Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Anyone have any recommendations for a low end (cheapish) digital camera that takes quick pictures?
Useless information/rant follows if you're bored (all I have is free time at the moment):
My mom has one that is ready to snap photos just a few seconds after it's turned on, but requires nearly 15 seconds to take another. I borrowed that one because my wife's camera takes 10-15 seconds to power up, and also takes too long in between photos (I have gone through different modes and settings). Then, my camcorder takes decent photos as quickly as you can take them, but there is no flash and it's something I don't want to always carry with me.
I never realized how slow they were until I tried taking spur-of-the-moment pictures of my baby ("I formed babby").
I hate this need for splash screen startups, or automatic picture review after one is taken (I also don't like how people, especially my wife, feel they need to review every single photo immediately after. You were just there!), and know I don't need a 30 megapixel camera with three displays and YouTube, Facebook, or other built-in fad support.
@madog: They may not literally take 10-15 seconds, but when you're trying to take pictures of a babys smile or something, 7 seconds can feel like an eternity; and the moment may be gone by then.
I also don't know anything about cameras so I don't know if they specifically rate that or have categories for a digital camera that works as fast as one from 15 years ago that took pics as fast as you could wind the film.
Any information about it would be greatly appreciated!
@madog: i bought the kodak easy share m1033 for like 130 bucks if not less.
really good for snapshots and keeping in your pocket. i like it. i keep it in my car. has a good battery life. if i need it i got a usb car adapter so it will charge on the drive to the event. it holds up pretty good. takes good photos.
@madog: oh! and it does start up fairly quickly around 3 seconds. and if you are taking regular snapshots, no long exposure and all that bull. its pretty instant.
@madog: There are a couple options but specifically I'd look at the Canon SD 1200 IS. It's got the digic IV processor, a fast lens, and it runs around $150 right now. Not too fancy in the spec department (3x zoom range, 10mp, SD movie ability) but it's a solid little camera.
@Gene @LatimerAnaxibia @che-che @FigNinja: Thanks for the info guys! I appreciate it. I'll definitely check out that site/forum and that Canon/Kodak. And yes, while $30 for one would be awesome, I'd expect to pay around $150 for a decent one these days.
With all of the different models out there with bonus novelty features and smile recognition and volume knobs that go to 11, it can be confusing to find a decent, simple camera that does what it's supposed to well.
(tried to promote all replies in case this multi-reply doesn't work as I'd imagine it to. Hopefully others find this useful too!)
@madog: Canon A1100. On sale for $129 if you look around. Amazing photos. I bought 10 for a photo class I teach to school kids and I've been blown away by the results.
I would have thought the best low light and best video/still crossover categories would have both gone to the Panasonic LX3... It does HD video and has a faster lens than the cannon.
I own the Lumix and it is a terrific camera. But the AVCHD video file format needs 3rd party conversation software so that it can be edited on a Mac. I've used VoltaicHD with good results.
@ren0901: many Lumixes support motion JPEG as a codec in mov container, my LX3 does. It's a much nicer codec since it's i frame based it gives you frame prcise editing in real time with little overhead. Final cut will deal with it no problem, i despise dealing with AVCHD. It's a digital format that feels like a tape format.
@ren0901: I have an older Lumix and agree that it is an awesome P&S. When I go on vacation I use it much more often than my DSLR and it still takes awesome shots. I'm not sure if mine does the AVCHD, pretty sure it doesn't, but the video was decent regardless. When people ask me what P&S to buy I almost always suggest the Lumix. But then they go and buy the $100 Kodak anyway...
so TX1 or the S90? the missus is taking a photography class in the spring, I know neither is a DSLR replacement, but low light was the biggest shortcoming of our current Cannon...thoughts?
@Kaspir: Don't even look at these if it's for a photography class. The lack manual controls and so they're not an option for learning the basics. Get on eBay/craigslist and get a last-gen DSLR body and a 50mm f/1.8.
