So after a summer of being told by a bunch of 10-year-olds that my camera sucks (or more accurately, "Haha teacher. My camera's better than yours!"), I've finally decided to invest in a digital camera. But here's the problem: What the hell do I buy?? Help!
I've been looking at camera websites for 2 days and I have no idea what's what anymore. Apparently, unless you have the mental and physical discipline of a British guard at Buckingham Palace, you're doomed to wind up with a blurry picture all fringed in purple.
I just want a pretty camera to take pretty pictures. Is that too much to ask? Here are some of the choices I've narrowed down to. If you know something about one of the cameras - like you take a picture of Dwyane Wade and it comes out looking like Calvin Booth - please tell me. I would really appreciate any and all feedback.
5.1 MP, 3x Optical Zoom
These two are both so pretty and sleek, but I think the person has to be standing 2 feet in front of you in order for the picture to come out. And anything more than 3 people and the camera may explode. But it looks sooo nice. This is my problem - if I had a choice between Naturalizers (those ugly librarian-looking heels that are comfortable as hell) and 4-inch Christian Louboutins, I'm unquestionably going for the Louboutins. Nevermind that I would be crying out in pain after 5 minutes. I have a feeling the Sonys here are more style than substance, but damn, are they stylish.
5 MP, 3x Anti Shake Optical Zoom
This is the dark horse candidate. I told my best friend I was looking at a Casio camera and her response was,
"Casios just remind me of those toy tape recorders with the microphone attached to them. Remember those? I used to scream tlc songs and another bad creation into those. Anyway yeah casio reminds me of technology for 5 year olds."That's what I thought at first, too, but people kept telling me Casio was like Canon, but with more bang for your buck.
7 MP, 3x Optical Zoom
I was originally leaning towards this or the SD400 or SD300, but I kept reading that the LCD screen cracks and the pictures aren't as clear.
Bottom line, I want something that takes good pictures but is sturdy (and pretty) enough to carry in my purse. Any suggestions?
5 comments:
I got a Canon Ixus 40, I think the american type is SD400 or something. And it rocks. The pics are perfect, the LCD is good, and it's fast, which is important.
There's no need to have more than 4 Mpixels in such a small camera.
I have a lesser Canon Powershot (3.2 Mp) than the one you pictured and I love it. I agree with Henrik - unless you're planning on producing prints larger than 8 x 10, you can probably get away with 4 Mp or less.
i can only reccomend the casio exilim. Super fast and great design. Also superb service. I dropped mine and the lens jammed. They replaced it. No questions asked.
uh.. right.. well, i've got the canon you put the picture of, no idea what's the name of the model, but i'm quite satisfied with it. i have nothing to compare it to, but it does it's job and it's got some fun features too, like color swap, which is pure fun when you swap the skin color with some bright red or blue, and color accent which can give you some nice pics. well, aside from these, I managed to capture a very clear pic of kimi raikkonen in a tv ad with the camera which shows you how fast it works. [this i'll surely try a lot when the season starts =)]I cannot tell you that it's better than the others though, as I didn't try them out =) good luck with your choice..
Sorry to get all Mark Cuban on here, but I had to erase that ridiculously long comment on lumber.
I really appreciate the camera feedback. I think I'm leaning towards one of the Canons. Or the Sonys. Or the Casios. AHH!
Post a Comment