Digital compact camera
Posted by: Rasher on 15 March 2006
My wife's Nikon Coolpix 3400 just got dropped ever so slightly, and now has a terminal "Lens Error". Looking on the web, it appears that these pieces of crap all snuff out exactly 2 years from being bought and there are a lot of very angry Nikon customers out there, and on inspection, it really is a very fragile and weedy piece.
We need to get a replacement, so this time the brief is for something at least as robust as an equivalent film jobbie. Canon anyone? Anyone given a digital compact a hard life with no ill effects? I'll certainly never buy a Nikon again.
I put "Lens Error" into Google and got pages relating to Nikon & Casio.
We need to get a replacement, so this time the brief is for something at least as robust as an equivalent film jobbie. Canon anyone? Anyone given a digital compact a hard life with no ill effects? I'll certainly never buy a Nikon again.
I put "Lens Error" into Google and got pages relating to Nikon & Casio.
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by thejejk
quote:Originally posted by Rasher:
I put "Lens Error" into Google and got pages relating to Nikon & Casio.
Well, if you google "Err99" you get pages related to Canon cameras
I don't think Nikon's any worse than Canon or any of the other major brands. For the record I own a Canon EOS350D which I am very happy with. My girlfriend have a Nikon Coolpix 4800 I think and she is very happy as well
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by Geoff P
Rasher
I have had a Sony and a Konica which while working sort of, have failed partially. the Sony forgot how to focus. The Konica how to do anything if there was'nt blinding sunlight available to illuminate the subject. I then admitted defeat and bought a Canon 300D SLR back to use with my already owned Canon lenses
The Compact digi's I have used and comments from other suggest they are almost the cardboard throwaway camera of teh digital age. Recently a tech article revealed that Sony is facing a multi million bill for screwing up the assembly process on the Image sensors it supplied not only to itself, but also to Canon and Nikon, in such a way that the electical connections are lilely to fail.
Maybe the age of disposable film camera's is not over. For a small fee processors like RITZ will happily put the film images on disc as digital scans whilst processing film. It beats lugging an SLR around if you are just want some quck snaps.
Actually if it was'nt crap resolution my cell phone camera is more reliable.
regards
Geoff
I have had a Sony and a Konica which while working sort of, have failed partially. the Sony forgot how to focus. The Konica how to do anything if there was'nt blinding sunlight available to illuminate the subject. I then admitted defeat and bought a Canon 300D SLR back to use with my already owned Canon lenses
The Compact digi's I have used and comments from other suggest they are almost the cardboard throwaway camera of teh digital age. Recently a tech article revealed that Sony is facing a multi million bill for screwing up the assembly process on the Image sensors it supplied not only to itself, but also to Canon and Nikon, in such a way that the electical connections are lilely to fail.
Maybe the age of disposable film camera's is not over. For a small fee processors like RITZ will happily put the film images on disc as digital scans whilst processing film. It beats lugging an SLR around if you are just want some quck snaps.
Actually if it was'nt crap resolution my cell phone camera is more reliable.
regards
Geoff
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by thejejk
Rasher,
In order not to make this a "digital compact bashing"-thread I have one experience to share regarding the longevity of cameras. At my work we share about ten Canon Ixus-cameras of various age and model (the first ixus to ixus50 I think). The oldest being perhaps five years old and the newest a couple of months. Apart from the fact that batteries turn crap after a while, and that the resolution is pretty low in the oldest they have been functioning without problems. So maybe a Canon Ixus for you?
Regards,
Jacob
In order not to make this a "digital compact bashing"-thread I have one experience to share regarding the longevity of cameras. At my work we share about ten Canon Ixus-cameras of various age and model (the first ixus to ixus50 I think). The oldest being perhaps five years old and the newest a couple of months. Apart from the fact that batteries turn crap after a while, and that the resolution is pretty low in the oldest they have been functioning without problems. So maybe a Canon Ixus for you?
Regards,
Jacob
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by Jono 13
Try looking at the panasonic range, all have leica lenses, well leica certified ones anyway, and look petty good.
My pentax optio 330 is still working well after nearly 4 years, but have a free shutter replacement.
Jono
My pentax optio 330 is still working well after nearly 4 years, but have a free shutter replacement.
Jono
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by BigH47
I am trying to decide between a DSLR or just a compact. I was shown a 6Mp Sony with viewfinder and single switch controls and was informed it was made of metal. I'm not sure of the model (DSC W5 I think) but circa £150. It seemed a lot asier to use than our C220 zoom Olympus which is now sffering from intermitent failure to deploy the lens.
Howard
Howard
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by Chris Kelly
Another vote for the latest Pansonic range or, if you can wait a few weeks, the new Fuji F30 should be brilliant. The Pansonics (some at least) have OIS on their Leica lenses, which is their version Image Stabilisation and useful feature if the photogrpher rather than the subject is prone to shake.
