Best for lowlight

Canon PowerShot S90 ($400)

The camera of the moment, the popular PowerShot S90 is a small but perfectly formed compact for the keen photographer. Concentrating on image quality rather than simply joining in the megapixel race (just like Sony's TX1 / WX1 models), the S90 offers DSLR-like results in a pocketable device, making it the perfect second camera for any self-respecting DSLR owner. A sensible resolution of 10 megapixels and fast zoom lens make the S90 an excellent choice when the lighting drops. This is one camera that you carry everywhere and still achieve breath-taking photos that will look great on your wall. [Review]

Best bang for your buck

Samsung HZ15W ($250)

Samsung can always be relied upon to deliver more for less, and the HZ15W is certainly no different. The HZ15W can't quite match every feature that its main rivals offer, but it does cost a lot less than them. With an amazingly versatile 10x zoom lens, high-definition video and a wealth of beginner-friendly modes, this well-designed camera is simple to use yet offers enough features and quality to satisfy more experienced photographers. The HZ15W could well be the only camera that you ever need. [Review]

Best video/still crossover

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7 ($400)

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7 is not only one of the best video compacts on the market, it's also one of the best cameras full stop. Support for the AVCHD Lite format almost doubles the recording time, albeit at the expense of editing ease. The dedicated Record button, stereo microphone, wind cut function and audio sampling at 48kHz combine to make the TZ7 a star performer for moving images. It's also a fantastic stills camera too, with an incredibly versatile 12x zoom and top-notch image quality - a great do-it-all, carry-everywhere device. [Review]

Best super slim model

Sony TX1 ($300)

Sony has long ruled the roost in the "it's so slim you can barely see it" category, and the desirable TX1 continues that tradition. Combining a sturdy yet stylish metal body, clever sliding front plate and impressive folded lens optics in a frame that's just 14.1mm thick, the TX1 still manages to pack in a 4x zoom lens and 3-inch touch-sensitive rear screen. You also get the added bonus of Sony's impressive "Exmor R" back-illuminated CMOS image sensor, which greatly improves low-light performance. Available in a variety of attractive colors to match your personality, the TX1 is guaranteed to look as good as you. [Review]

Best wet and rugged

Pentax Optio W80 ($210)

Ed note: Brian Lam reviewed most every rugged camera under the sun last summer, and his favorite all around performer went to the Pentax W80, a Jack-of-all-trades rugged cam featuring a 5x internal zoom lens. Its picture quality doesn't compete with the best point and shoots, and the W80 can only be dropped from around 3 feet, but it can go underwater up to 16 feet and function in temperatures down to 14 degrees. [Review]

There are obviously a lot of other great cameras this year for every budget and level of experience. See all of Photography Blog's camera reviews here (http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/).

Mark Goldstein is the Editor of Photography Blog. Photography Blog has been independently reviewing cameras and reporting photography news since 2003.

When you buy a camera, you'll be pelted with specs from a salesperson, many of which are confusing, and even misleading. You will cower, and may cover your head for protection. He will keep pelting. And really, he has to—spec sheets and jargon are integral to camera marketing, at least for now. Here's what it all means, in one handy cheat sheet.

Types of Cameras

Before you set out to buy a new camera, or even just to get to know yours a little better, you've got to know the difference between the different types or cameras. Here are the ones you're likely to come across.

Point-and-Shoots: Also known as compact cameras. If you don't know what kind of camera you're looking for, or what kind your have, it's probably one of these. They're the smallest style of camera, typically—at least in the last few years—trending toward a boxy, mostly featureless shape. The lens is non-removable. The flash unit is built in. They have LCD screens on the back, not just for reviewing photos, but to use as a viewfinder as well. When you press the shutter button on a point-and-shoot, there is a slight delay before the photo is actually recorded. Many new point and shoot cameras will take video, and some even manage to record in HD.

Bridge/Superzoom Cameras: These cameras often look like DSLRs, but don't be fooled: They're just juiced-up point-and-shoots. They will typically come with longer lenses and slightly more impressive specs than your average P&S, and will give you a bit more photographic flexibility to play with. Sadly, they suffer from the same picture-taking delay, or "shutter lag," as point and shoots. The problem with bridge cameras, especially now, is that in order to get a decent one you have to spend at least a few hundreds dollars, at which point you may as well get a...

DSLRs: This unwieldy acronym stands for Digital Single Lens Reflex. Narrowly, this means that the camera has a mirror mechanism which allows photographers to see through the camera's lens while setting up a shot, and which flips up, exposing the image sensor (the equivalent to film in a digital camera). Widely, this means that the camera will have interchangeable lenses, a larger sensor than a point and shoot, and to an extent, more image controls. When you press the shutter button on a DSLR, it takes the photo instantly—no lag, like in a point-and-shoot. Many new DSLRs at mid-to-high price points shoot HD video; some manage 720p, some manage 1080p, but all turn out impressive results, if simply because of the cameras' lenses. That said, they're not really ready to replace proper video cameras yet, because amongother things, no DSLR to date has got the autofocus during video thing right.

These are the cameras that photographers, or people who call themselves photographers, use. They're also the ones that are capable of taking the best photos.

As a rule, DSLRs are more expensive than point and shoots. But they're getting cheaper. Much, much cheaper. Olympus, Nikon, Pentax and Sony all have DSLRs that can be had for under $500—and these are real cameras—rendering the entire category of bridge cameras kind of pointless.

Micro Four Thirds/Digital Rangefinder: Micro Four Thirds cameras are interchangeable-lens cameras, minus the straight-through-the lens viewfinder that defines a DSLR. In other words, they have larger sensors like DSLRs, have swappable glass like DSLRs, but use an LCD screen as viewfinderlike a point-and-shoot. This saves space inside the camera, meaning that—at least this is the theory—it can be more portable than an equivalent DSLR, while maintaining the same versatility and image quality. Most of them record video, too, and they're pretty good at it: They don't have the complex viewfinder/mirror system of a DSLR, so it's technically simpler to record video. Some of these cameras are styled like DSLRs, like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1, while some are styled more like portable cameras, like the Olympus EP-1.

