Point & Shoot camera

[lpk29]

Looking for one for cruising and everyday life that captures great quality with little to no adjustments that I can just takeout and grab that shot. I am no photo expert and haven't really every done anything off the auto/sports mode. So I am a totaly newbie to all of it

Looking for something small to fit in a purse or pocket

 

[photo_chick]

Unfortunately a camera that gets a great shot of whatever you want on auto in any situation doesn't exist yet. It still takes a little bit of knowledge in many situations.

Now.. what kind of features do you want and what is your budget? There are a lot of cameras out there and it's hard to narrow it down without more specifics.

 

[lpk29]

somewhere around $500 and jsut be able to learn easily to grab those shots. I have twin toddlers so looking for something to use with them and disney parks/cruising and such. Something that works good in low light and action

 

[lpk29]

Thoughts on these two. I know they are totally different in their own way from what I am ready but which is more user friendly

Canon S110 vs Sony RX100

 

[hakepb]

Those are 2 of the most popular and highly rated enthuiast cameras. Neither is a bad choice (unless you are say. a bird watcher, and need a bunch of zoom)

I'd start by looking at this article:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6698413448/dpreview-recommends-top-5-compact-cameras

And then reading the full reviews for each camera.

The RX-100 can produce images closer to DSLr quality (sensor is 3x larger than the s110). But capability can also require more skill (focusing is more finicky with the RX's more shallow depth of field), so it may not be the best choice for you. In addition, people's hands are different so a different camera may feel better in your hands.

 

[havoc315]

Auto modes are similar on just about every camera. To get the most out of any camera though, you need to leave auto.

Between those 2 cameras, you pay a premium for the rx100. For that price, you get a bigger sensor along with top quality lens, bringing higher image quality, lower noise, and excellent low light performance.

 

[havoc315]

Those are 2 of the most popular and highly rated enthuiast cameras. Neither is a bad choice (unless you are say. a bird watcher, and need a bunch of zoom)

I'd start by looking at this article:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6698413448/dpreview-recommends-top-5-compact-cameras

And then reading the full reviews for each camera.

The RX-100 can produce images closer to DSLr quality (sensor is 3x larger than the s110). But capability can also require more skill (focusing is more finicky with the RX's more shallow depth of field), so it may not be the best choice for you. In addition, people's hands are different so a different camera may feel better in your hands.

Depth of field isn't sooo shallow on the rx100, the sensor isn't that big. I've heard that it does become an issue with the rx1, full frame. Focus is quick and accurate on the rx100.

I do agree about considering how a camera feels in the hand.

 

[photo_chick]

Thoughts on these two. I know they are totally different in their own way from what I am ready but which is more user friendly

Canon S110 vs Sony RX100

Of those two I'd personally go with the RX100.

Now a note on depth of field and sensor size that have been mentioned. Depth of field doesn't really change with sensor size when all other things are equal. The math stays the same. What happens is with a larger sensor you get a wider field of view, again when all other things are equal, so you have to either move closer to your subject or you have to use a longer focal length to frame the same shot as you would with a smaller sensor camera. Which changes the math and things are no longer equal. All of this gets turned on it's side with point and shoots when it comes to comparisons because nothing is equal like when we compare a full frame to a crop DSLR. Simply saying that a larger sensor size means you will have a shallower depth of field is really inaccurate.

 

[lpk29]

thoughtts on this one
Sony Cyber-shot DSCHX30V

 

[havoc315]

thoughtts on this one
Sony Cyber-shot DSCHX30V

Good camera, but very different than the other 2. You're getting a good telephoto zoom, but trading off some image quality and low light performance.

Every camera, even very expensive ones, are about pros/cons and trade offs.

In order to get a big telephoto in a tiny package, a lot of compromises are made.
If a big telephoto is important, it is a very good camera. It is loaded with features and has good image quality. The Rx100 has similar features, far far superior image quality, but much less telephoto. The Canon s110 would be in between the two in terms of image quality, price and telephoto.

