Digital cameras - how much have they improved in the last 5 years?

greyster

thanks everyone for your replies. I'm currently looking for a new camera after reading your comments. I'm debating whether to upgrade from my Ixus 30 as mentioned to an Ixus 95, or invest more in a TZ6. I don't use my camera much so I am not sure whether to invest a lot more so I am hoping the Ixus 95 shows a noticeable improvement over my Ixus 30.

debitcardmayhem

I personally prefer a camera with a viewfinder/DSLR the most annoying point of my Olympus is the fact you can't see the screen in certain lighting conditions.

spaceboy

ahmjt wrote: »

Although I have not upgraded from a 4-5 year old digital camera yet, I will try to list things that have been changed in the last 4-5 years.

- Increase in megapixels = as you have already mentioned...a marketing gimmick. Without increasing the actual sensor's size, better megapixel does not do any good photos anyway.

Not quite. Depends on lens quality.

reymarkacain

As of now there's a lot of improvements on the digital camera. one of this is a digital camera with a built in GPS and a WiFi. or visit my site for more information about the latest digital camera dslr-review.org .

tomstickland

I had a Kodak compact that I bought for £20 on a deal found via here in 2007. Looked a bit chunky and grey plastic, but it worked brilliantly. With 2 x AA rechargables in it the battery life was several days, even in the cold.

When that finally died due to water and mud getting into it I upgraded to a higher spec Fuji compact. This was remanufactured, so it cost me £80, but they had originally been selling for £200 and were considered one of the best compacts in 2008.
It has 8 MP capability, but I run it at 4MP and that's still more than I need really.

It uses custom rechargable batteries. Battery life has been disappointing. User interface is OK I suppose, a bit fiddly.
Picture quality is no better or worse than my previous camera.

Overall I'd say it offers no improvement over my first camera.

Over 8 years you might find a small improvement, but I wouldn't say that you were missing much.

Both cameras have produced a lot of so-so photos, but both have occasionally produced amazing pictures.
This was a 5s point and shoot: http://www.flickr.com/photos/92961862@N00/4263887414/sizes/o/in/set-72157623058567703/


My only real gripe is the shutter delay. Taking action photos is a lottery.

ukcarper

[QUOTE=


My only real gripe is the shutter delay. Taking action photos is a lottery.[/QUOTE]

That’s why I bought a dslr are the new compacts better

gonzo127

simple idea, take your old camera with you including SD memory card to a shop (jessups will sometimes let you) and basically take a few pictures (take the same piture with both cameras) from around the shop/out of the shop window then take it home and compare side by the side the pictures and make up you mind which one is better and if YOU can notice a difference!

nomoneytoday

megapixels, schmegapixels!

I could get a better picture from a 5 year old 6mp DSLR than many a cheap 12-14 mp point and shoot

tomstickland

Exactly. You just end up with a very high resolution copy of a poor image with high MP and a so-so lens.

*sas*

Any suggestions for good sites to get the best price on a camera. I'm unsure what sort I'd like the only thing that has tempted me is the sonyT500 as I've seen some amazing videos taken on that. Also wondering whether to stick with a sony as I can link it to my sony dvd recorder. Just want one for holiday shots and concerts mainly so zoom is important