, so why waste it on transfers? The card reader is typically faster anyway. Almost all newer camera software will recognize the card reader just as easily as the camera.