Topic: small point-and-shoot for 250 or under?

[scb]

someone stole my girlfriend's little sony cybershot camera.  she wants to get a new one for 250 or under

any recommendations on a small sized point-and-shoot that'll easily fit in a girl's purse?

she mentioned this one:
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=A1286345

is that even a good deal?  or a decent camera?

[pjdavep]

My wife loves her Canon point & shoot and I like it as well from the limited time I've used it.  There seems to be at least one Canon posting on slickdeals.net a week, here's the latest:

"Gateway has Canon PowerShot SD1000 7.1 MP 3x Zoom digital camera for $153 with free shipping. Add a free 2-year warranty with code WARRANTY and get a free 1GB Gateway SD card after $15.99 MIR (Details). Next best on PriceGrabber for just the camera is $168. "

Not sure if you want to stick with a Sony because of accessories you still own, but I haven't heard one bad thing about Canon cameras in the last couple years.

Edit: This is the upgraded version to what my wife has.  The 4x optical zoom is pretty rare for a small camera, and the image stabilization really helps out in low light -
"Office Depot has Canon SD850IS 8MP 4x zoom digital camera for $240 with free shipping. Lowest on PriceGrabber is $269. If you purchase it together with Epson CX4700 All-In-One printer/copier/scanner, you can get the printer free after $70 rebate. Fillable rebate form for the printer."
Once you eBay the printer, it'll be a fairly cheap camera in the end 

Later,
   pjdavep

[scb]

thanks

[Brian Skalinder]

"Office Depot has Canon SD850IS 8MP 4x zoom digital camera for $240 with free shipping.

I picked up one of these a while back.  Great little camerea.  Not quite as small as the 6xx model a friend has, I'm sure due to the image stabilization, but it's still a pocket- or purse-camera:

3.56 x 2.22 x 1.04 in. / 90.4 x 56.5 x 26.4mm

The IS makes a big difference, IME, since most of my pocket-camera shooting is in less than desirable lighting circumstances.  Granted, it's no SLR, nor a smedium-sized more powerful point & shoot, but for a quite small camera, I love it.  It gets quite good reviews (and gobs more detail than you could ever want):

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/canon_sd850.html

Others here have also suggested the Panasonic TZ3.  It has a 10x optical zoom (!), and is a little bigger than the SD850IS:

4.20'' x 2.37'' x 1.47''

So 0.64" longer, 0.15" thicker, and 0.43" wider, which doesn't sound like a lot, but can make a big difference for pocket (though probably less so for purse).  Also good reviews (and gobs more detail than you could ever want):

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/panasonic_tz3.html

If I were to do it again, I might go for the TZ3's 10x optical at the expense of the slightly larger size.

There's also a fairly recent thread or two on the same subject...scroll through the first few pages of threads and you may find some other suggestions, too.

[mizary]

I'll second the canon powershots with IS...

Canon PowerShot A570IS $157.00

plus a free 2gb mem card and photo calendar.

or for a few more bucks more
Canon PowerShot A720IS 8MP Digital Camera with 6x zoom $197.66 (same mem card photo calendar deals)

--mizary

[red]

I'm also in the market for a digital camera.  Down the line I'd like to get an SLR, but for now I'm happy with a mid-range pocket-type camera.  It appears that the two that Brian recommends will be on sale Black Friday for about $250.  If anyone has any additional comments on these cameras, or any other camera's, I'd appreciate your thoughts.  Thanks!

[bluntforcetrauma]

I use the canon power shot S5IS, and i dont like it, stay away from it.  I have had it a little over 30 days and have taken about 50 shots, and i dont like the picture.  I like the idea of point and shoot and this camera is great for close close range 25cm or so, but beyond that the grain is very noticable.  At the auto setting, you get a 200iso, which IMO sucks! grainy.  Now a couple of years ago, you could get "auto" with a 60 iso with a 4MP powershot and the pictdure is better.  AGain this is point and shoot.  2.5 LCD is nice, but if you want a shoot it and forget it dont get this one. I am already looking for another camera.  The IS is really not all that great and actually you want to set that up with " shoot" only mode or you will get some fringes and shadows on your outlines.  AGain great pictures for everyday life you need the lowest iso you can get with an " auto" setting.  Even in "sport" shooting mode the iso is at 200--= grainy, again years back i was able to shoot motion at a iso of 60, less artifacts for good family events.  Again this is just for the average photo, not for the advanced SLR shooters.

