I'm hoping someone can help me out. I am looking to buy a point and shoot digital camera. I have been told that canon makes the best cameras. I work in real estate and what to use it for that as well as personal use. I don't want to break the bank in terms of price, but at the same time do not want to cheap out. I have thinking about a canon a640. Can anyone give me some suggestions on what to buy, I don't have much experience with these types of cameras. Thanks in advance and have a great holiday everyone....
Digital Cameras
- Thread starter BillyBeru
- Start date
The 20d/30d are digital SLRs. BillyBeru I think is looking for a point and click digital.
Take a look at http://www.dpreview.com for comprehensive reviews of cameras and equipment. They tackle pretty much all types of digital, not just the the 1k+ market cameras.
One thing I think you should look for in a point and shoot is one with a fast lens. The 20d's etc. work like your normal SLRs - great for action shots, but point and clicks suck. Got kids? Try to get them to stay still long enough for your digital to snap the pic. These camera's are great for houses, but how many houses move so much that you worry about blurry shots?
BTW, the Canon's are great and everyone is always chasing them in style and quality, but I prefer the Nikons now as they have come along way and I think have better optics.
Take a look at http://www.dpreview.com for comprehensive reviews of cameras and equipment. They tackle pretty much all types of digital, not just the the 1k+ market cameras.
One thing I think you should look for in a point and shoot is one with a fast lens. The 20d's etc. work like your normal SLRs - great for action shots, but point and clicks suck. Got kids? Try to get them to stay still long enough for your digital to snap the pic. These camera's are great for houses, but how many houses move so much that you worry about blurry shots?
BTW, the Canon's are great and everyone is always chasing them in style and quality, but I prefer the Nikons now as they have come along way and I think have better optics.
Thanks for the response guys. One use for this camera is going to be for my job. I am a real estate agent and I will be taking photos of the inside and outside of houses. I also want to use it for personal use. I like to go to motorcycle shows and would like to be able to take pictures of the bikes and then print them out. I have heard that canon is better for action shots. There are so many to choose from it's a little confusing trying to figure out which one would be the best choice. My price range is probably going to be around $400. Give or take a little, depending on how good the camera is.
If you're not using it for high speed photography, commercial, portraits or action shots then any point and shoot with a 3-5 mega-pixel should be more than sufficient. You might want to walk thru a Comp-USA or one of those larger electronic stores that have a wide variety on display and see what "feels" right in your hand and ease of operation.
Most decent point and shoots in the mid to high price range (300-500) have a decent range on the lens... prob 28 or 35-100mm and that should cover most wide angles up to a decent zoom.
Try looking into the Canon Elf series, which has always been among the top point and shoots every year. It's also small enough to put in your pocket and durable enough to withstand everyday use. A lot bldg surveyors, architects and engineers I know use it cause its so convenient, reliable and packs a good performance wallop. Canon's software is also highly rated. I would go with Canon or Sony for their reliability, ease of use and hassle free software
Try looking into the Canon Elf series, which has always been among the top point and shoots every year. It's also small enough to put in your pocket and durable enough to withstand everyday use. A lot bldg surveyors, architects and engineers I know use it cause its so convenient, reliable and packs a good performance wallop. Canon's software is also highly rated. I would go with Canon or Sony for their reliability, ease of use and hassle free software
This is absolutely right, especially to show the size of an interior. The widest lens I've ever seen on a point-and-shoot is 28mm (equivalent) and that's not wide enough. But somebody might make one with a wider lens than that. If they don't, I'd say you need an slr.
That said, a friend of mine has a high-end point-and-shoot Nikon Coolpix (I forget the model number). The thing has a lot of advanced features and takes fantastic pictures.
That said, a friend of mine has a high-end point-and-shoot Nikon Coolpix (I forget the model number). The thing has a lot of advanced features and takes fantastic pictures.
In addition to everything that has been suggested so far, one consideration I haven't seen mentioned is batteries.
I opted for the nikon coolpix 7600 over the canon due to the fact the Nikon takes AA batteries. The canon has a built in rechargable (at least the models I was considering at the time). Being in the field taking real estate photos, you can always pop in a new set of AA batteries without having to wait or worry about charging the internal ones of some cameras.
CD
I opted for the nikon coolpix 7600 over the canon due to the fact the Nikon takes AA batteries. The canon has a built in rechargable (at least the models I was considering at the time). Being in the field taking real estate photos, you can always pop in a new set of AA batteries without having to wait or worry about charging the internal ones of some cameras.
CD
Any camera in the $200 range is going to be fine for your uses. I have the Nikon Coolpix. Ozzy- I'm not sure if under 4Mp are being sold anymore, maybe clearance stuff. Also my Coolpix was cheaper than the comparable Canon when I bought it. The pricing relationship changes based on promotions.
Anything over 4 Mp doesn’t add much to picture (4X6) especially for newspaper quality prints (and takes up more storage on your computer and takes longer to transfer) unless you intend to crop or make large posters.
Very important - you want a camera that takes AA batteries. The rechargeable batteries are so good (look for the highest ma-hrs - not price, I think the max nowadays is 2300)and cheap, that you can keep a dozen(maybe $30 or so) hanging around (assuming you take a lot of pix's - you want to use them a lot as it is not good to let them self-discharge - they should outlast the camera if you buy 12) and in a pinch you can always buy some alkalines.
Anything over 4 Mp doesn’t add much to picture (4X6) especially for newspaper quality prints (and takes up more storage on your computer and takes longer to transfer) unless you intend to crop or make large posters.
