I am tired of using disposable cameras. My old camera will cost too much to fix. i have a cheap digital camera that suits me okay but I wonder if I could do better. I have 5 kids and an online photo album.
My printer is broken so I need to get it fixed if I wanted to print photos off my 'puter.
I have some money saved up. Obviously I don’t want to spend a fortune. I would like something nice.
Should I get a new digital or a nice 35mm?
Are there cameras that do both?
I don’t think there are any cameras that shoot both digital and 35mm, as the capture media (film vs. silicon) are different. I will recommend against the APS format, though, because APS is dead.
You’ll have to be a little more specific with regard to your price target. “I have money saved up but I don’t want to spend a fortune” is rather vague and somewhat self-contradictory.
I assume you want a Point & Shoot rather than an SLR, yes?
As for film vs. digital, the answer is going to depend on what you want to do with the photos. If you mainly share them online, then starting with a digital original will certainly make life easier. If you primarily share or keep prints, then a film camera will be more convenient (though the variability in the quality of the lab you use may or may not be a problem).
There is another option you may want to think about: Get a 35mm camera, then save up some more money to buy a film scanner. This way, you can have prints made at the lab as well as a convenient way to digitize them for online use, and probably comes closest to your original goal. A scanner capable of monitor-sized resolutions (say, 1024x768 or less) should run no more than $2-300. With a better-quality scanner and some experience using photo-editing software, you may also be able to get better quality and control out of your prints than from a lab.
This is all IMHO, though.
My advice (and of course this is opinion only) is to go digital and either get a camera that is packed with features like zoom, flash fill, etc (essentially something as good as a modern SLR, but digital), or get the very smallest camera you can find that still fulfills your image quality requirements.
In any case, whether you go for digital or film, mid-size cameras are (IMHO) pointless; I will either be going out with the specific goal of photography and should be prepared to take a pile of equipment, or I will be going out for some other purpose and only carrying a camera because it’s not at all inconvenient to do so.
Of course there are some sexy little digital camcorders now that also take very good stills (IMO Sony makes the best of these).
Stick with film; the formats don’t change as often.
APS is cute, but in the long run, expensive.
You want something with wide angle and zoom, I’ll assume an SLR is not an option, so I’ll recommend a point and shoot.
Olympus makes a great line of P&S’s called ‘Stylus’; I’m currently on my second, having upgraded from the fixed (35mm) lens to a short zoom (35-70mm).
I shoot professionally (not with these cameras) and just about always have the Stylus in my bag for grab shots.
Digital has many advantages. It’s easier to handle image files than negatives, especially for exchanging data online. There is no “per shot” cost, and you get instant feedback on the display. There are also disadvantages - once the memory card fills up, you can’t just stop at the nearest supermarket to buy another card. You have to get to a computer (or carry a laptop) and transfer the data. Also you need to recharge the battery often, and perhaps carry a spare. If you take a lot of photos and/or if you have a camera with a short battery life, it can be a lot of work making sure all the batteries are charged.
If you don’t carry your laptop on vacations, I think it’s worth getting both a digital and a film camera. Use the film camera for vacations. Or you could buy a digital camera that uses removable disks (floppy, CD-R or some type of magneto-optical disk) for storage.
There are no cameras which combine film and digital. There are Nikon and Canon compatible digital SLR cameras (i.e. digital cameras that use the same lenses and accessories as the film cameras), but they’re currently in the >$2000 range.
To second what Earthling said, the desired result can make help you decide what kind of camera to start with.
At this point, a 35mm with the right film will have better print quality than most any digital camera. But if you only plan to e-mail or make 4x6 prints, or even 8x10, a digital will do just fine. And until you make prints, the cost of operation is zero! That’s hard to beat.
You will need a good photo quality printer and right now most serious digital printers agree that the Epson Photo Stylus series make the bst prints. See www.dcresource.com for further printer discussions.
Olympus makes several good digitals in the 200-300 price range. I’m a Nikon Coolpix fan myself, but I think that the Olympus cameras are a better value at the lower end of the scale.
To second what Earthling said, the desired result can make help you decide what kind of camera to start with.
At this point, a 35mm with the right film will have better print quality than most any digital camera. But if you only plan to e-mail or make 4x6 prints, or even 8x10, a digital will do just fine. And until you make prints, the cost of operation is zero! That’s hard to beat.
You will need a good photo quality printer and right now most serious digital printers agree that the Epson Photo Stylus series make the bst prints. See www.dcresource.com for further printer discussions.
Olympus makes several good digitals in the 200-300 price range. I’m a Nikon Coolpix fan myself, but I think that the Olympus cameras are a better value at the lower end of the scale.
To second what Earthling said, the desired result can help you decide what kind of camera to start with.
At this point, a 35mm with the right film will have better print quality than most any digital camera. But if you only plan to e-mail or make 4x6 prints, or even 8x10, a digital will do just fine. And until you make prints, the cost of operation is zero! That’s hard to beat.
You will need a good photo quality printer and right now most serious digital printers agree that the Epson Photo Stylus series make the bst prints. See www.dcresource.com for further printer discussions.
Olympus makes several good digitals in the 200-300 price range. I’m a Nikon Coolpix fan myself, but I think that the Olympus cameras are a better value at the lower end of the scale.
My PC kept saying the server was down! Sorry
If you are going digital look at the cost of extra memory. The cost of compact flash is pretty cheap these days 128M byte flash is about $60 these days. I would avoid getting a Sony that only uses their memory stick stuff for memory because I think it is expensive about $90 for 128M. But maybe that is a small consideration if the cameras work better.