@Kaspir: Pure photo quality, I'd almost always take the Canon over the Sony of equal comparison. Plus accessories are usually cheaper for Canon over Sony. But, the TX1 is so cool and it's slim form factor is important for pocketability.
@Kaspir: If those were the only choices, I'd go with the S90 since you have more manual control and that's the point of the class. Still, I have to agree with mullingitover. The class is going to be geared toward DSLR. Even an older one will really be leagues beyond these cameras. Most of the stuff covered will be of limited use without one. Used or last-gen is pretty reasonable. In addition to eBay and CL, I recommend checking out Adorama. Of course, where it really starts costing you is the lenses but there are a few good ones out there that aren't too much, like 50mm f1.8 mentioned. It's $125 and a great portrait lens. That and a moderate zoom should be plenty to start.
I love my S90. It has a few annoying quirks, like the silly pop-up flash and the back control ring that's loose and easily bumped, but its capabilities and image quality are unmatched in a camera this size. Especially great for pro-sumers who like to tinker with ISO, aperture and exposure time (but the auto, low-light and programmed "scene" modes work great for the point-and-shoot crowd too).
These descriptions sound like something Rod Roddy would say while running down the items on the Showcase Showdown..."all this and more could be yours on the Price Is Right!"
@John_001: same... remember his insane outfits? and how red in the face he use to get? Lets hope he's doing tons of blow off strippers asses in heaven... thats what he deserves
I'm in the market for a cheap and portable laptop/netbook in the $400-500 range. I'm looking for 10-14" screen, dual core CPU, and 2+ GB memory. The Aspire listed above looks pretty nice! However, I'm not sure how the celeron performs. Does anyone have advice on other alternatives?
(I know this is proselytizing but) I think that Linux deserves a mention for netbooks. It runs fast on the current gen of netbook and, best of all, is free to install.
Skip Moblin - it doesn't install on most hardware.
The netbook build of Ubuntu deserves a look, even if there are a couple of oddball glitches.
Remember what the concept behind a netbook is: quick-and-dirty computing on the go. Checking email, watching movies, and surfing the web. Great deals can be had if you stick to that philosophy. If I'm going to game on a PC, I'm not going to do it on a 10" screen. Because I don't require gaming capability, a wide range of netbooks is available.
Personally, I love my little eeePC. The keyboard is decently spaced, the keys don't feel to mushy to me, and, most importantly, the hinge design provides a natural grip point for carrying the netbook from room to room without worry of damaging the hardware.
Is it the world's lightest netbook? No. But when I'm websurfing while watching TV, the bottom doesn't get hot. That is a vital selling point. These are points that need to be brought to the fore.
How hot does it get? How much battery time do you get while running Firefox and Pidgin? How durable does it feel? What is the real-world range of the wireless card inside?
I had a ridiculously hard time finding a netbook that fit my main criteria when I was looking for one. Basically my choices were HP Mini, or...wait until someone else comes out with another netbook that has a solid-state drive. Sure, it's only got 16GB on the internal drive, but I slipped a 32GB SDHC card into the reader, and now I've got a good on-the-go LDraw machine with a crash-proof model library, and I can check e-mail and such as a bonus.
@(Starman) Starman: They may have started the trend but their netbooks aren't exactly the nicest thing in the world. In fact, the original EEE PC looks ancient by comparison when you line it up against Dell, HP, Toshiba, ACER ect. Can't start a fire without a spark but the spark is usually much less impressive than the fire.
@Maori_Yelir: They may not be pretty, but they work, and they are still competitive. I've got a EEE 1005HA and my little brother has a Toshiba NB205. I absolutely hate his keyboard, my computer has a little better battery life (obviously neither get 1o hours), my laptop supports wireless N, and is a little more linux friendly.
Yeah, designs inspired from seashells and ballerinas are lame, but i didn't buy the computer because I loved it's design. I bought it because it had a great battery life and I could use it everywhere.
@(Starman) Starman: I love the original Asus EEE pc design, with the small silver logo.