This is a small category for now, and accordingly, prices are still high, starting at about $750. Panasonic and Olympus are basically the only game in town.

Sensors

The sensor is the part of the camera that actually records the image. In other words, it is your camera.

Megapixels, and image resolution: Megapixels have been central to digital camera marketing since the beginning (it just sounds like a 90s term, doesn't it?). A megapixel, quite simply, is one million pixels. If a one-megapixel image (or sensor) was perfectly square, it would be 1000x1000 pixels. They're usually rectangular, at 4:3 or 3:2 ratios, which means their resolutions look more like this: 2048x1536 pixels for a 3-megapixel camera; 3264x2448 pixels for an 8-megapixel camera, and so on.

As digital cameras mature, this number means less and less—it's easy to cram megapixels in a camera, but without good optics and light sensitivity, it doesn't mean that it's going to turn out an honest, clean, high-quality images at such a high resolution. My cellphone shoots at five megapixels, but the images look like screenshots from some kind of ghosthunting show. My DSLR shoots at 10.1 megpixels, but turns out images more than twice as clean and clear as my phone. My point-and-shoot is rated at 12.1 megapixels, but on close examination, its images are effectively blurrier than those from the DSLR.

If you're planning on making huge prints, or need to crop your images a lot, a high megapixel count is necessary, but beyond a certain point, the returns are minimal. You'll read a lot of guidance from camera manufacturers about how many megapixels you need to print different sized photos, which you can ignore, because they seem to change with every generation of cameras. Unless you're printing billboards or in magazine or something, don't sweat it too much.

Aside from indicating how many dots a camera is capable of capturing, megapixels can be a helpful indicator of how old a camera's guts may be. Megapixel count has been increasing fairly steadily over the years, so within a given manufacturer's camera line, increased megapixels could correlate to newer sensors, which could, along with high resolution, take richer, less noisy pictures.

ISO: This indicates how fast your camera's sensor collects light—the higher your ISO, the more sensitive your camera is to light, the less light you need to take a picture. And while high-ISO capability is most useful in low light, it also comes in handy when you're shooting extremely fast exposures in the daytime, like at a sports game. With higher ISOs, though, comes more noise—some point-and-shoot cameras advertise extremely high ISOs, on the order of 6400. Shots at this sensitivity will invariably look like ass. DSLRs, which have larger sensors that are better at gathering light, can sometimes shoot at 6400 ISO and higher without too much noise.

It might help to think of it like this: ISO ratings are actually a callback to the days of film. You used to have to anticipate how you'd be shooting, and buy film based on how sensitive it was, as expressed in an ISO or ASA rating. The ratings got carried over to digital cameras, despite film getting replaced with sensors.

Anyway, don't buy a camera for its ISO rating alone, because there's a good chance its top two to three settings will be useless.

CCD and CMOS: From our previous Giz Explains on the subject:

There are two major types of image sensors for digital cameras and camcorders: CCD (charged-couple device) and CMOS (complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor, sometimes also known as active pixel sensor). We're not going to get into the really geeky differences, because you don't really need to know or care. What you should know is that higher-end digital SLRs (the big cameras with a removable lens) use CMOS because it's easier to make bigger CMOS sensors; and mobile phones do because CMOS uses less power. That said, most point-and-shoot cameras and most camcorders use the more common CCD sensor.

Things are a little different now, and CCDs are common in DSLRs nowadays. The difference for consumers is minimal—don't be alarmed to see either on your camera's spec sheet. UPDATE: As some commenters have pointed out, this isn't quite right: DSLRs are still trending more towards CMOS sensors, including most of the latest/greatest cameras. Anyway: still more of a curiosity than a purchasing point, for most people.

White Balance: Have you ever seen a set of indoor pictures that's totally, inexplicably orange? That's a white balance problem. Your camera can adjust to compensate for different light temperatures—tungsten lights have that orange hue, and sunlight will turn your photos kind of blue—and correct your image's color accordingly. Virtually all cameras let you adjust white balance with presets, though it's best if you can adjust it manually, too.

Sensor size, and crop factor: Some cameras have sensors that are roughly the same size as 35mm film, at 36x24mm. These are called full frame cameras. They tend to be more expensive—like Canon's 5D and 1D series, or Nikon's D3s—and their bodies tend to be a bit bigger. Semi-pro to pro equipment, basically.

APS-C sensors, on the other hand, are what almost all consumer DSLRs ship with. These sensors are about 22x15mm, which is significantly smaller than a full frame's sensor. Why does this matter? Larger sensors provide more room for each pixel, which makes them better at picking up light. (A bucket analogy is useful here.) More importantly for APS-C users, though, is crop factor. A smaller sensor will pick up a smaller section of what's coming through a lens, so: A 200mm lens on a full frame DSLR becomes a 300m lens on an APS-C camera, a 50mm becomes a 75mm, etc. Of course, camera manufacturers make APS-C -specific lenses which are designed for the smaller sensors, but the listed focal lengths aren't adjusted—they're still 35mm-equivalent numbers. Just be aware the any given lens will shoot differently from one type of camera to another.

Optics

The optics are the the parts through which your camera sees. They're the eyeballs, basically.

Swappable lenses: There are two kinds of swappable lenses, generally speaking. Ones that zoom in and out, which are called "zoom" lenses, and ones that don't move. These are called "primes." They're all classified by focal length. Strictly speaking, focal length refers to the distance required for a lens system to focus light. In real terms, focal length roughly correlates to physical lens length, and helps indicate how much a lens magnifies an image. 18mm focal length on a DSLR is considered wide, 200mm or more would be considered a telephoto lens.

Point-and-Shoot Lenses, and the X Factor: The second most prominently featured number on your point-and-shoot's obnoxious feature sticker is the zoom rating. It'll be expressed as a number, with an x: 5x, 10x, etc. You'll also see a printed range, something like 5.0-25mm, which describes the focal length of the lens. Here's a trick: Divide the larger focal length measurement by the smaller one. The result should match your "x" zoom rating, because, well, that's all it is: the quotient of the maximum lens length and the minimum lens length.

