Speaking of cameras (digi cams?)

[Jon Bond]

My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that) died - LCD
cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a new one.

Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much cash to
throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more expensive.

Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between shutter
button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more annoying
initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a viewfinder - everything
was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard to follow action shots. I'd
also like a little more control over shutter speed and fstop and whatnot,
but I can live without.

Any suggestions?

Jon Bond

[CP1]

"Jon Bond" > wrote in message
...
> My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that) died -
LCD
> cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a new one.
>
> Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much cash to
> throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more expensive.
>
> Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between shutter
> button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more annoying
> initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a viewfinder - everything
> was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard to follow action shots. I'd
> also like a little more control over shutter speed and fstop and whatnot,
> but I can live without.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Jon Bond

Canon digital elph.

Small, tough and relatively inexpensive.

I am getting ready to purchase my second elph.

--

CP

[Penny S]

CP1 murmured while asleep:
> "Jon Bond" > wrote in message
> ...
>> My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that)
>> died - LCD cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a
>> new one.
>>
>> Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much
>> cash to throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more
>> expensive.
>>
>> Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between
>> shutter button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more
>> annoying initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a
>> viewfinder - everything was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard
>> to follow action shots. I'd also like a little more control over
>> shutter speed and fstop and whatnot, but I can live without.
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>>
>> Jon Bond
>
> Canon digital elph.
>
> Small, tough and relatively inexpensive.
>
> I am getting ready to purchase my second elph.

I had a nikon, now have a Canon A70.. I think the Nikon optics are better.
The delay seems the same no matter what.

Penny

[miles todd]

Penny S wrote:
> CP1 murmured while asleep:
>
>>"Jon Bond" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that)
>>>died - LCD cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a
>>>new one.
>>>
>>>Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much
>>>cash to throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more
>>>expensive.
>>>
>>>Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between
>>>shutter button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more
>>>annoying initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a
>>>viewfinder - everything was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard
>>>to follow action shots. I'd also like a little more control over
>>>shutter speed and fstop and whatnot, but I can live without.
>>>
>>>Any suggestions?
>>>
>>>Jon Bond
>>
>>Canon digital elph.
>>
>>Small, tough and relatively inexpensive.
>>
>>I am getting ready to purchase my second elph.
>
>
> I had a nikon, now have a Canon A70.. I think the Nikon optics are better.
> The delay seems the same no matter what.
>
> Penny
>
>
My dad did a ton of searching for the digital camera with the least
autofocus lag. He takes a lot of Skiing photos, so he needed the
quickest possible camera. It was also extremely important that the
optics be extremely good. As it turns out, it was a Pentax he bought,
but I can't remember the model. I do think it came in at your price
range, though.
I'd check them out.

Miles

[Mike DeMicco]

In article >,
"CP1" > wrote:

> "Jon Bond" > wrote in message
> ...

> Canon digital elph.
>
> Small, tough and relatively inexpensive.
>
> I am getting ready to purchase my second elph.

I've got an Canon S330 - too thick and especially too heavy to the point
that I stopped taking it with me, which is bad. I wish I'd bought the
Minolta DiMage xft.

--
Mike DeMicco >
(Remove the REMOVE_THIS from my email address to reply.)

[Destroy]

http://www.steves-digicams.com/diginews_aug2003.html#bestof2003


Jon Bond wrote:
> My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that) died - LCD
> cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a new one.
>
> Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much cash to
> throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more expensive.
>
> Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between shutter
> button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more annoying
> initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a viewfinder - everything
> was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard to follow action shots. I'd
> also like a little more control over shutter speed and fstop and whatnot,
> but I can live without.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Jon Bond
>
>

[Destroy]

Try here too

http://www.imaging-resource.com/WB/WB.HTM

Destroy wrote:

> http://www.steves-digicams.com/diginews_aug2003.html#bestof2003
>
>

[Westie]

"Jon Bond" > wrote in message
...
> My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that) died -
LCD
> cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a new one.
<snip>
> Any suggestions?
Canon IXUS V3. Dunno what the price will be.
3.2Megapixel. Small and pocket sized., lots of features - including more
than your average manual controls if you desire, otherwise it's just point
and shoot. Very good battery life. Mostly metal body means it's robust and
I've crashed with mine more times than I can count. Usually it's in a front
pocket or pack. Cons: Relatively heavy for a pocket. But most others are
usually too big too. Shutter lag is about on par with all the others.
Speeds up a bit if you tell it you're in daylight and you set the white
balance manually etc, etc....
If it's general purpose photos and mountainbiking specifically, it's be hard
to go past this for portability and robustness versus usefulness.
--
Westie
(Replace 'invalid' with 'yahoo' when replying.)

