Digital Camera Suggestion?

cherrybird

I was wondering whether anyone had a suggestion for a reasonably decent digital camera. I have had an old olympus 3.2mp digital camera for a while now, but as it ages it's taking longer and longer to take a picture, often meaning that the subject has moved and the picture is blurred. There are some functions I am more interested in than others and am finding that when I find the functions, the camera reviers are not good so was hoping someone might have a good suggestion. I can spend up to £150, I like to print my pics up to about 7X5inches so dont want too low mp's. Continuous shooting, or fast shooting is important, anti blur is a bonus, optical zoom, and iso for low light shooting, metal/alloy casing is preferable but not essential for the right camera.
Not bothered about the size of the lcd screen, size of the camera or colour, battery type or memory format.
Thanks in advance
Cherrybird

[Deleted User]

My 5mp Canon Ixus prints come out nice at 7x5 prints. You should ignore the number of megapixels unless you are printing out posters

Anti-blur (optical image stabalisation) is a necessity if shooting rapidly (if you want continuous shooting i'm guessing it is for sports)

Canon Ixus 95 or the Panasonic FS15 are probably a good choice in this price range - both would be good cameras

cherrybird

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction, the reviews look excellent. I had spent ages looking for a combination of the right functions for a reasonable price, once I thought I had it mastered I found that the reviews were awful. You are a star.

chalky_75

Got the chance of Olympus X-935 for £109.99 any comments please

mr_fishbulb

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Anti-blur (optical image stabalisation) is a necessity if shooting rapidly (if you want continuous shooting i'm guessing it is for sports)

Image stabilisation is to reduce the shaking of the camera whilst you are holding it in your hands. It works well if you are taking a photo of something which isn't moving - a landscape for example.

It does not correct for blur introduced because the subject is moving. The only way to reduce that is to have a faster shutter speed (achieved by a higher ISO sensitivity or a larger aperture size). So unfortunetly image stabilisation isn't going to help when taking sports photos.

Saving_spree

It does't give a clear picture.The processer is slow.

spaceboy

ringo_24601 wrote: »

My 5mp Canon Ixus prints come out nice at 7x5 prints. You should ignore the number of megapixels unless you are printing out posters

Anti-blur (optical image stabalisation) is a necessity if shooting rapidly (if you want continuous shooting i'm guessing it is for sports)

Canon Ixus 95 or the Panasonic FS15 are probably a good choice in this price range - both would be good cameras

I agree with this guy. Both of these are excellent, the Canon Ixus 95 was £115 on amazon a week or so ago. The Panasonic FS7 and FS62 are very good as well.

althas

If you are getting a "basic" point and shoot camera, then, as others have said, the megapixel count is pretty much irrelevant. This is because of the size of the sensor in these kinds of cameras (they are small), and anything really over 8mp is a complete waste. THE most important thing is the lens. Whatever you get, make sure the lens is a good one

Ok, getting past that, it sounds like you are wanting to get past the simple point and click, and go a little more advanced. I must say that something like a http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2008/10/03/Canon-PowerShot-SX110-IS/p1 may be better (a little over your budget, but a nice camera) but shop around and you may well find it a little cheaper. It is more advanced, but you will have more fun with the manual modes and the creativity they bring

If you do not want this kind of advancement in the camera, then something along the lines of http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2009/12/20/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-FS62/p1

Best advice would be to get a few makes and models in mind, then have a look on a good review site at them, or pop down to somewhere like Jessops and have a hands on play with the camera, see if it fits you

Good luck on what you decide

darich

I'd be inclined to steer clear of "image stabilisation" on a point and shoot camera within the budget you have.
In most cases it's actually a lie - the image isn't stabilised - the camera simply increases the ISO setting (increased sensitivity to light meaning a faster shutter speed can be used). The increased ISO setting results in a very grainy or "noisy" image. Noisy images are less sharp and less clear than "quiet" images.

There are probably dozens of cameras to choose from in your budget. I agree with previous posters - pixel count doesn't mean better images at the lower end of the market. Best thing to do is decide on the features you want, find the cameras with those features then make your choice.

I'd stick with the major manufacturers eg Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Kodak etc.

johnmc

Some nice ones on the Fuji web site.

FinePix F200EXR (Refurbished) £151.99

12 Millions Pixels
Internal memory (approx. 48MB)
xD™/ SD™/SDHC™
5 x Optical Zoom
3-inch LCD
6 Months Warranty

Radsteral

canon ixus 7 m pixels, 3 years now and love it.. havent done no setting or anything, picture quality and use, exelent, battery last forever,
canon any time