With our 2 Mega pixel camera 128Mbyte flash is about 300 pictures. The cameras themselves usually come with much smaller memory cards so you really should include the cost of extra memory.
and third, and fourth… 
Just kidding, GaryM–I have also had a huge number of “server busy” problems at this site.
Good point about the memory! The Sony sticks seem to be priced a little higher than the CompactFlash or SmartMedia cards. But not as high as they once were.
scr4 mentioned batteries. Many cameras today use special lithium-ion batteries. Some can take a disposable lithium battery as well. That way you can carry one along and use it if the rechargable battery is down. The disposble Lithium batteries have a very long shelf life.
Conventional film-based photography will provide you with the best value for your money. Digital cameras still seem quite unfinished. There is a very annoying 1-2 second lag between shutter firings, image edges can be quite jaggy under less than optimal lighting conditions, and film captures far more subtlety of color. Sure you can fix a digital image using software, but that requires lots of time and often money for training, image processing, consumables, and printing. I also get the feeling that current digital photographic technology will be on the same obsolescence/upgrade path shared by computers.
You can purchase a very nice point-and-shoot by Olympus, Canon, Minolta etc. for under $200. Costco sells lots of cheap Kodak film.
Lots of options exist if you want to add a digital dimension. While having your film processed (including getting paper prints) you can also have the same images transferred to a disk. At the high end, Kodak will make you a Photo CD for about $10 more. Kodak also sells the Picture CD service that provides your images in a lesser quality .jpg file format. In addition, Costco offers their own in-house CD imaging service for about $6 per role. Lesser quality, but acceptable for many.
Each of these disk imaging products let you play with software to improve the printed image and then email it out.
The final digital option is to buy a scanner for $50. Individual photos can be scanned, manipulated in software, emailed and reprinted. I do this and an occasional Picture CD.
I keep hearing about Sony memory sticks being available online for an effective price of about $40 (after a rebate) - shop around.
It might sound like I work for them or something (I don’t) but Sony digital cameras positively ooze smart design - pick one up and look at it; you can just see how much consideration they have put into every feature.
However, if you already have a device (like a PDA) that uses a particular format of memory, then you might be better off going for a camera that uses the same.
I’ve been seriously in to digital for a year and using a semi-pro camera, Minolta Dimage 7, instead of 35mm for most things. Here’s a few things I can toss your way.
Megapixels: Try to have at least 150 linear pixels per inch on paper. 1.3mp (1280x960 typically) will be just adequate for 5x7 and 2mp (1600x1200) will do okay 8x10s on kinkjet if you don’t crop. If you want 8x10s on a regular basis get at least 3mp go have some flexibility. If you print your own get quality, glossy photo paper and make sure windows control panel is setup for the paper and quality of print you want.
Memory: Get lots especially if you want to go on a trip and won’t have access to a computer to download. I suggest bare minumum of 256mb. Compact flash doesn’t have an effective size limit and you can get it all in one card. Smart Media and Sony ms top out at 128mb currently. You’ll also have to read that memory. You can connect y our camera but you’ll eventualy want to get a dedicated card reader. If you get compact flash you can get a $10 PC card adapter to read cards with no driver required. FWIW I usually run my camera with a gigabyte microdrive that fits in the compact flash slot. Having lots of memory means you can always shoot at highest resolution and best quality. You can always resize down for the web but if you want an 8x10 of a once in a lifetime shot and it’s 640x480 then tough titties.
Batteries: The Achilles heel of digital. I suggest you avoid proprietary Li-ion batteriees as they are expensive. Get something that takes standard AA cells. Don’t waste your money on Alkaline or photo lithium, get recharghable Nickel metal hydride and a fast charger. Get at least two or three sets of batteries.
Digital zoom: Ignore it. It’s a scam that only “zooms” by trading off image size and/or quality for magnification. You can do the same thing in software post production and usually better than the camera will do.
Optical zoom: A 3x zoom ratio will usually cover the equivalent of a 35-105mm lens on a 35mm camera. Not bad, moderate wide angle to short telephoto. More is better if you want to do things like bird photos.
Propriatory Li-Ion batteries aren’t that bad. Sure they are expensive, but many of them have very large capacities. On my Canon G1, one battery is always enough to fill up my 128MB card, and I’ve never filled it up in a day. (Which of course doesn’t mean you won’t.) SONY also puts large capacity Li-Ion batteries on most (not all) of their cameras. The reviews on Imaging Resource usually give measurements of battery life.
I love the SDMB. You all are great.
I need to save this page to sort everything out.
Thanks for everything!
It’s hard to find a better source of information on the web about buying a camera than Philip Greenspun’s photo.net.
Li-Ion batteries aren’t the worst thing in the world I’ll admit. Still I’d rather pay $10-11 (I’ve paid as little as $5) for a set of NiMH with 1600mah capacity than $35-50 for a Li-ion battery with 1300mah capacity. It’s always wise to have spares so you aren’t caught with your only battery in the charger.
FWIW the cam I use is a known power hog. I still use AAs but have started using an external pack made form a 7.2v 3000mah NiMH RC car pack. Keep in mind I sometimes fill up a one gigabyte IBM microdrive. 128mb memory cards don’t cut it at 5 megapixels.
Oh, a couple of other places worth checking are Steve’s Digicams and Digital Photography Review