This is misleading labeling. Mounted on the same camera, a lens that zooms from 50mm to 100mm would be called a 2X lens, while a lens that zooms from 18mm to 42mm would be called a 3X lens, even though at the longest, it doesn't zoom in as far as the 50-100mm lens does at its shortest. Take this equation into account when comparing point-and-shoots, but most of all, try them. You'll see the difference.

Shutter, shutter speed, and shutter lag: You shutter is the little door that opens up between your lens and your sensor, allowing for photographic exposure. Shutter speed ranges are advertised with the intention of implying that the camera will be useful at both ends: from the 10-second long exposure to the 1/4000th-second high-speed shot. Keep in mind, for both numbers, that shutter speed alone doesn't guarantee anything. If your camera can shoot at 1/4000th of a second, but it's got a small aperture and low ISO rating, your shots will probably be too dark.

Shutter lag is something else entirely. You know how on a point and shoot, there's a frustrating gap between when you press the button and when your shot actually takes? That's it. The lower the shutter lag, the better, though many camera manufacturers don't even bother to advertise this.

Aperture: This is the hole through which light passes after its been through part of your lens, and before it hits your sensor. The bigger the hole, the more light gets in. The smaller the hole, the less light gets in. Larger apertures allow you to take pictures in lower light situations, but only allow you to focus on a thin plane—either your background or your foreground will be out of focus. Smaller apertures let you keep more of a scene in focus but they let less light through, and require longer exposure times. Apertures are described by f-numbers—these are the ration between the width of an aperture and the focal length of a lens. The smaller the number, the larger the aperture.

Optical vs Digital Zoom: Another scourge of the camera buyer is digital zoom. Optical is magnification by your lens—in other words, it's true zoom. Digital zoom is just your camera taking the optically zoomed image and blowing it up, like you'd do in Photoshop. It's only useful for framing shots and sometimes helping your camera focus properly. Otherwise, it's a gimmick: Ignore it, shoot wide and crop your shots later.

IS, or Antishake: Image stabilization is fast becoming a standard feature on even the cheapest cameras, though you'll find some sub-$150 point-and-shoots without it. The point of image stabilization is to correct for camera movements during an exposure, which cause blurry shots.

There are two types: Digital IS, which you'll find mostly in point-and-shoots, corrects the image with software, and can be somewhat effective, though the results are often passable, not perfect. Optical image stabilization physically moves some part of the camera to counteract shaking. In some cameras, like Nikons and Canons, the moving parts are in the lens. In most other other manufacturers' DSLRs, it's the sensor that actually moves to stabilize the image. Optical IS almost always works better, but it's not magic—you won't be able to shoot a freehand four-second exposure just because it's on, but you might be able to keep things together for a half-second or more.

Software

"Modes," Face Detection, Smile Detection: Your camera's modes are assistive tools,, not hard features. They're generally just collected presets for settings that you can adjust yourself, like equalizer presets on your iPod. They can be useful, though you'll be a better photographer if you manage settings yourself.

Face and smile detection, again, are like crutches. Face detection guesses when there's a human in the photo so the camera can adjust exposure, white balance and focus to make sure that said human doesn't end up blurry. Smile detection is a crude algorithm that measures facial features, and won't take a photo until the subjects are judged to be SUFFICIENTLY CONTENTED, by which I mean they have vaguely crescent-shaped mouth holes. It's a good way to ensure that nobody is ruining a photo with a grimace. Also, to ensure that none of your photos are ever interesting.

Image formats: You digital camera doesn't have film, but your photos have to go somewhere. In today's cameras, the digitally stored photos are either JPEGs or RAW files. JPEG files are compressed, which means that they are encoded in such a way that they don't take up much space, but lose a small amount of quality. This is how point-and-shoot cameras almost always store images, and how DSLRs store images by default, generally.

If JPEGs are like photo prints (they're not, really, but bear with me) then RAW files are like the digital negatives. (In fact, one popular RAW format, .DNG, crudely stands for "digital negative"). Raw files contain almost exactly what your sensor has recorded, which means you can change values like exposure, white balance and coloration after taking the photo, to a surprisingly high degree. It feels like cheating! There is a downside: larger image files. And, depending on the type of RAW file—different camera manufacturers have different ones—you may need special software to view and edit your photos. Shoot in RAW if you can, and buy a camera that'll let you. This is a huge feature.

As a bonus, most cameras that shoot RAW will also let you shoot RAW and JPEG files simultaneously, so you have a lightweight, ready-to-print-or-upload file right away, as well as the RAW source, for later editing. It takes up a ton of space, but hey, space is cheap nowadays. Spend a few bucks on a bigger memory card, and live your life.

Video: Most new cameras, including some DSLRs, shoot video. But just because your camera shoots stills at 10 megapixels doesn't mean that it'll shoot anywhere near that kind of resolution in motion. The standard resolution for most point-and-shoot cameras is VGA—that's just 640x480 pixels of video, which is good enough for YouTube—while DSLRs, and some nicer point-and-shoots, record in either 720p or 1080p, which are HD resolutions, which translate to 1280x720 pixels and 1920×1080 pixels, respectively.

Storage

Point and shoot cameras usually come with a small amount of onboard storage. This, I'm about 100% sure, is there so that the camera technically works when you buy it, making your inevitable extra storage purchase seem more like a choice, and less like a mandatory camera tax. Anyway, with any camera, you're going to need to buy some memory, or storage.

There are a few peripheral memory card formats still kicking around (Sony, can you please just put Memory Stick Pro out of its misery? Thanks!) but there are only two that matter.

SD: Also seen as SDHC, or SDXC, these little guys are the card of choice for point-and-shoot and bridge cameras, and some newer DSLRs. They're small, they works fine, and they're available in just about any capacity you could ever want. Almost: Most cameras are only SDHC-compatible, a standard which maxes out at 32GB. SDXC, the next evolution of the SD standard, maxes out at a theoretical 2TB, though almost no cameras support it yet.

Compact Flash: These cards are chunkier, can be faster, and are more durable, and anecdotally less prone to temperature and weather damage. These are what you'll find in DSLRs.