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by Two-Sheds
I just bought my Fiance a Nikon coolpix S3, it's only been a month or so, but it's ok (so far!) and comes with a 2 year warranty. Hopefully it will last the distance.
I have 2 digital cameras, a canon digital rebel XT (DSLR) and a canon powershot S60 (compact). The powershot has been a good compact camera and I've taken it out skiing with me (as has the digital rebel) and both are still fine. I also like having a SLR and a compact since there are times I want a camera, but don't want to carry round the SLR and having a camera is better than no camera!
Back to the Nikon, have you tried writing (I find a physical letter better than e-mail in this regard) to Nikon UK (assuming you live in UK) describing what happened and how dissapointed you are with the product. Even if it is out of warranty you may get something back.
I have 2 digital cameras, a canon digital rebel XT (DSLR) and a canon powershot S60 (compact). The powershot has been a good compact camera and I've taken it out skiing with me (as has the digital rebel) and both are still fine. I also like having a SLR and a compact since there are times I want a camera, but don't want to carry round the SLR and having a camera is better than no camera!
Back to the Nikon, have you tried writing (I find a physical letter better than e-mail in this regard) to Nikon UK (assuming you live in UK) describing what happened and how dissapointed you are with the product. Even if it is out of warranty you may get something back.
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by count.d
With all due respect, a Leica lens used in a cheap compact camera will not be the quality you may hope for. They're not "real" Leica lenses. With compact cameras, you only get what you pay for and so a Coolpix 3400 made from plastic is not going to stand up to hard use.
Unfortunately, photo equipment review sites are next to useless for getting an idea of how good a camera can perform.
If you want a good camera for a budget the key points I'd suggest are:
a) Buy one with a modest zoom lens range (i.e. not 35-200mm)
b) Raw file option
c) contrast adjustment
d) saturation adjustment
The Coolpix 8400 is really a wonderful camera and I recently saw my dealer have 10 of them, new/boxed for £250 each.
Unfortunately, photo equipment review sites are next to useless for getting an idea of how good a camera can perform.
If you want a good camera for a budget the key points I'd suggest are:
a) Buy one with a modest zoom lens range (i.e. not 35-200mm)
b) Raw file option
c) contrast adjustment
d) saturation adjustment
The Coolpix 8400 is really a wonderful camera and I recently saw my dealer have 10 of them, new/boxed for £250 each.
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by count.d
P.S. Those slim cameras such as the Coolpix S3 are handy, but the dimensions force the lens design to compromise on quality.
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by Roy T
I would go along with the idea that you get exactly what you pay for and that most small cameras are indeed a design compromise between style, performance and size. I would suggest that a modest zoom range say between 28mm and 90mm-120mm tops (35mm equivalent) should be considered so as to cover most landscapes and happy people shots. You will notice the difference between a 28mm and the 35mm when it comes to interiors and landscapes and be surprised just what a difference those 7mm make.
Some of the 2005 Ricoh range is worth a look although anything that starts at 28mm is in my mind worthy of consideration.
Some of the 2005 Ricoh range is worth a look although anything that starts at 28mm is in my mind worthy of consideration.
Posted on: 15 March 2006 by arf005
As far point and shoot camera's go I have no complaints with Sony, each to their own I guess....much like music and hi-fi then...
All my shots in here - http://forums.naim-audio.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/58019385/m/6842935207 are/were shot with a Sony DSC-P10 5 megapix compact....before that I had the P-51 and P-71 (2 and 3 megapix, I think). I find their menu's easy to use, and functions useful, only complaint is they are woefully slow at starting up and charging the flash - even with a full batt.
But the results are quite good, picture quality for the price, in my opinion, is good too....saying that I'm looking to buy a digital SLR, and if I'm honest that's because of the Sony's limitations, but hey, we're talking point and shoot camera's right! They get my vote......I hear the P-200 is quite good, and seven megapix for a couple hundred quid....
Just my two pennies....
Cheers,
Ali
All my shots in here - http://forums.naim-audio.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/58019385/m/6842935207 are/were shot with a Sony DSC-P10 5 megapix compact....before that I had the P-51 and P-71 (2 and 3 megapix, I think). I find their menu's easy to use, and functions useful, only complaint is they are woefully slow at starting up and charging the flash - even with a full batt.
But the results are quite good, picture quality for the price, in my opinion, is good too....saying that I'm looking to buy a digital SLR, and if I'm honest that's because of the Sony's limitations, but hey, we're talking point and shoot camera's right! They get my vote......I hear the P-200 is quite good, and seven megapix for a couple hundred quid....
Just my two pennies....
Cheers,
Ali
Posted on: 16 March 2006 by Rasher
It's the toughness that is top of my list after the Nikon episode.
I googled "digital camera tough dropped" and got these customer reviews. This looks like the sort of thing I'm after.
I googled "digital camera tough dropped" and got these customer reviews. This looks like the sort of thing I'm after.