Small camera

[Traveler]

I want to get myself a smaller camera that can fit into a pocket of a jacket or a pair of cargo pants.

Zoom is not too important, but I'd like to have a nice something of 8-10 megapixels.

Any advice, this genre of camera is completely unknown to me.

[3RZ]

I bought a Nikon L22 for a pocket Camera to supplement my Canon SX 20IS and I must say I am pleasantly surpised with the performance for a camera costing R999 at Makro. Uses two penlight AA batteries so it is not as flat as it could be but I wanted something with penlights so this did not bother me.

12 Megapixels
3x optical zoom
3" LCD
2 year extended warranty supported by Nikon S.A.

[Mud Dog]

The little Canon's are not too bad either.

[OOOOMS]

Sony Optio - kyk maar ook gerus

[pietpetoors]

I agree with Willem, look for something with penlight batteries, it is just so much more prectical than having something with a special battery.

[OOOOMS]

The pocket type cams with pen-light batteries are also quite a lot cheaper.

My one has batteries , the other has a rechargable battery.

I prefer the one with the rechargable battery by far! Wich lasts a lot longer than the penlite battery's

[Mud Dog]

Use a decent re-chargeable penlight battery, like "GP", and you have the best of both worlds, plus you can use 'off the shelf' penlights if you have forgotten your charger behind.

[Traveler]

Thanks for the advice up to this point. Some things to consider which I have not thought of.

MD, agree with you I have a stack of rechargeable AA and AAA size batteries for all the toys at home.

[kfxnando]

self have a Canon G7, no longer available!!
the current model is the G11

takes great pics, and is used by many professionals as the back up camera!!

as is the norm the issue of the batteries comes up
these come with a unique rechargeable battery, and they do last for ever!!
have been told they are good for around 400 photos between recharges
dont know, have never taken that many in one day!!

have a look at the G11, they are not the cheapest around 6k, however believe them to be tops of the compacts!!

here is a sample pic on an overcast day!!

can only post this size


few more pics on the link
http://outdoors.webshots.com/album/5761 ... GM?start=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

we cant take pics, however this camera makes us look like pros!!

hope this helps!!

[Traveler]

Very nice picture. Very well framed, and all in focus.

[Big Al]

i agree with all and just my 2c.
-high optical zoom (with macro facility,but not a must).
-min 8 meg pixels (note eye will not see much difference after 8 and only needed if enlarging over A4).
-high refresh rate.
-battery only becomes a problem when excessive use of flash.
-simple ergonomics and easy ti access controls.
last but not least good memory card with fat refresh rate.
it like they say you get what you pay for,buy cheap and soon you will want to upgrade costing the same.

enjoy hunt.

[kfxnando]

you guys are not going to believe this!!!!!!!


wife killed the camera today!!!! :angry2: :angry2:

so now it will get repaired or replaced!!!!!!!

[Big Al]

good excuse to buy a new one without any guilt.

[Traveler]

Another excellent picture. WOW.

I've looked at the Kodak as well today, was impressed for what you can get at the price.

[kfxnando]

Another excellent picture. WOW.

I've looked at the Kodak as well today, was impressed for what you can get at the price.

now we are on a similar path!!

need to admit that I am a little disappointed with how my G7 had died only after 3.5 years, yes great pics!!! still!!!
did not take much to kill it!! regardless of what happened!!
if my phone was to dies every time any little thing happened, then would need a new cell every month!!

friend (actually never met, know each other from other hobby ) he takes pics for a few publications, and has posted some nature pics that he has taken with a kodac, and as a result am now looking a little in that direction!!

not sure if his FB page is open could well be, and the comets are there also!!
looks like he is using Kodak Z1015 IS

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id= ... =699275123" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

so will see what choices will come up!!

[kfxnando]

sorry that is not the same guys who takes pics for some publications!! any case, great pics from a Kodac!!

[Traveler]

I read an article in a popular mechanics that many camera manufacturers use Kodak internals in their cameras.

[Traveler]

Seeing it will be a hard working camera, I decided to take my budget, buy a Hi-Lift (from Len at Onca), and use the rest for a camera.

Got myself the Kodak M340. All my previous experiences has been very positive with Kodak, and I am not looking for an SLR (yet).....

http://store.kodak.com/store/ekconsus/e ... .145091700" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Mud Dog]

There's a lot to be said for a decent SLR. Of course you're going to have to cough .... recently bought a Canon 450D. Very happy so far.

[Traveler]

The SLR EOS I have my eye on is probably going to cost R8k for the body.

[andrevt]

kodak easyshare C182

[dizzy]

Have a look at the Olympus SW cameras.
Not sure of the current range, but they are shock proof and water proof. Great value for money P&S.

[Mr_B]

personally I like Canon's stuff... but from my years as a photographic salesman... the olympus optics in the small camera's are excellent!

[Mud Dog]

The Kodak cameras are in my opinion not that wonderful ... good value for money yes, but seriously lacking in build quality. The Olympus cameras are quite a bit better with fair to good build quality and more than reasonable optics. What I like about the Olympus SLR's is that the image stabilization is built into the body (on the CCD) which means that your lenses are much cheaper since they are not individually stabilised like the Canon's and the Nikon's. Where Olympus falls down, I think, is in the actual size of the CCD's ... they're much smaller than those of Canon & Nikon. This means that all the picture detail is crammed onto a smaller surface ... less definition.
At the end of the day it comes down to what you want to do with the camera and how big or small your purse / allocation is.

[Mud Dog]

The Canon 450D is just one step above their entry level SLR's. This pic was taken today in a 45km/h wind, hand held, ISO 100 (F-stop & shutter on auto) with the standard 18-55 mm lens.

Resized from original resolution

This is a cropping from the same pic at full resolution (Cannot display, you will have to open the link)
http://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz57 ... G4244B.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's not bad given the adverse conditions. Had there been no movement of the subject and the camera mounted on a tripod using a remote shutter release, it would have been crystal clear.

[Mr_B]

Andy match that 450D with a better Canon lense and the results are awesome... take a look at the range here: http://www.orms.co.za/browse.php?a=brow ... ategory=55

Something like the 17-55mm F2.8 would do nicely!

[Mud Dog]

The standard lens is 18-55mm f4.5 (image stabilised) .... and that's not too bad. Agreed though, the f2.8 will give better results and an improved depth of field. Such a pity that I can't use all my old filters and lenses ... (telephoto / macro / fish-eye / wide angle / 2x converter) ... because they're incompatible.

I have full range catalogues but I still look in at "Orms" every now and then to see what's new or on special. Will have to build up all new equipment again and have been looking rather seriously at the Sigma range of lenses. For now though, I'll just have to go along with Swambs, who tells me I can "wish in one hand and spit in the other"!

[Mr_B]

Back in my photographer days I had an awesome Canon setup... and to think I sold it all to buy a PC? :wth:

[Mud Dog]

Back in my photographer days I had an awesome Canon setup... and to think I sold it all to buy a PC? :wth:

You're probably talking 35mm film .... in which case you did well, cos you get next to nothing for them now ... not even the lenses.