Speed ratings: Memory cards come in different speeds. These are advertised in a variety of different ways, for no good reason. You'll see a couple of numbers on most cards, in the "133x" syntax. Ignore them—they are inflated, unregulated and therefore, basically meaningless. What you're looking for on SD cards is a Class rating, from 1-6. The official SD Association chart:
For Compact Flash cards, your best bet is to look for an actual transfer speed on the card, expressed in MB/s.

Further Reading

Reviews: One gadget blog, try as we may, can't cover the hundreds of cameras that come out every year. We'll leave that to the obsessives. See:

• DPReview

• The Photography Bay

• Photography Review

• Photo.net

You really shouldn't buy a camera without consulting these guys first. They have a habit of lapsing into jargon at times, but hey, if you've read this far, you'll be able to get by.

Taking Photos: So now you've got your new piece of neck candy, and you feel awfully cool. You know what would make you cooler? Learning how to shoot, for god's sake. A few of out recent guides:

• The Basics: Your new camera has been removed from the box. It has been fiddled with. You cat has been photographed multiple times. Now what?

• When Not to Use Flash: The answer: Pretty much always.

• How To Shoot HDR: Taking hyperreal photos by combining multiple exposures, without, as we call it, the "clown vomit."

• For general advice, Photo.net's comically extensive set of photography guides provides instructions for virtually any scenario. Need to shoot some, say, nudes? In, say, Namibia's uniquely harsh sunlight? They've got you covered.

And although broad guides are useful, I've learned more about photography and cameras from Flickr than any other resource. Join the Flickr group for your camera, and spend some time on the message boards. You'll learn clever tricks for getting the most out of your hardware, but in doing so, with the help of a gracious community, you'll learn just as much about photography as a whole.

Still something you wanna know? Send questions about DSLRs, P&Ses, B&Bs or BBQs here, with "Giz Explains" in the subject line.

The 12.1 megapixel EXILIM Zoom EX-Z280, likes its name leads, has a wide-angle 26 mm 4X optical zoom lens. From the pictures it looks to have a nice compact body and comes with standard features including a CCD-shift image stabilization mechanism and face detection function. Casio is also touting its high-speed image processing CPU, which allows it to run its EXILIM Engine 4.0 on the camera itself (that includes editing abilities, etc.). It can also shoot 720p. All in all, not too bad for under $200.

A bit more basic, the 10.1 megapixel EXILIM EX-Z33 has a 3X optical zoom lens. Meant for the beginner, it features an easy mode and though it won't shoot 720p you can record some YouTube friendly 640 x 480 resolution video. You can snatch this guy up in the colors of the rainbow, including black, light pink, darker pink, silver and blue. [Casio]

While both handle low light pretty darn well (you can check that out for yourself in his gallery), he concludes that the Sony did better than the Fuji more times than not, and it also adds some cool features like a sweep panorama mode and a burst function.

The best part of the review: the video segment where Pogue and his buds go visit a psychic (it is very Mallrats minus the nipple part) and take pictures of her creepy spirit doll in the dim light. Having appeared in my fair share of Pogue productions, I've got to say that psychic should get a Pogie. [New York Times]

Though entry-level models, each camera records 720p video (24fps, saved as AVI files).

The $200, "champagne"-colored EX-Z450 (above) has a 28mm wide-angle lens with 4x optical zoom, sensor-shifting mechanical image stabilization", and a 3-inch LCD.

The cheaper $150 EX-Z90 skips the wide-angle lens, has 3x optical zoom, image stabilization, and a smaller 2.7-inch display. You'll have more color-choices, too: black, pink, and silver.

Both cameras should hit stores in October. [via PC World]

Ignoring the screen for a second, the TL22x cameras are a decent get for the price, with 720p video recording, haptic touchscreens (though the interface isn't terribly intuitive or responsive), and a full range of expected features for a midrange point and shoot. The only noticeable differences between the TL220 and TL225, which will ship at $299 and $349, respectively, are the 225's aluminum body, larger screen and HDMI output. But anyway, the screen's the thing people are curious about here, so here you go:

As you can see, it's there. When the camera is off, you can't see it—it goes black, and sits flush and invisible against an equally black camera face, at least on the test unit I saw. You turn it on with a direct tap of the finger, which I repeatedly had trouble getting to register, though I was told that was due to preproduction hardware iffyness. I'll trust Sammy on this one, but a simple toggle button would've done fine here.

The screen isn't just for self-shooting, although it manages that just fine. It'll also show playful images to get childrens' and/or idiots' attention. (In the case of the default clown animation, "playful" means "disconcerting," a fact which isn't helped by how difficult it is to navigate the menus to make him go away. ) No worries though: You'll be able to download more animations from Samsung's website, apparently.

Another simple function is a countdown timer, which gives you a numerical countdown to timed shots, letting you and your photomates know exactly when to mug.

At any rate, your first intuition on this was probably correct: front-facing LCDs are somewhat gimmicky, but they do what they say, making life easier for the internet-popular or extremely lonely. The catch would've been that the feature prices the cameras out of mainstream accessibility, but it doesn't. So hey, why not? (This, I think, was Samsung's design mantra here) [Samsung]

Their new Optio E75, not quite announced for US release, promises 10.2MP stills, 3x optical zoom, 1600 ISO and face detection on top of its smallish waterproof build. It'll be available in Europe this July for the equivalent of $160. [The Digital News Room via Engadget]

Granted, we also like shooting HD video with every possible thing we own, but it's nice to see some fairly unique photography-focused features pop up here and there, like in-camera high dynamic range shooting for more balanced exposure in unevenly lit scenes, to remind us that we can use our cameras to take photos too; that's exactly what Ricoh is going for, and even better, it's all packed into a nice minimalistic camera body that feels solid and light at the same time and has great style. I like the black one even better than the silver, but the black review unit we received had a faulty lens cover.