I would love to have a 7>MP flip out LCD screen with a capability of " auto" iso of 80 or less, anyone?

[scb]

thank you to everyone

[red]

Thanks for the comments; bluntforcetrauama, it is helpful to hear what NOT to buy, as well as the positive recommendations, so I appreciate your thoughts. 

scott, if you don't mind my asking, which camera did you end up buying, and are you happy with it?  thanks again.

[scb]

she didn't get anything yet, but i think she's going to go with the cannon sd850

[tiberiusbkirk]

thanks for that honest report on your canon BFT.
I hear lots of people have canon's. I bought a panasonic lumix fx 01 and I get
mixed results. some outdoor action photos come out crisp and clean and
some outdoor photos have a water color effect.
Indoor photos, forget about it, my old HP 2.0 mp performed better.
though I did get a good pic of a guy nodding off at the clinic the other day.
(no flash, indoors)
How are the sony's with the carl zeiss lens?

[Frank in JC]

I use the canon power shot S5IS, and i dont like it, stay away from it.  I have had it a little over 30 days and have taken about 50 shots, and i dont like the picture.  I like the idea of point and shoot and this camera is great for close close range 25cm or so, but beyond that the grain is very noticable.  At the auto setting, you get a 200iso, which IMO sucks! grainy.  Now a couple of years ago, you could get "auto" with a 60 iso with a 4MP powershot and the pictdure is better.  AGain this is point and shoot.  2.5 LCD is nice, but if you want a shoot it and forget it dont get this one. I am already looking for another camera.  The IS is really not all that great and actually you want to set that up with " shoot" only mode or you will get some fringes and shadows on your outlines.  AGain great pictures for everyday life you need the lowest iso you can get with an " auto" setting.  Even in "sport" shooting mode the iso is at 200--= grainy, again years back i was able to shoot motion at a iso of 60, less artifacts for good family events.  Again this is just for the average photo, not for the advanced SLR shooters.

I would love to have a 7>MP flip out LCD screen with a capability of " auto" iso of 80 or less, anyone?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass, but if you've only taken 50 photographs in a month, you might want study it a little further before trashing it.  It's not a giant-killer, but has been well received.  You just have to accept it for what it is: a compact digital camera.  I had a Canon G7 and for what it was, I didn't have any complaints.  Compared to a DSLR on the other hand, it sucked.  Every single one of them is full of compromises when compared to their bigger brothers.  However, if you're on a budget and need a super-zoom, in my book it's either this or the Panasonic equivalent.

If you still have it, I suggest NOT using any of the auto modes.  Try shooting in aperture priority and set the ISO to the lowest possible.  I guarantee that unless something is wrong with the camera, it is capable of taking excellent photographs under good lighting conditions.  Don't believe me?  Go to Flickr and search for "Canon S5 IS"   

[Frank in JC]

How are the sony's with the carl zeiss lens?

I really don't know any specifics, but I do know that putting the Zeiss name on the lens is purely a marketing strategy.  Panasonic does the same thing with Leica branding.  We're not getting remotely the kind of lens that made these optical companies world-famous.  Also, from what I understand, these lenses are usually made by OEM manufacturers in Asia.  If they came from the Zeiss or Leica plants, that would add more cost to the job but they're tying to sell these cameras to regular people, cheaply.  A good Zeiss or Leica lens will set you back the equivalent of several compact cameras!  (The Germans have to pay for all those vacations, after all.) 

What sets them apart is that they are known for having large maximum apertures and are intended to be used as such while still providing sharp images.  It's a real trick to get a lens with a big aperture to be sharp from corner to corner.

[rastasean]

I would recommend anything by panasonic with a leica lens.

[willndmb]

I would recommend anything by panasonic with a leica lens.

are those the "lumix"?

my kodak died the other day and i am looking for one to get by val day

the canon 850 has great reviews though and for $309 you get a case and extra battery
seems like most of the middle of the road price wise don't have great reviews, the $250+ ones get much better reviews then the 150-250 range