 

[wiigirl]

Thoughts on these two. I know they are totally different in their own way from what I am ready but which is more user friendly

Canon S110 vs Sony RX100

Out of those two I would vote the Canon.

 

[lpk29]

Thanks. I just need to make up my mind in which one I want to go with.

 

[havoc315]

Thanks. I just need to make up my mind in which one I want to go with.

Truthfully, the main advantage of the Canon is that it's cheaper. It has tiny bit more zoom, and has touch screen.

The rx100 is considerably more expensive, but brings far better image quality, higher resolution, better low light performance, far faster shooting.

The question is whether the advantages of the rx100 are worth the extra $$$.. When the s110 is a good performer and good enough for many people.

 

[hakepb]

Good camera, but very different than the other 2. You're getting a good telephoto zoom, but trading off some image quality and low light performance.

Every camera, even very expensive ones, are about pros/cons and trade offs.

In order to get a big telephoto in a tiny package, a lot of compromises are made.
If a big telephoto is important, it is a very good camera. It is loaded with features and has good image quality. The Rx100 has similar features, far far superior image quality, but much less telephoto. The Canon s110 would be in between the two in terms of image quality, price and telephoto.

Agree, I have an HX30. Within their common zoom range, the RX100 is far superior. Most great Disney photos are wide angle.
The only place the HX30's zoom might win at Disney is the Safari ride:

The main reason I chose the HX-30 was to zoom in to DS on a baseball or soccer field..but the RX would be far superior for Portraits , landscapes and Disney

 

[havoc315]

Agree, I have an HX30. Within their common zoom range, the RX100 is far superior. Most great Disney photos are wide angle.
The only place the HX30's zoom might win at Disney is the Safari ride:

The main reason I chose the HX-30 was to zoom in to DS on a baseball or soccer field..but the RX would be far superior for Portraits , landscapes and Disney

I'm curious, how do you feel your camera does in those sports situations? I imagine it does very well when players are basically stationary, but do you feel you can capture action?

 

[hakepb]

I'm curious, how do you feel your camera does in those sports situations? I imagine it does very well when players are basically stationary, but do you feel you can capture action?

I know my "keeper rate" is not as high as a great DSLr. The main reason I take the sports pictures is to post 2-3 shots on Facebook per game...and the HX30 delivers quite well.
From a technical perspective, The quality of photos is in-line with the quality of light. Near magic hour with the sun behind me, the HX is near amazing when it can stay at ISO 100-200.
I suppose a SI photographer would complain that I don't quite freeze all action enough, as a ball or foot or hand may have a some motion blur (often self inflicted while I try to keep ISO lower)

With Indoor basketball, I am stuck with Sports mode and its ISO 1600. It's not superb detail, but still quite recognizable.

Since im not big into publically posting pictures of DS, here's a picture I took at a college game from up in the cheap seats:

 

[hakepb]

I also think the HX30's video is really close to broadcast TV quality. Even handheld, its quite watchable on a flat screen:
http://vimeo.com/54696226

And the ability to capture full resolution stills during vidèo has given me some nice action stills.

 

[havoc315]

I know my "keeper rate" is not as high as a great DSLr. The main reason I take the sports pictures is to post 2-3 shots on Facebook per game...and the HX30 delivers quite well.
From a technical perspective, The quality of photos is in-line with the quality of light. Near magic hour with the sun behind me, the HX is near amazing when it can stay at ISO 100-200.
I suppose a SI photographer would complain that I don't quite freeze all action enough, as a ball or foot or hand may have a some motion blur (often self inflicted while I try to keep ISO lower)

With Indoor basketball, I am stuck with Sports mode and its ISO 1600. It's not superb detail, but still quite recognizable.

Since im not big into publically posting pictures of DS, here's a picture I took at a college game from up in the cheap seats:

That's more than acceptable for a p&s. very nice.