Specs:
• 1/2.3" CMOS Sensor, 9.29MP
• 28-200mm, f/3.3-f/5.2 optical zoom lens (7.1x)
• 1cm macro focusing distance
• 7fps continuous shooting, with 60fps and 120fps 1-second burst shooting modes
• "Dynamic Range Double Shot" mode for in-camera HDR, 12ev stops of coverage
• VGA movie mode
• ISO up to 1600

In-Camera High Dynamic Range
The major selling point of the CX1 is its ability to take two exposures of an unevenly lit scene and combine them into a single shot that more accurately captures what your human eye sees. We did a guide to doing the exact same thing with Photoshop, but the CX1 joins just a few other cameras that do it automatically. And it works.

Granted, you can get much more dramatic results (and way more exposure lee-way) by dumping 7 RAW files into Photoshop, and it won't work perfectly in every situation (night shots don't show much effect), but it's a very cool feature to play around with. And keep in mind, this is HDR of the actually useful, exposure-enhancing variety—no clown vomit colors here.

Here's an example shot of Matt hard at work making Gizmodo blog sausage:

As you can see, the shot in HDR mode captures detail from out the window above Matt's head without greatly darkening the rest of the scene, like his face. HDR mode takes an additional second or so to capture and drops your shutter speed down a stop or two, but other than that, it's indistinguishable from regular shooting. Very nicely done.

Image Quality/Sensitiviy
Overall I found it to be very good—nice colors with a bit of the video-y color palette many other point-and-shoots have but nothing extreme. ISO sensitivity is OK, but not great: ISO 800 is useable at small sizes, but you'll want to stick to ISO 400 or below to keep the noise in check for most shots:

One thing that's awesome is the CX1's macro-mode, as is the case on lots of newer point-and-shoots. It focuses down to one centimeter, has a movable focus point (many macro modes get caught hunting if what you want in focus isn't right in the middle of the frame) and is razor sharp. Check out this clementine peel:

Shooting With the CX1
It's a pretty nice experience, due in large part to the wide range of custom functions available. A "Function" button, one of four on the camera's back, can be assigned one of nine jobs, from locking exposure to bracketing to setting the macro focus point.

And in addition, four quick-access function buttons that pop up when you hit the main "OK" button can also be custom-defined to whatever you want for immediate access to exposure compensation, white balance, ISO, image size—10 possible options. Super-handy.

The 60fps and 120fps burst modes (limited to VGA resolution) are usable, but they're not as smoothly implemented as other parts of the camera. It's really hard to know exactly when recording starts, and the output is a practically useless .MPO file, which you have to open in Ricoh's software, split the MPO out into 120 JPEGs, then, if you want a movie, link them back together in something like Quicktime. That's what I did here; the results are nice (although limited to one second), but it's a pain in the ass since even VLC can't open these MPO files.

Conclusion
In-camera HDR is not a gimmick here—it's both usable and useful. Which is awesome. At $370, the CX1 is in the same price ballpark as most higher-end compacts, so your choice is basically HD video or the CX1's unique photo features. The CX1 implements the latter very nicely, in a classically sleek, compact metal body. It's not a huge surprise that tons of Japanese pros carry a Ricoh P+S in their pocket to supplement their DSLRs.

In-camera HDR works well and is handy

Super-sharp macro mode

Deeply customizable interface

Great-looking body

Decent ISO sensitivity

High-speed burst kind of sucks

No HD video capture

No RAW shooting or manual exposure controls

[Ricoh]

Nikon's been sleeping a bit in the point and shoot area, so its funny that such sexiness comes from an amateur concept designer. But there are some neat things going on here, including a curved, sand-weathered-stone body shape and a continuous LCD on the back panel. This is the camera I would have loved to have on my recent trip to Egypt's desert and coastal reefs.

[Yanko Design]

The announcement is short on details, but here's the pitch: the NX series is a hybrid system, meaning that it doesn't have a mirror box or a physical through-the-lens viewfinder, but retains a DSLR-sized APS-C imaging sensor and interchangeable lens capability. In other words, it's conceptually similar to Micro Four Thirds cameras such as the Panasonic Lumix DMC G1, though it doesn't share their mounts.

What makes the NX particularly interesting, though, is its build—it's pretty thin. Our biggest issue with the DMC G1 was its bulk, as it was only slightly more compact than some of the smaller entry-level DSLRs like the Nikon D40, despite its shorter flange-back and lack of a pentaprism. Samsung seems to have stolen and embraced the spirit (though unfortunately, not the lenses) of Micro Four Thirds, making this truly slim for a camera of its abilities. As for those lenses, it remains to be seen if Samsung will use the Pentax mount, as they have historically, or if they've got a new standard in mind.

The release is set for the second half of '09, and specs will probably be fleshed out at PMA, which starts tomorrow. You can read the full, teasing release below:

SEOUL, KOREA – March 2, 2009 – Samsung Digital Imaging Co., Ltd. used PMA 2009 as the global launching pad for the NX Series, the company's revolutionary new family of hybrid digital cameras. A new concept digital camera, the NX Series offers the performance and image quality of a DSLR and the portability and convenience of a compact point-and-shoot. With the NX Series, Samsung will become a global leader in the new hybrid market.

Samsung's new NX Series bridges the gap between a DSLR and compact point-and-shoot digital camera by combining the benefits of both in one new model. Like conventional DSLRs, the NX Series utilizes an APS‑C sized image sensor providing a much larger surface area to gather light and produce higher-quality images than comparable digital camera systems. Unlike a DSLR, the NX Series does not feature a mirror box and employs an ultra-precise Electronic Viewfinder (EVF). The use of an EVF has allowed Samsung engineers to significantly reduce the size and weight of the new camera system by decreasing the distance between the lens and image sensor (flange back) by approximately 60% compared to traditional DSLRs. In addition to utilizing the EVF, consumers can also take advantage of the camera's Live View functionality to frame their shots on the NX Series' high‑resolution screen.

Samsung has recently intensified its focus on the digital imaging market and established a separate company dedicated exclusively to digital imaging in Samsung Digital Imaging Company. The new company was formed to focus on the development of its digital still cameras around world's first and best in class features, design, and easy-to-use interfaces, and will work towards achieving the company's stated goal of becoming the world's leading digital imaging company.