[Rocketman]

"miles todd" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Penny S wrote:
> > CP1 murmured while asleep:
> >
> >>"Jon Bond" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >>>My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that)
> >>>died - LCD cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a
> >>>new one.
> >>>
> >>>Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much
> >>>cash to throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more
> >>>expensive.
> >>>
> >>>Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between
> >>>shutter button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more
> >>>annoying initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a
> >>>viewfinder - everything was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard
> >>>to follow action shots. I'd also like a little more control over
> >>>shutter speed and fstop and whatnot, but I can live without.
> >>>
> >>>Any suggestions?
> >>>
> >>>Jon Bond
> >>
> >>Canon digital elph.
> >>
> >>Small, tough and relatively inexpensive.
> >>
> >>I am getting ready to purchase my second elph.
> >
> >
> > I had a nikon, now have a Canon A70.. I think the Nikon optics are
better.
> > The delay seems the same no matter what.
> >
> > Penny
> >
> >
> My dad did a ton of searching for the digital camera with the least
> autofocus lag. He takes a lot of Skiing photos, so he needed the
> quickest possible camera. It was also extremely important that the
> optics be extremely good. As it turns out, it was a Pentax he bought,
> but I can't remember the model.

Probably one of the Pentax Optio cameras. Very nice, very small, well
designed. It's on my short list, along with the Canon S400, S50 and the
Nikon 4300. There is a *lot* to look at in the $300 - $400 range these
days. Have a look at www.bizrate.com www.pricewatch.com or www.pricescan.com
to see what I mean. I've seen several online shops (reputable ones) selling
the Canon S400 Digital Elph (3x, 4MP) for $389 shipped. That's *very*
tempting. The Digital Elph cameras have it all, in the most portable and
rugged package you'll find. Great, great cameras for just about everything
(except maybe studio photography).

Rocketman

[Slacker]

> My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that) died -
LCD
> cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a new one.
>
> Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much cash to
> throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more expensive.
>
> Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between shutter
> button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more annoying
> initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a viewfinder - everything
> was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard to follow action shots. I'd
> also like a little more control over shutter speed and fstop and whatnot,
> but I can live without.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Jon Bond


Here's a pretty good resource for digitals http://www.dpreview.com/

--
Slacker

[MattB]

"Jon Bond" > wrote in message
...
> My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that) died -
LCD
> cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a new one.
>
> Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much cash to
> throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more expensive.
>
> Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between shutter
> button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more annoying
> initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a viewfinder - everything
> was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard to follow action shots. I'd
> also like a little more control over shutter speed and fstop and whatnot,
> but I can live without.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Jon Bond
>

Just to throw another camera out there I'm happy with my Sony DSC-P72. It
has a viewfinder and lcd, it has a slight lag, but not as bad as I've seen
on others. Any of my photos in the last few months have come from it. JD
also has a Sony I believe.

Matt

[Bake]

I have the Canon Digital Elph S200 and I also like it. I do hate the
shutter lag. If this is an important feature you may want to explore
other options. I don't know how much it has been improved in newer
models.

[JD]

"MattB" > wrote in message >...
> "Jon Bond" > wrote in message
> ...
> > My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that) died -
> LCD
> > cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a new one.
> >
> > Probably 3.1MegaPixel. Under 400 would be nice, I don't have much cash to
> > throw around. But throw out your faves even if they're more expensive.
> >
> > Anyway, most annoying part of the old camera was lag time between shutter
> > button and shutter action. Second most annoying thing (more annoying
> > initially, but I got used to it) was the lack of a viewfinder - everything
> > was done with the LCD screen. Made it hard to follow action shots. I'd
> > also like a little more control over shutter speed and fstop and whatnot,
> > but I can live without.
> >
> > Any suggestions?
> >
> > Jon Bond
> >
>
> Just to throw another camera out there I'm happy with my Sony DSC-P72. It
> has a viewfinder and lcd, it has a slight lag, but not as bad as I've seen
> on others. Any of my photos in the last few months have come from it. JD
> also has a Sony I believe.

The newer Sonys have more than the paltry 2.0 megapixel resolution my
camera has. Try the DSC-P52 to meet your minimum requirements.

JD

[MattB]

"JD" > wrote in message
om...
<snip>
>
> The newer Sonys have more than the paltry 2.0 megapixel resolution my
> camera has. Try the DSC-P52 to meet your minimum requirements.
>
> JD

Mine is 3.2 MP, which is good for my needs. You can make a decent print
(nothing really big, but 3x5 looks fine) from a 3.2 MP photo.
I think the P52 is also 3.2 MP, but it only has a 2x optical zoom instead of
the 3x the 72 has.

Looks like a good camera if it fits your needs and budget.

Matt

[Gman]

On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 23:58:09 GMT, CP1 > wrote:
>
> "Jon Bond" > wrote in message
> ...
>> My old digital camera (Nikon Coolpix 2500 or something like that) died -
> LCD
>> cracked, way too expensive to repair. So, I'm getting a new one.
>> <snip>
>> Any suggestions?
>>
>> Jon Bond
>
> Canon digital elph.
>
> Small, tough and relatively inexpensive.
>
> I am getting ready to purchase my second elph.
>

I second the Canon. I still use my older Canon
S110 (Elph). Small enough to not be a bother,
rugged enough to take a crash (mine has many
times), and enough features to do it all (small
movies w/ sound, etc).

We've got WAY more small Canon AVI vids of our
daughter than video camera tape because the Canon
is so small it's always just laying around and
easy to grab for the spur of the moment...

G