Forums | MacLife

Sony is generally no more "overpriced" than Canon. I don't actually think they are overpriced, they are just more expensive. Both companies make excellent cameras.
I have read that the T1 doesn't have the best image quality in low light compared to other Sony Models. The size, however, is very nice.
A friedn of mine has the Sony Cybershot DSC-W1, it is very nice.
If you are looking Canon, you're probably looking for something like the S500 or SD500

You are paying a premium to get an ultra-compact camera, so similar cameras will similarly priced.

Use the buyers' guide at any of the following:
Digital Photography Review
Digital Camera Resource Page and
Steve's Digicams
to get an idea of the ultra-compact digital cameras out there. Put in your list of criteria and see which one best fits them, then go read the very detailed reviews that any of the above will have on all but the most recent releases.

Get a fujifilm finepix e550, it's super fast, and takes stunning pics, and 300 smackums is a good price to pay for em.

For an ultra-compact camera, I'd recommend something in the Canon SD-X00 family (except the SD-100).

I am very happy with my Canon PowerShot A85.  It takes some really good pics, and has a lot of options.  It was one of the better cameras in its price-range when I bought it.

From my experience, Canon and Nikon make the best cameras.  Currently I've been using a Powershot A75 and like it a lot.  I've been using a Canon i960 printer to print my digital photos, and it rocks my socks as well.  I'd definitely recommend something in Canon's Powershot "A" line.

Thunderstruck wrote:

I'm happy with my PowerShot A10 except for when I take photos without flash and it gives me blurry pictures

I hope you don't think that's the camera's fault lol

No. Low light means that in auto focus mode, the shutter will have to remain open longer in order to capture enough light to expose the photo. If the shutter has to remain open longer than 1/60 of a second, then the shot will be influenced by hand-shake (the movement of the person holding the camera). The longer the exposure, the worse the blur will be.

The way to get around that is to either use a tripod, use more ambient lighting, or both.

Sorry, I want a totally portable (non bulging pocket) size camera to take pictures at bars, clubs, sight seeing, etc.

I'm not a big photo guy... no breathtaking landscapes

But optical zoom is a must.

I do want great quality 8 x 11 prints IF I decide to order via Apple iPhoto, but I mostly keep the pics on my mac

How does the Olympus Camedia D630 5MP Digital Camera with 3x Optical Zoom compare to the Sony Cybershot series?

Last edited by Aldarion (2005-03-21 1:21 pm)

Aldarion wrote:

Sorry, I want a totally portable (non bulging pocket) size camera to take pictures at bars, clubs, sight seeing, etc.

I'm not a big photo guy... no breathtaking landscapes

But optical zoom is a must.

I do want great quality 8 x 11 prints IF I decide to order via Apple iPhoto, but I mostly keep the pics on my mac

How does the Olympus Camedia D630 5MP Digital Camera with 3x Optical Zoom compare to the Sony Cybershot series?

You can use the Digital Photography Review's side-by-side comparison (sorry, Java/JavaScript required) to see for yourself. Here is one showing the Olympus D630 with the various thin ultra-compact Sony's. Just glancing through the chart I see that the Olympus is limited to ISO 320 (the Sony's go up to 400) and doesn't have manual focus, either of which might hamper the Olympus' performance in low-light situations like in bars and clubs (perhaps not enough to kill it as a possibility--just something to keep in mind).

Thunderstruck wrote:

I don't know, i mean flash is just to light up the object right? when the lighting isn't enough, shouldn't it still be able to focus?

It would work with a tripod.

Without the flash, the camera is going to compensate with a shower shutter speed....

I have a Canon PS A400.  No complaints.