02-11-2009 10:34 AM
Solved! Go to Solution.
02-11-2009 03:47 PM
I suggest checking reviews and such. Both have about the same sensor size so not much difference there.
With insane zoom numbers like that, make sure you check reviews. Ultrazoom lenses don't have the best image quality reputation, but there are exceptions (like the Sigma 50-500 SLR lens and the Tamron 18-250). Ultrazooms tend to be prone to nasty barrel distortion at the wide end.
02-12-2009 02:59 PM
The reviews are similar. And the pictures posted with some of them both look good. Even at the macro levels.... I'm still stumped.... Ithink I am leaning towards waiting for the new Nikon P90...from the online reviews I've read it sounds like they should start arriving at stores in March or so.
02-13-2009 03:34 PM
I agree with Entropy whenever purchasing a point and shoot camera with what are called ultrazoom, or superzoom lenses you have to be careful. Camera engineers have come a long way, but with this long a lens range you will most likely experience image degradation on both of extreme ends of the zooms range. If you can afford to invest more money on a camera I would suggest looking at a DSLR, and the two SLR lenses Entropy mentioned are great lenses and would produce far superior results.
Both Nikon and Canon have been the leading brands in the camera market for a long time, and there is definitely two camps that each believes their brand is superior to the other. I am from the Nikon camp, but to be honest most unbiased experts will tell you that both companies make great products! If you had to choose between one of these two cameras, I would say go to a Best Buy® store and see which one feels better to you!
Thanks for posting,
Best Buy® Corporate
02-19-2009 09:22 AM
02-19-2009 11:20 AM
Hmm. You didn't mention your desired use of the camera.
For "action" photography you'll get MAJOR benefits from a DSLR due to the significantly decreased shutter lag.
For low-light photography you will also get significant benefits from a DSLR due to the increased sensor size - Increased physical sensor size means less noise at a given ISO rating. My Pentax K20D gives noise performance at ISO 400 that my Panasonic point-and-shoot gives at 100.
Keep in mind that most of the time, technology advances in DSLRs mean you only have to upgrade part of the system (the body) - except in cases where manufacturers change mounts (rare but does happen), glass is eternal. I frequently use a 30 year old full manual lens on my K20D - incredible image quality and it was only $30 from fleabay.
One thing I forgot to check between those two units was whether they had hotshoes for an external flash - a good external flash could be very beneficial in some of your shooting situations. strobist.com has quite a few articles on flash photography + sports.
02-19-2009 02:41 PM
Ok so now I am even more confused? I really did not want to spend $600 plus on a camera right now but it sounds like y'all think the Advanced P&S are a waste of money. All the reviews say that these cameras ( the 2 I have been looking at) are great cameras. I really don't know what to do now.
02-20-2009 04:05 PM
I did not mean to imply that these two cameras will not produce good quality images. I was just trying to say that if you can afford the additional cost of purchasing a DSLR I would do that instead. Having used SLR cameras for 20 plus years, and consistently being rewarded with great images, I think I am a little prejudiced towards SLR cameras. I don't believe Nikon or Canon makes a bad camera, and I'm sure if you purchased either one of these cameras you would be happy with your purchase.
Thanks for posting,
Best Buy® Corporate
02-23-2009 09:05 AM
The advanced P&S cameras aren't necessarily a waste, but it depends on what you plan on doing with them.
Indoor action photography is one place where DSLRs are going to be way ahead of a P&S. (Actually action photography in general... Shutter lag is a big problem for P&S cameras and really hurts for action photography.)