Best Non-SLR digital camera

[aizan]

can't forget the groundbreaking epson r-d1/r-d1s. first of its kind. stick a zeiss zm lens on it and be the envy of all.

too bad the "bridge" camera niche collapsed. great cams—they still command fairly high prices on ebay.

olympus c-5050, c-8080, etc.

konica minolta a2

panasonic lc1/leica digilux 2

sony f717, r1, etc.

i don't like the ricoh grd ii because it doesn't have a 35mm equiv. lens and image stabilization. it's otherwise pretty awesome.

[highfructosecorn]

1 - you said that image quality and control on high end p/s are better than on entry level dslrs - quality and control are both integral parts of shooting raw so i was bringing that point up.

2 - i mispoke, the xti is the previous generation while the xsi is the newest generation, and therefore the one i am talking about. the standard bundle includes the IS lens. who said anything about price point? comparing a ps and dslr no matter how close the price is still pretty much apples and oranges.

3 - you were talking about image quality and image control, now you are bringing up focal length ranges etc? id have the "limited" 18-55mm over whatever lens the g9 has anyday.

4 - who cares about 400 iso?, oh you are so right, noone!

uhh what happens in low light, night, evening, indoors etc? not every picture is taken outdoors on a sunny day.

Price is an issue for most of us unfortunately. And as the XSi has only this year been announced and recently become available, I would still consider the XT and XTi "entry level", as in a DSLR for someone new to photography.

I brought up the issue of focal length because thats what I thought you were referring to since both cameras have some form of optical IS and your previous point was moot. And typically, except for purists which you seem to claim to be, someone new to photography would find a zoom lens beneficial. Finally, if you need to be taking quality pictures in the evening or indoors I would suggest spending money on a good flash/sufficient lighting rather than relying on ISO 400 for any camera. If high quality low-light is really the situation you want, then you need more than any of the cameras we've been tlaking about.

Have you personally tried any of the cameras you are attacking? I will say from experience that I have used the g9 and seen a g9 used by a beginner, and the image quality was on par with an XTi I own. Both produce a very canon style look to the pictures with similar sharpness and color at 100 ISO. I'm sorry if this is unsatifactory to you and if it is I blame it on my contact prescription and cheap monitor and printer.

I'm not going to escalate this further, as it seems you came to this thread to pick fights. All you have done is attack posts of two individuals TWO WEEKS after they have posted (both of which seem to be happy with their respective cameras), and nit pick at others...

Please Mr. Kennmon, find some happiness in your life.

[pompadork]

if you are a hipster who needs to look cool, has no regard for image quality, and loveesssssss noisy pictures.

lol, or just want a decent digital point and shoot. I'm not saying wear it around your neck, what does this have to do with looking cool? Anyway, the thing handles amazingly, but i'm sure you've just written it off without having actually ever handled one. Internet!

Also why are people recommending digital m-mount rangefinders..i'm pretty sure the OP meant point and shoots, but shrug.

[bchhun]

well you're still shooting film anyway so... yashica t4/t5?

[operationjake]

Umm...

Honestly, go with a Nikon D40.

1) It'll fit your lenses already

2) It's lightweight and cheap (I believe $500 is your pricerange?)

3) It'll generally beat any point and shoot in that range...

4) Damn is it easy to use.

5) You said you want a camera for travel... A point and shoot will make you look like a total tourist. A Nikon D40 will at least present you as an artsy one.

[pompadork]

Buy my olympus XA2 off of me ~

[conan.]

if price is an issue why spend fucking 400 and up on a goddamn p&s? easy, answer is to look cool...for real, g9's main target market is techbeasts i went to canon product show for like electronics store employees and they explained how they jus added in a cheap 'brightness/contrast' option and called it 'aperture' to fool all the techbeast wannabes ahahahaha

[pompadork]

Well, you can change the aperture in manual mode and that isn't a brightness option, so not really sure what you're talking about.

[conan.]

as in it just brightens and darkens the pic it dont change DOF or nothin it aint actually aperture change it jus brighten n darken the pic LOL U GOT SCAMMED BY CANON but not rly u jus scamm urself.. if u bought it... just go with like canon a series for like 200 bux n it take alrite pix

[pompadork]

I guess they could do that, if that's even true, but its not like it would matter because you can't get any decent dof on shitty small sensors anyway.

[highfructosecorn]

if price is an issue why spend fucking 400 and up on a goddamn p&s?

becase theyre smaller and lighter. do you always lug around slr and lens?

as in it just brightens and darkens the pic it dont change DOF or nothin it aint actually aperture change it jus brighten n darken the pic LOL U GOT SCAMMED BY CANON but not rly u jus scamm urself.. if u bought it... just go with like canon a series for like 200 bux n it take alrite pix

i think what you mean is there is no depth of field preview. there is still aperture control.

[mis]

Depth of field is redundant when you're talking about a point and shoot, the sensor is so small that even if youre at f2.8, you'll still be getting a lot in focus.

If you have sufficient light, most decent point and shoots/entry level slrs will give you excellent results. the kit lens on an slr stopped down to f11 will give you similar results compared to a $1000 lens stopped down to f11, its the non-ideal situations where you seperate an slr from and pns, DOF control, high iso noise control etc.

The sigma dp1 uses an SLR size sensor apprently, but its pretty much a prime PnS, I wouldnt fuck with that cause I'd get a point and shoot for convenience. It really depends on what you need/the kind of situations you'll find yourself it. I personally like the G9 because it supports an external flash and it supports RAW.

(Btw, which other PnS cameras support raw?)

[highfructosecorn]

(Btw, which other PnS cameras support raw?)