Very important - you want a camera that takes AA batteries. The rechargeable batteries are so good (look for the highest ma-hrs - not price, I think the max nowadays is 2300)and cheap, that you can keep a dozen(maybe $30 or so) hanging around (assuming you take a lot of pix's - you want to use them a lot as it is not good to let them self-discharge - they should outlast the camera if you buy 12) and in a pinch you can always buy some alkalines.
Unless you're in a very large room, 28mm won't be enough for interior shots. Standing in a corner of my moderately-sized living room, a 28mm lens gives a good view of the opposing corner. It's nowhere near wide enough to give a good view of the whole room.
I don't know if there's a point-and-shoot with a lens wider than 28mm (35mm equivalent, obviously). If not, I'd recommend an slr.
Below is a little thing about shooting interiors for real estate.
"For the purposes of shooting interiors you need lens that is 24mm or shorter. Why 24mm? Because 24mm lenses have a wide angle of view but are not so wide that the perspective starts to look exaggerated. Whether you go wider than 24 to 20mm or 16mm or 14mm is a matter of taste. I work with a 16-35mm zoom and find my self having the lens zoomed to 16mm or 18mm all the time.
"The main message I want to get across is don’t be sold a camera for interior shooting that won’t zoom down to at least 24mm. This happens all the time. Last week I was at a real estate convention where the speaker was recommending camera whose widest angle was 35mm. With a 35mm lens your interior photos will look like you are looking through a keyhole!"
http://larrylohrman.wordpress.com/tag/wide-angle-lens/
I don't know if there's a point-and-shoot with a lens wider than 28mm (35mm equivalent, obviously). If not, I'd recommend an slr.
Below is a little thing about shooting interiors for real estate.
"For the purposes of shooting interiors you need lens that is 24mm or shorter. Why 24mm? Because 24mm lenses have a wide angle of view but are not so wide that the perspective starts to look exaggerated. Whether you go wider than 24 to 20mm or 16mm or 14mm is a matter of taste. I work with a 16-35mm zoom and find my self having the lens zoomed to 16mm or 18mm all the time.
"The main message I want to get across is don’t be sold a camera for interior shooting that won’t zoom down to at least 24mm. This happens all the time. Last week I was at a real estate convention where the speaker was recommending camera whose widest angle was 35mm. With a 35mm lens your interior photos will look like you are looking through a keyhole!"
http://larrylohrman.wordpress.com/tag/wide-angle-lens/
I haven't seen a point and shoot lens under 28mm either... that's why I said he'll have to settle for that unless as you pointed out.... He steps up to an SLR. It's possible there's a point and shoot wide angle out there.. But it'll prob run as much as a mid level SLR. 28 should be sufficient cause after that you start to get slight fish-eye distortion. An Elf or comparable from any manufacturer should suit is needs. I've yet to see an RE agent carrying around an SLR.
PS... Who ever this Larry Lohrman is...... is full of shit and himself. You don't need a special wide angle lens to shoot an interior if you know how to take a fucking picture. 90% of the RE ads have some pretty fucking inferior shots, most of which look like they were taken with a cardboard throw-away. Unless were selling multi million dollar properties any good point and shoot in the $500 range will be more than enough.
Sorry Ozzy, but you seem to be the one full of shit not Larry. I am sure you have seen many crappy interior pics with RE listings but why should Billy take more of them? If he gets a proper focal length for his camera he will be able to actually take some decent interior shots that will really stand out and may help him sell more houses.
Sorry Nate but what exactly an I full of shit about? That a 16mm lens distorts the image? Cause it fucking most certainly does.
Then you suggest he use a wide angle but not a fish eye and you suggest an 18mm..... Well that's a "fish eye" in case you didn't know it. I feel bad for the photogs you work for.
And secondly... he said he wants a point and shoot and doesn't want to spend the money for an SLR and a special wide angle lens for another $200 on top of that. Since point and shoots aren't made below a 28mm... probably cause they're pretty much not needed and rarely used... I figured the 28mm would do him just fine as it does eery other RE agent I've seen with a point and shoot.
When you shoot with a fisheye you also lose all sense of true "depth of field". I can't imagine any RE agent presenting a distorted view of a property over an accurate representation. I can't imagine a buyer wanting to see a view that looks like it was shot thru a fun house mirror over an accurate photo.
Here's some samples of 16mm fisheye and if anyone thinks it's not completely distorted.... well I feel sorry for you. Get some new glasses.
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/zenitar/16_28_mc_fisheye
Then you suggest he use a wide angle but not a fish eye and you suggest an 18mm..... Well that's a "fish eye" in case you didn't know it. I feel bad for the photogs you work for.
And secondly... he said he wants a point and shoot and doesn't want to spend the money for an SLR and a special wide angle lens for another $200 on top of that. Since point and shoots aren't made below a 28mm... probably cause they're pretty much not needed and rarely used... I figured the 28mm would do him just fine as it does eery other RE agent I've seen with a point and shoot.
When you shoot with a fisheye you also lose all sense of true "depth of field". I can't imagine any RE agent presenting a distorted view of a property over an accurate representation. I can't imagine a buyer wanting to see a view that looks like it was shot thru a fun house mirror over an accurate photo.
Here's some samples of 16mm fisheye and if anyone thinks it's not completely distorted.... well I feel sorry for you. Get some new glasses.
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/zenitar/16_28_mc_fisheye