"We estimate that the hybrid digital camera market will be over 20% of the global digital still camera market by 2012," said Sang-jin Park, CEO of Samsung Digital Imaging Company. "With the release of the NX Series, a digital camera that combines the strengths of a DSLR and compact digital camera, Samsung Digital Imaging will become a global leader in the new hybrid digital camera market and achieve the company's goal to become the global leader in the digital camera market by 2012."

Samsung Digital Imaging Company also creates a much more efficient vertical alignment between related Samsung affiliate business units including semiconductor, LCD panel and consumer electronics. This new vertical alignment will create competitive advantages for Samsung by fostering greater collaboration between Samsung affiliate business units and allowing the company to develop and deliver highly-innovative digital imaging products that set the standard for the industry, including the newly unveiled NX Series.

The first model of NX Series will be available in the second-half of 2009.

It's not the first (a few Pentax DSLRs do it, the K20 and K200) but it may very well be the first point-and-shoot to offer in-camera HDR (high dynamic range) processing.

HDR works by taking multiple exposures back-to-back (the Ricoh does two) of a difficultly-lit scene, one where there is a wide range between the brightest and darkest areas. Your eye, because it's awesome, can sort all this out on its own, but a digital camera's sensor can't. So what HDR does is blend the correctly exposed parts from each image into one shot which more closely matches what your naked eye is seeing. Generally it takes Photoshop or specialized software to merge your own manually bracketed shots into an HDR image, but the Ricoh does it automagically.

The technique can be pushed to extremes for horrifically gaudy results (see here if you don't believe me), but when done right, it's truly valuable to make the most out of difficult exposure situations. The Ricoh has four HDR strength settings so you can go for more subtle merges.

On top of that, there's a 9.3-megapixel CMOS sensor, 28-200mm zoom equivalent, and a 120 fps slow-mo video mode that captures at 640x480. It's popping in the UK in mid-march for £299 (around $430), but we'll probably hear more about a US release at PMA. Very cool stuff. [Ricoh Press Release/Specs via DPReview]

The FX580 is pretty much the star of the show here, as it's fitted with a 3-inch touchscreen and 720p HD video capability. Otherwise it's a fairly standard 12.1 megapixel camera, with 5x optical zoom via a Leica ultrawide lens, 6400 max ISO and the standard stable of antishake and facial recognition features. It's priced with the TS1 at $400.

The ZS3 and ZS1 are of a zoomier sort, boasting 12x optical zoom capabilities and similar core specs to the F580, but without the touchscreen. Though they only have a 10.1 megapixel sensors, 720p HD video recording is included as well. They'll sell at $400 and $300, respectively.

Stepping down the lineup we have the mid-range, $350 FX48, which is, feature for feature, more or less the TS1 without the tough outer shell. Then there's the $250 FS25, which retains many of the features of the FX48 but loses HD video recording and slims down slightly, measuring in at 3.82 x 2.28 x 0.86 in.

The most obvious thing about this batch of cameras is how little feature differentiation there is between the two, and how HD video seems to be the new de-facto standard for the latest point-and shoots. It's worth noting, though, that these HD recording will be encoded in some kind of AVCHD Lite format instead of a more standard, supported type of codec. The new cameras will ship in April. [Panasonic]

The P70 looks remarkably petite, though Pentax's press materials don't specify just how thin the body is. As for specs, the still imaging features aren't terribly surprising: a 12MP CCD sits behind a 4X zoom, 28mm wide-angle lens. Pentax claims that the camera's autofocus will track 32 faces almost instantly, which is useful if you often take pictures of, uhh, 32 faces.

The P70's trump card is its video recording capability. The camera can pull down 720p video at a respectable 15fps, making it a reasonable replacement for many of the pocket video cameras that sit around the same price, as long as the cut in framerate doesn't bother you too much. About that price—the P70 should sell for $200.

So what of the E70? It's pretty boring, to be frank. The features are as standard as they come, for the most part mirroring, with a bit of subtraction, the E70. Where there were 12MP, there are now 10, and where there was 4x zoom, there's a 3x. The HD video recording is gone, as is the rechargable battery, and the body is a bit thicker, though still admirably slim. The E70 is an unspectacular camera, a very cheap one. The price at launch will be a scant $140, and it is due for release in February, with the P70. [Pentax via Akihabara]

The Z980 is a low-to-midrange bridge camera, primarily marketed (like its predecessors) for its formidable 24x zoom. The 12MP sensor is exposed through a 26mm fixed lens, and comes with a now-standard set of P&S features. What makes the Z980 interesting, though, are the few pro(ish) features thrown in. HD video recording at 720p, assuming it isn't a shaky, noisy mess, is a big plus. And the hot flash shoe and vertical shutter release and grip gives the camera some photog cred that you usually don't always see at this price ($400) and form factor.

As for Kodak's miniature video camcorder range, the Zx1 is interesting successor to the fantastic Zi6 Flip-killer. The main difference? It's weatherproof, and slightly cheaper at $150. The camera will mercifully support a full range of SDHC storage, meaning that you can carry up to 32GB or HD video around in your pocket.

These products are set to be demonstrated (and were originally intended to be unveiled) at CES, where they'll be accompanied by a range of point-and-shoot pocket cameras that were slightly too boring to write about just now. STAY TUNED. [PhotographyBay]

There are a lot of $200-$300 point and shoots on the market right now, and there's no way the test display at Best Buy is going to tell you which to buy. How is elbowing other shoppers while analyzing your hasty snapshots on a 3-inch, low-rez screen going to help you make an informed buying decision?

Instead, I put six of the most popular point-and-shoots on the market through some major testing. Then I decided on the one that you should buy without the hedging BS.

Meet our competitors

Each of these compact point and shoots features optical image stabilization and is priced around $250:

Samsung TL9 ($280)

10MP, 5X zoom, 2.7-inch LCD

Canon SD790 ($250)

10MP, 3X zoom, 3-inch LCD

Nikon S560 ($250)

10MP, 5X zoom, 2.7-inch LCD

Sony W170 ($250)

10MP, 5x zoom, 2.7-inch LCD

Panasonic FS20 ($250)

10MP, 4x zoom, 3-inch LCD

Kodak M1093 ($200)

10MP, 3x zoom, 3-inch LCD

Studio Shoot

The shots inside were captured under diffused sunlight in full auto mode at max (10MP) resolution. I won't say that it wasn't an extreme disappointment that only one camera, the Kodak, was able to shoot with proper white balance in this situation and offer us colors as they really look (you'll have to trust me on this one). The other cameras compensated poorly, possibly metering the diffused light as tungsten light, and producing a fairly cold image because of it.