If I were to buy a netbook, I'd definitely go with the original, although I'm a little bit disappointed that their netbooks aren't customizable and don't cover the features I want. From a marketing standpoint, they have far too many similar models clogging up the $300-$350 price range, and not enough products on the upper and ends of the market.
@gmrple: It's no so much the look as it is the build quality and offered features. I own a Dell Mini 10 and it feels like a brick and has an HD screen, HDMI port (Though no Ion so I admit this point is very weak) and a 6 hour battery. My friend's EEE PC feels flimsy, has a lower resolution screen, has a more cramped keyboard and was only about 30 bucks less than what I bought. That's not to say they don't have a market or that they are bad devices but this list is the BEST and nothing Asus makes would ever strike me as the best, they are, after all, a budget PC maker and they do quite well in that niche. Don't expect them to be something they are not.
@(Starman) Starman: I was going to say, where's the love for the 1005HA? I can get 11 hours of battery out of it, and the multitouch touchpad is really great.
@Nathan Obbards: This is exactly what I was thinking. The Mini 1ov (IMO) is the best best netbook out there - solid construction (Have you felt this thing? amazing), great price (base of $279 and only around $330 or so as it "should be") and perfect for OSX =)
@TKE-Egon: Paid $200 for mine from the outlet. Wait for the sales and you can get one dirt cheap. I wish I had the bigger battery, but, hell, I can get 3-3.5 hours on the small one if I turn the internet off and just work on papers.
While I do agree these might be very decent netbooks, I think 400 dollars is really pushing it for netbook. If you are going to spend that much, you might as well spend the extra 50-100 more and get a regular 12 inch laptop.
I was thinking the same thing. The threshold I have for a proper netbook is no more than 300, with 200 being a nice sweet spot. I mean, it's a netbook. It should be doing exactly what my iPhone does, except with cheaper and bigger parts.
@PurpleMonkeyDishwasher:: I picked up a 17" laptop for my wife a few months back for $350. It's nothing spectacular, but it has specs that easily place it outside of the realm of netbooks. Granted, it was a great deal at the time, but as a result I certainly can't see spending more for less.
@MagicalTrev: That's a great deal, IF you want the 17" footprint. I like the small size of my 10" Eee, not to mention the $300 pricetag. My next purchase will probably be a used 8.9" or even 7" original-spec Eee.
@Xagest: Agreed. When you can pick up an Acer Aspire AS1410 for $399 or less, and compared to a netbook it's:
- got a faster CPU
- got a bigger screen, and higher resolution too
- got a better keyboard
- got better battery life
- got 802.11n rather than 802.11g wireless
- got HDMI and eSATA unlike the netbook
- is just as thin or thinner, and only a little bigger
- got Windows 7 Home Premium rather than Starter
I think most of the justification for going with a netbook at $400 isn't there any more.
@B3ND3R: Actually the HP Mini 311 has been very successfully hackintoshed. I'm writing this message on one now. There are easy instructions and a nicely packaged installer over at [www.insanelymac.com]
@MacPro66: The mini311 is going to be 100% hackintoshable soon...
The only thing that's missing right now is the wireless card, but you can put another in it an done...
Or , of course, you could wait until someone figures out how to use the default wireless card on macosx ;)
12/11/09
Useless information/rant follows if you're bored (all I have is free time at the moment):
My mom has one that is ready to snap photos just a few seconds after it's turned on, but requires nearly 15 seconds to take another. I borrowed that one because my wife's camera takes 10-15 seconds to power up, and also takes too long in between photos (I have gone through different modes and settings). Then, my camcorder takes decent photos as quickly as you can take them, but there is no flash and it's something I don't want to always carry with me.
I never realized how slow they were until I tried taking spur-of-the-moment pictures of my baby ("I formed babby").
I hate this need for splash screen startups, or automatic picture review after one is taken (I also don't like how people, especially my wife, feel they need to review every single photo immediately after. You were just there!), and know I don't need a 30 megapixel camera with three displays and YouTube, Facebook, or other built-in fad support.