I know the nicer Panasonic/Leica (LX2/D-LUX 3) one does. olympus too. and ricoh too probably but that's a bit of a niche. I don't remember Nikon having any though (surprisingly)

[conan.]

becase theyre smaller and lighter. do you always lug around slr and lens?

i meant y spent 400 wen u can spend 200, dumbass...

panasonic z18 or t18 [forget model numba] supports raw

[highfructosecorn]

^ when he gets proven wrong he resorts to name calling? grow up kid.

is it that hard to imagine that there are cameras out there that cost more than the average PnS that also take better pictures?

[home]

mis has mentioned it, but what is DoF like (in the G9 / upper-end p&s)? Useless? I have only really played with aperture on a film SLR, but it is something I would like to have reasonable control over with my new camera. Can this only be found in a DSLR?

[jcotteri]

does it need to be digital home?

also mm preferred mate?

[conan.]

^ when he gets proven wrong he resorts to name calling? grow up kid.

is it that hard to imagine that there are cameras out there that cost more than the average PnS that also take better pictures?

ahaha u thin kby sayin 'they r lightr n smallr' is provin me wrong? did u learn dat logic dis year in ur kindergarten debate club? ahaha looser

[kennmon]

lol, or just want a decent digital point and shoot. I'm not saying wear it around your neck, what does this have to do with looking cool? Anyway, the thing handles amazingly, but i'm sure you've just written it off without having actually ever handled one. Internet!

Also why are people recommending digital m-mount rangefinders..i'm pretty sure the OP meant point and shoots, but shrug.

ive actually owned both for short short periods of time.

they were terribly dissapointing, and regular canon consumer line point and shoots gave me better results, especially when it comes to noise, like one online review said, even at iso 64 there is noticable noise.

[aizan]

in prints or at 100% on screen? you'll definitely see noise at 100%, which is mostly useless, but you will get very nice 8x10 prints at iso 64, even iso 400 with routine post-processing. past that and you're in moriyama-esque, my soul is so dark territory.

[highfructosecorn]

ahaha u thin kby sayin 'they r lightr n smallr' is provin me wrong? did u learn dat logic dis year in ur kindergarten debate club? ahaha looser

yep kindergarten was a blast!

I learned a lot there! like how to spell 'you, 'are', 'and', 'proving', 'that', 'this', and 'loser'. You'll have so much fun there next year!

[ChadR]

my g9, i love it. it looks cool, it doesn't take the most amazing pictures on auto (all i know how to do), but it is much better than my previous nikon and all my photo-nerd buddies are a bit jealous.

[conan.]

aiight thnx homi gud lookin out

[jonle714]

sigma DP1 or leica D-LUX3?

[the_state]

my g9, i love it. it looks cool, it doesn't take the most amazing pictures on auto (all i know how to do), but it is much better than my previous nikon and all my photo-nerd buddies are a bit jealous.

wait so you bought a g9 to take picture on auto mode? that's awesomely retarded. way to spend $500 champ.

[Kasper]

Giving this thread a bump.

A few months ago I was very close to pulling the trigger on a D80. In a way I'm glad I didn't.

I now think that a high-level p&s might be a better option for me (due to size & cost).

Basically I'm looking for a p&s that can give me entry-level DSLR results (or near enough) - this includes a decent manual interface.

So far the Canon G9 seems to fit the bill - what else should I be looking at? Leica? Ricoh?

My budget is roughly 500, but I guess I'm fairly flexibile in this regard if I can see value in dropping more coin.

Cheers.

i don't know much about cameras, but i bought something like the ancestor of the G9 a couple of years ago (i really can't remember the name) thinking i would really appreciate the full manual control. But i soon realized that because it really wasn't anywhere as good as a real DSLR, i endep up pretty much using the automatic funtions most of the times. i felt stupid carrying such a big camera with me all the time to perform the same thing a much smaller camera could have.

either by a small camera or a DSLR, with your budget, you could buy a get a used digital rebel. if you end up buying a regular digital camera, i really recommend getting on with a good image stabilizer (i've been told Canon and Sony make the best ones). You won't take as good a picture in a low light environment than with a DSLR and a tripod, but you'll at least be able to get good nough pictures that you'll want to keep them and look at them again. i have a canon powershot SD something now and i love it.

[VuONG]

wait so you bought a g9 to take picture on auto mode? that's awesomely retarded. way to spend $500 champ.

now now... i know plenty of people with rebels and d40s who spent 500 dollars and shoot auto. If you don't know shit you gotta start somewhere... not everyone is a super pro to begin with

[polishmike]

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ4 is a good p&s camera if you just want good pictures and you shoot on auto. There is no reason to get the G9 if you're not going manual.

[Leeacto]

point and shoot vs. slr question:

so I have a g9 and am still really new to taking photographs. I did the basic reading about camera functions (shutter speed, aperture, ISO, etc). My main question is when I look at a lot of the "Photog vol 2" and WAYWT pics, they seem much cleaner than what I take. Are these just all done w/ slr's and I can't ever take them that well w/ my PNS? or is it possible that I just need to keep experimenting and can take crisp pictures also.

[VuONG]

point and shoot vs. slr question:

so I have a g9 and am still really new to taking photographs. I did the basic reading about camera functions (shutter speed, aperture, ISO, etc). My main question is when I look at a lot of the "Photog vol 2" and WAYWT pics, they seem much cleaner than what I take. Are these just all done w/ slr's and I can't ever take them that well w/ my PNS? or is it possible that I just need to keep experimenting and can take crisp pictures also.

^^^ well most of the "cleanness" you talk about is mostly done with SLR but its not the camera itself its actually the lens which makes the image "sharp" and crisp. im not sure if this quality of sharpness would come equipped with a most P&S, maybe the higher end models. Most lenses cost 2-3 times the cost of most P&S