Other than the color, you can't make out much from the wide shots. But if you blow the images up to their native resolution, there are huge differences. Even in the web-compressed images here, it's obvious that Canon captures the most detail:

It's basically a tie between Sony and Kodak for second place. Here's what Kodak looks like:

And then there's a pretty hard drop in quality. Panasonic comes in a solid last place here:

You can fix the color by manually choosing a smarter white balance (color temperature), or adjusting the balance in post. But you can't get the texture of those cookies back. Big win for Canon here.

Motion Photography

It's no secret that many point-and-shoots are horrible for capturing the spontaneity of a child or pet, in part due to focus lag and often an additional wait before the shot is actually taken. While DSLRs are the best solution, I wanted to see if any point-and-shoots could rise to the challenge of capturing some action.

So I put them to the test on a Chicago side street where cars get up to 15-20mph. After repeat testing on each model, once again, we had a clear winner. Trouble is, it's Panasonic, loser of the resolution match! Panasonic features more shooting settings than any of its competitors, so my guess is that they spent a lot of time on optimizing at least this particular preset optimization.



The remainder of the competition was fairly close, and I can't say that even the Panasonic model will capture any incredible sports action photography. But I will say that the Nikon and Samsung seemed to lag more than the others from button press to shot acquisition. They both tended to have the blurriest shots as well. Here's a typical result of the Nikon:

Video

Like high-speed photography, point-and-shoots aren't fundamentally designed for video. But then again, since they all shoot video, people have begun using them more frequently than they ever used their bigger, more specialized camcorders, so a test was necessary.

After playing some billiards, I found Canon's image, though not technically the highest resolution, to be the best. A point as well to its realistic sound capture of ball on ball action.



Second place goes to Kodak. Even though you can make out a great deal of grain on the table's felt surface, it also captures a relatively sharp, pleasantly contrasty image when you examine each ball.



Last place? This title is, once again, reserved for Panasonic. For some reason, the camera interpreted the red table as some sort of blurry pastel. And the sound was a like a fast food drive-through speaker.

Flash

We've all been there. It's late. A friend is in town. Your cameraphone can't hope to capture a shot in your drunken stupor, especially as you're hanging out in a smokey bar. I'd loved to have recreated this scene precisely in its brilliance, but instead I opted to take pictures of my cat with the lights low.



It's an unfair challenge for a small-lensed, small-chipped camera to capture a decent picture in low light, even with flash as a crutch, but the Sony did as well as I could have hoped, illuminating my subject and her background alike, lacking the hotspots of most flash photography.

The other cameras were predictably mediocre, but the absolute worst at handling flash had to be the Nikon. Not only did it give my cat a washed-out glow, but it didn't even consider properly exposing that obnoxious pile of boxes behind her. The shame.

Weird Features and Gimmicks

None of these items should probably determine your buying decision, but I wanted to mention a few of the more...interesting features of the cameras. The Samsung TL9 has a set of snazzy analog dials on top that display battery life and remaining memory like a car's dash—plus it plays music and movies. The Panasonic has categorized an Intelligent Auto Mode that gives a lazy but informed user a nice way to tell the camera, "hey, you may need to boost the ISO," without messing with any other controls or gimmicky menus. The Nikon will warn you if a subject's eyes are closed. The Canon has ditched the standard up, down, left, right menu dial for a spinning ring...that's bold, if not always intuitive. And Sony will shoot in 16x9 or stretch images to that ratio for quick HDTV slideshows. Plus, smile/face detectors are everywhere. How did we ever take pictures before boxes enclosed a loved one's face?

So What Should You Buy?

After all my testing, I'd recommend the Canon SD790. Sure, it didn't win every category, but it won the one that counts most—detail. It came first in the video category. And it never ever fell flat on its face.

Maybe this conclusion sounds a little too clinical to you. If so, let me say that there are less tangible elements I appreciate about the Canon SD790: It includes the best built battery charger and it is the only model tested to sync with a computer via mini USB (as opposed to some annoying proprietary cable or dock). On top of those, it always seems quick to capture a shot after I pressed for the shutter, though it's still not nearly as responsive as my prosumer DSLR. The one thing I'd ask for in this camera is a more powerful zoom lens (something you can get in the Canon line for a few bucks more).

If you know an extreme technophobe, you might tell them about the Kodak M1093. It offers the simplest shooting experience with one button to choose a photo mode, one button for flash toggling and one button to actually take a picture. Digital cameras don't get simpler than that, and I have to admit, as the cheapest model in this roundup ($200), with the least techie brand name, it performs better than I expected—though it does have a propensity to bump the ISO, producing some unwanted noise.

But as for the Sony W170, while it does feature the widest angle lens with 5x of zoom, it's clunky in the hand and rarely brilliant in quality. As for the Nikon S560, it takes mediocre shots. The Panasonic FS20 is inconsistent—bordering on horrendous much of the time—and features a small screen and a dated interface. Meanwhile, the Samsung TL9 just completely fails to impress me.

So go ahead, pick up the Canon. It seems the company's overwhelming market share is well deserved. Or don't. I won't lose sleep or anything. Just don't come crying to me when all your pictures look like crap.

Zi6 Pocket Video Camera Unveiled, Boasting HD Video Capture and Instant Uploading to YouTube™

ROCHESTER, NY, July 10 — Eastman Kodak Company (NYSE:EK) today announced its entry into the fast-growing pocket digital video camera market with the KODAK Zi6 Pocket Video Camera. This stylish HD video camera makes it fun and simple to shoot and share high-quality videos in moments, thanks to 720p HD video capture, a large 2.4-inch LCD screen, and easy-to-use software.