12/11/09
I also don't know anything about cameras so I don't know if they specifically rate that or have categories for a digital camera that works as fast as one from 15 years ago that took pics as fast as you could wind the film.
Any information about it would be greatly appreciated!
12/11/09
[www.dpreview.com]
They often give list how long all those things take for a given camera. The forums are really helpful, too.
12/11/09
really good for snapshots and keeping in your pocket. i like it. i keep it in my car. has a good battery life. if i need it i got a usb car adapter so it will charge on the drive to the event. it holds up pretty good. takes good photos.
is that cheap enough.
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/12/09
With all of the different models out there with bonus novelty features and smile recognition and volume knobs that go to 11, it can be confusing to find a decent, simple camera that does what it's supposed to well.
(tried to promote all replies in case this multi-reply doesn't work as I'd imagine it to. Hopefully others find this useful too!)
12/12/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
So anyway +1 for the Lumix!
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
12/11/09
[www.laptopmag.com]
12/11/09
Skip Moblin - it doesn't install on most hardware.
The netbook build of Ubuntu deserves a look, even if there are a couple of oddball glitches.
Remember what the concept behind a netbook is: quick-and-dirty computing on the go. Checking email, watching movies, and surfing the web. Great deals can be had if you stick to that philosophy. If I'm going to game on a PC, I'm not going to do it on a 10" screen. Because I don't require gaming capability, a wide range of netbooks is available.
Personally, I love my little eeePC. The keyboard is decently spaced, the keys don't feel to mushy to me, and, most importantly, the hinge design provides a natural grip point for carrying the netbook from room to room without worry of damaging the hardware.
Is it the world's lightest netbook? No. But when I'm websurfing while watching TV, the bottom doesn't get hot. That is a vital selling point. These are points that need to be brought to the fore.
How hot does it get? How much battery time do you get while running Firefox and Pidgin? How durable does it feel? What is the real-world range of the wireless card inside?
12/11/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
Yeah, designs inspired from seashells and ballerinas are lame, but i didn't buy the computer because I loved it's design. I bought it because it had a great battery life and I could use it everywhere.
12/10/09
If I were to buy a netbook, I'd definitely go with the original, although I'm a little bit disappointed that their netbooks aren't customizable and don't cover the features I want. From a marketing standpoint, they have far too many similar models clogging up the $300-$350 price range, and not enough products on the upper and ends of the market.
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
I was thinking the same thing. The threshold I have for a proper netbook is no more than 300, with 200 being a nice sweet spot. I mean, it's a netbook. It should be doing exactly what my iPhone does, except with cheaper and bigger parts.
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
Yeah, that's why laptop hard drives are so much less expensive than desktop hard drives with the same space.
I'm pretty sure 32 gigs in a netbook drive is going to be a lot cheaper than the 32 gigs of flash in an iPhone.
12/10/09
- got a faster CPU
- got a bigger screen, and higher resolution too
- got a better keyboard
- got better battery life
- got 802.11n rather than 802.11g wireless
- got HDMI and eSATA unlike the netbook
- is just as thin or thinner, and only a little bigger
- got Windows 7 Home Premium rather than Starter
I think most of the justification for going with a netbook at $400 isn't there any more.
Now at $300 I can still see it.
12/11/09
12/10/09
12/10/09
None of those are easy, though due to their video chipsets. The reigning champ of easy hackintoshing is the Mini 10v (or the Mini9).
12/10/09
12/10/09
The only thing that's missing right now is the wireless card, but you can put another in it an done...
Or , of course, you could wait until someone figures out how to use the default wireless card on macosx ;)
12/10/09
I should have said the "easiEST" was the Dell Mini10v/Mini9 because they require no wifi card swap (although for most that's certainly not hard).
The HP makes a good one, as well, but the Samsung and Toshiba, AFAIK, are exponentially more difficult due to video chipsets.
disclaimer: Posted on my Mini9 running OS 10.5.8
12/09/09