Digital camera...advice needed :-)

**koxka** · 02-03-2005, 07:40 PM

For those of you that are experienced with Digital Cameras I have a question:
Which camera would you prefer,the one with less megapixels but more features and more accurate focus/autofocus. Or the one with more megapixel, but les features and less control on focusing.?

I'm thinking on getting me one of these two.

What do you think?

**slleipnir** · 02-03-2005, 07:43 PM

I duno, I'd prob go for the first one.

**koxka** · 02-04-2005, 02:42 AM

Thank you!

Anyone else opinion, please?

**Barbara** · 02-04-2005, 02:55 AM

It depends for what you need the pictures. I preferred one with less pixels because I need my pictures mainly for posting on the web so I have to downsize them all the time anyway. If you have a big picture size they take longer to load, they take more space- you may even need a new computer to be able to work on them comfortably.

I would always go for a good optical zoom, more accurate focus and good light management.

Of course if you want pictures that can be printed (e.g. as a journalist) you need the pixels. I read that pixels can be a misleading information but I forgot why.

You may find a review and customer opinions at www.dpreview.com
Or ask Jonza, I think he knows an awful lot about cameras.

**MaryJae** · 02-04-2005, 05:27 AM

If you plan on printing big pictures off of your computer, it's better to get a camera with high megapixels. But there's really no need to though if you're not going to do that.

Go here for digital camera reviews:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/

Best cameras:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/best_cameras.html

I just got a Canon PowerShot A85 about a week before Christmas and that camera is awesome! It's a 4 megapixel and cost $250 at Ritz Camera. I definitely recommend either a Canon or Nikon cause they have movie modes too.

Good luck! Once you get a new camera, it's a new addiction!

**Tubby & Peanut's Mom** · 02-04-2005, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by koxka
Which camera would you prefer,the one with less megapixels but more features and more accurate focus/autofocus. Or the one with more megapixel, but les features and less control on focusing.?

First of all, I'm curious as to what you mean by more accurate focus/autofocus? If you mean the resolution, which on the one the best is 2048x1536 and the other is 1600x1200, that is not the focus, but the picture resolution. And to answer that question, yes, it depends on what you are going to be doing with the pictures. For internet purposes, 2.0 is plenty. You can get "bigger" pictures with the higher resolution if you're going to be printing them. But for internet purposes teh 2048x1536 is too big and like Barbara says, you'd probably be reducing them all the time anyway.

Also not sure what you mean by less features because they both seem real similar to me in that department.....

Now, I, personally, would not get either one of these and here's why. Look at the "Focusing Range" - they are both the same: normal 20"(.5m) - Infinity and macro 8"(.2m) - 20"(.5m) You will not be able to get extreme closups with either of these cameras. As an example, here are the specs for my camera, a Canon S400:
Focusing Range
Normal AF: 46cm/1.5 ft. - Infinity (W/T)
Macro AF: 5 - 46cm/2.0 in. - 1.5 ft. (W); 30 - 46cm/1.0 - 1.5 ft. (T)
I'm not sure about the cm/m numbers but if you look at the Canon, the macro mode allows pictures from as close as 2" whereas the Olympus can only come as close as 8". Which means you won't be able to get the extreme closups like this. If you try, the pic will be all blurry because it can't focus that close.

This is the reason I needed a new digital camera. However, this particular feature may not be as important to you. And I have to admit that my camera cost a bit more than the two you have highlighted here, but I know Canon offers a wide variety of cameras in a wide price range, and every one I clicked on at http://www.canon.com (then click on your part of the world) had the 2" macro feature. I'm sure Olympus probably has some in that range too, but I didn't check that out, and they might be more than you want to spend on a camera.

Other than this, I think both cameras you picked would be perfectly fine. It mentioned list price on both of them was $129.00 and I would be curious to know what features the lesser megapixel one has that would bring it up to the same price as the higher megapixel.

Also, do either offer video with sound?

**Disclaimer - like I mentioned, the macro feature was extremely important to me, it may not be that important to you. I, personally, prefer the Canon brand, but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with Olympus. Just my personal preference.

Good luck and I can't wait to see all the new pics of your babies!

**micki76** · 02-04-2005, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Tubby & Peanut's Mom
Now, I, personally, would not get either one of these and here's why.

**Disclaimer - like I mentioned, the macro feature was extremely important to me, it may not be that important to you. I, personally, prefer the Canon brand, but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with Olympus. Just my personal preference.

Good luck and I can't wait to see all the new pics of your babies!

I agree, I wouldn't get one of these either. Why? I bought a digital camera very similar to this for my first digicam. It satisfied me for a short time, but then I wanted a better camera that I could get better pics with.

Don't be misled by the megapixel confusion. Like eveyone has said, you probably don't need a high number here.

Also, there's only digital zoom on both of these, no optical. This was VERY important to me. (mine has a 10x optical zoom) It makes all the difference in my pics.

I prefer Olympus (I have the c740), but not these models.

**jenfer** · 02-04-2005, 12:07 PM

I have an Olympus, it's ok. However, some of the close-up shots can get blurry at times. I say get the best one you can afford. I know me always want to have the best one or I would want to upgrade my existing.

**luvofallhorses** · 02-04-2005, 02:20 PM

I don't know what kinda digi we have all I know it is nice Good luck

**Randi** · 02-04-2005, 03:13 PM

Koxka, I don't know that much about camera's, and John has been busy all day - he investigated quite a few models last year before he decided on this:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/spec...oly_c5060z.asp

It's excellent, but probably more expensive than the one you have in mind. If you can wait until tomorrow, I'll ask him to explain what you need to look for in a camera.

**koxka** · 02-04-2005, 08:51 PM

...for your replays.

The camera ,it will be mainly for posting pictures on the web.
And it's a first digital.
Now, I need to be enlightened on wich is the difference between the MPEG and the QuickTime movie?

Debbie, I mean there are differents ways to focus the camera objective to the object to be photografied.Some are more accurate than others.Do I explain myself?