“Today’s connected consumers increasingly turn to video to express themselves and connect with others. The KODAK Zi6 Pocket Video Camera satisfies their thirst for an HD video camera that is simple to use and can go anywhere life takes them,” said John Blake, General Manager Digital Capture and Devices, Vice President, Eastman Kodak Company. “With the launch of the Zi6 Pocket Video Camera, consumers now have a high-quality solution from the trusted brand in digital imaging.”

With the exploding popularity of video sharing sites such as YouTube, the demand for easy to use video devices is also growing rapidly. At the same time, the expanding penetration of HDTVs is driving consumer demand for HD quality personal content.

The KODAK Zi6 Pocket Video Camera is designed to meet these needs at the touch of a button — no lens cap, dials to turn or settings to adjust.

A range of advanced features enables consumers to:

Capture video in HD quality on this fun and super simple pocket video camera (720p at 60 fps with 16:9 aspect ratio).
Upload your videos to YouTube quickly and easily using the built-in USB and software.
Record hours of video with the expandable SD/SDHC card slot that can hold up to 32 GB.
Experience your videos on HDTV in stunning HD quality with included cables.
Edit videos, add pictures and music, and share your creation anywhere with the included video software CD.
Go green with included pre-charged AA Ni-MH rechargeable batteries and battery charger.
Watch videos on the vibrant 2.4” LCD screen.
Catch the highlights with slow motion playback right in the palm of your hand.

Uploading to YouTube
YouTube is the world’s most popular online video community. The Kodak and YouTube relationship will enable consumers to quickly and easily upload videos to YouTube directly from the Zi6 Pocket Video Camera, or from the included simple and powerful video editing software (ARCSOFT MEDIAIMPRESSIONS for Kodak).

Accessories
A range of accessories will be available for the KODAK Zi6 Pocket Video Camera:

KODAK 2GB and 4GB High Performance memory cards
1-hour battery charger with 4 AA pre-charged Ni-MH batteries
KODAK tripods
KODAK camera bags

Pricing and Availability
The KODAK Zi6 Pocket Video Camera will be available from late September 2008, retailing for US$179.95 MSRP.

Kodak EasyShare M853 ($150 , 8.2MP) - The Best UI
The Good: The UI is clean and straightforward. On-screen menus explain the different options very clearly. The color in outdoor, well-lit settings was very accurate. Macro shots were clear.
The Bad: For such a great UI, I was surprised at the mediocrity of certain features. The most problematic issue I found was the M853 wouldn't mount to my Mac. Neither iPhoto nor Image Capture recognized it as a USB mass-storage device. The display is too small to get a decent field of vision. There are few options for taking manual shots, and the buttons used for these limited options aren't labeled. The M853 had the worst battery life of any camera I tried. Low light/no flash situations yielded poor pictures.
The Verdict: A beginner will be taking pictures right away, but it's not worth the frustration that comes later.

Nikon CoolPix L18 ($140 , 8MP) - The Easiest to Use
The Good: The CoolPix is so simple that it pretty much has two modes: Auto and Easy Auto. No pure manual mode exists, but there are some scene options available if you need something more specific. Outdoor pictures as well as close up macro shots looked good. Most of all, I really loved the 3" LCD display—larger than any other I tested.
The Bad: It may be too simple for people who like to tinker with their shots. You can adjust exposure and ISO, but the options don't help very much and you may not have as much control over your pictures as you'd like. Low light shots came out very blurry. I am not fans of AA batteries in cameras, and this one takes two.
The Verdict: This camera is a no-brainer for those with no-brains. It's pretty much the digital equivalent of a disposable camera—decent pictures for a decent price.

Canon PowerShot A580 ($150 , 8MP) - The No-Frills Camera
The Good: This camera takes pictures and it takes them well. Outdoor pictures came out bright and colorful, and turned out best when we were able to get a clear shot of the subject without background distractions. Manual options are comprehensive and show changes live, allowing you to see your alterations. The A580 took the clearest pictures of any of the cameras in dim light/flash free situations.
The Bad: It's bulky and unattractive. Pictures taken from a distance were out of focus and came out bad. The UI is cumbersome. Indoor, well-lit, no flash macro shots did not come out well (though maybe that's asking too much). It too runs on AAs, which I have avoided buying since 2002.
The Verdict: If you want the best pictures you can get in this price range, the A580 is a good choice. If you want to win the $150-and-under point-and-shoot beauty contest, you better keep shopping.

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S750 ($150 , 7.2MP) - The Fiddler's Delight
The Good: Pictures on the S750 turned out bright and crisp. Outdoor shots looked good, and so did indoor macro shots. Plenty of manual options put you in control of the pictures you take.
The Bad: It helps to have some experience with digital cameras if you want to get the most out of the Cyber-shot. The auto mode is fine, but the manual options are the stars of the show. The scene modes are few and located on the camera dial itself, not a menu, adding some awkwardness. Low light shots were blurry. It uses Sony's proprietary Memory Stick, and not SD, a big no-no in my book.
The Verdict: The Cyber-shot is a very complete camera, it takes good pictures in different situations, has many options as well as a solid UI. I think it's worth learning all of the features on the camera; after all, this will be an investment, and it could improve my photo-taking skills.

GE A735 ($100, 7MP) - The Cheapest
The Good: The A735 is seriously cheap—$40 to $50 less than the rest—and holds its own when it comes to features. Manual mode is full of options. Bright light pictures had rich, deep colors.
The Bad: Most pictures didn't come out well and were very dark. Indoor and low-light situations were blurry and unfocused. The UI is a mess, way too many options and not easy to figure out. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't want no stinking AA batteries!
The Verdict: If you're super-broke, wait until you save up some more and get something nicer than this. It will take pictures, but you won't be happy with most of them.

The Final Word: Point-and-shoots in this price range will never be masterful at taking great pictures. However, if you don't have the money or desire to make the DSLR investment, or even spring for the next step up, you don't have to be stuck with junky pictures or a junky camera. There are different things I liked about each one I tested, especially the screen on the Nikon and the picture quality of the Canon. But for the best all around package, I'd spend my hard-earned $150 on the Cyber-shot DSC-S750.