Digi cameras

[Moosie]

Alot of you guys are talking about them... WHat kind do you have and Why ? I'm looking for a new one in the Next 6 months or so,...

[Left Behind]

We have a sony cyber shot
So far so good , but once you buy one you can't look back they get out dated quick.
Like a computer.

[Kraven]

Well the wife bought me mine for Xmas last year and love it.It is a Sony DSC-P71 with 3.2 megapixels,6 power with digital zoom.It was top of the line when she got it but now Im thinking it is middle of the road but it works great for me.I bought a tri pod for it to go in the pack and I have a few memory stix,probably more than I will ever need.

[Ovis]

What are you budgeting for Moosie? I know Elkgunner is looking at the Canon Rebel (D10) and asked a few questions about the new Sony F828, two of the hotest new cameras on the market. They retail for about $1000.

The Canon A70 or A80's are compact lower end cameras, but have many options the more expensive ones have. I was shopping around for an A70 today for the wife, but everyone is sold out of them.

I settled for the Nikon Coolpix 3100. Most everyone is selling them for $299. Throw in a few more bones (like $100) for larger memory cards, charger, rechargeable batteries, and a case. I think I spent close to $450 today on getting her everything she needs for the camera. It is a 3mp cam and something she can use to get started with. My F707 seems intimidating to her, and I am hoping this will help her out.

Take a look at the Sony P72, another compact lower end cam.

Lots of cameras out there, many options. Take a look at www.dpreview.com (http://www.dpreview.com) for different camera reviews. It is a very helpful site minus all the huggers on there.

Gotta go, I have to play with the wife's new camera smilies/biggrin.gif

[Nut]

Heck I am almost ashamed to name the one I got. But my purpose was to get a cheap one in order to see what they are all about and then upgrade once I learn what I actually need and will use.

It was a Vivitran model at Wally World. smilies/wink.gif

[Ovis]

A word on memory stix...from what I have seen, the most you are going to get from any NIB camera is a 8-16mb stick. Do yourself a favor and purchase at the very minimum a 128mb stick...a 256 would be even better. This gives you the opportunity to shoot the camera at it's maximum resolution and get plenty of pics. You'll be able to print your photos without worries there will be pixelation.

[Ovis]

Nut

No shame, those pics you have posted are very nice. Keep shooting!!!

[trophy_killer]

Hey Nut, that's the same one I have!! It does what I want it too....take some quick pictures to put up on the internet for all the yahoo's here to see without waiting for film to develop and to see what all the hype about them was. They are pretty cool and I think now I wouldn't mind upgrading to one for around $300 or so.

[Nut]

It was regularly priced for $132 and I got it for $85. smilies/wink.gif

But I will be doing LOTS more on posting pics. smilies/wink.gif

[Left Behind]

Nut,
Our first one was an Intel from Sam's, and gradualy upgraded once we learned and I weeded a lot of flower beds smilies/biggrin.gif

[Oak]

We just bought a Pentax Optio 555 two days ago. I haven't had much time to mess wit it yet, but I did quite a bit of research. BTW, the site Ovis mentioned has some good camera reviews.

The features I was most interested in were a high optical zoom (for wildlife shots), a built-in flash, and as many megapixels as I could afford (for printing out enlargements). I also prefered the SD memory cards, which the Pentax uses. If I could afford it I would have bought the Canon D10 or D300, but they're definately not good cameras for those who just want to snap shots for the internet. If that's what you will use it for primarily, and you only want 4x6 or 5x7 prints, 3 megapixels will be plenty.

I also learned a lot about storage media while I was researching. I found out that all discs are not created equally, and you need to know what you're buying, even within a single manufacturer. As Ovis mentioned, buy the largest card or stick you can, so you can take your photos at high resolution.

Here's a good website to help you learn all you need to know when choosing a digital. It also helps to look at reviews on sites like Amazon for specific models, once you narrow your choice down.
http://www.shortcourses.com/choosing/contents.htm

Oak

[Whiskers]

I have a Fujifilm 2600. I also bought mine at Wally World. It didn't have a memory card with it. It said on the box contains memory card. I took it back, showed it to them, they gave me a new memory card. Two weeks later I found the orignal memory card between the split seats of the truck. Apparently when I opened the box it fell out. I went back and told them what happened. They said because it was electronic they could not take it back. Just KEEP IT.I have never had to use the other card. I have taken 40+ pictures on the one card with great resolution.

[schmalts]

Moosie, there is 3 you need to look at. I have been researching the hell out of them and going and looking and playing with them.
The best on the market right now for hunters and wildlife is,
The panansonic DCM-fz10. It has a 12X OPTICAL zoom, Leica lense, and most of all IMAGE stablization. 4.0MP the downside is the size is almost as big as an SLR. the lense is huge and gathers lots of light for clear pics while under high zoom.
2, olympus C750. This has a 10X optical zoom and a real compact unit. however it does not have imige stabalizer so a tripod would be handy for wildlife shots.
3, the panasonic dcm-fz1 it has all the specs as the fz-10 but only 2.0 mp. it is a smaller camera than the fz10 too. if you dont plan on blowing up lots of 8x10's this is the camera.
Whatever you do disregard digital zoom specs and only go off of optical zoom. Digital zoom is a marketing scam and thats it. the second you go into digital zoom you pics go grainy. For guys like us you want a good power optical zoom. I tried all the high zoom cameras while holding free-hand under full zoom and the panasonics ruled. I turned off the image stabalizer on them and tried again and the pictures went fuzzy like the other cameras.
I know Deerking just bought the DCM-FZ10, and is selling the oly he used for wildlife pics. Maybe you want to buy his old one.
If you want to get one for wildlife make sure is doesnt have one of those peanut lenses!! get one with a lense at least the size of a quarter. Light gathering is important with pics because it lowers the shutter time allowing for less tripod use.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 12-22-2003 06:25: Message edited by: schmalts ]</font>

[JoseCuervo]

Moosie,

It all depends on what you want to do with your pictures. My goal with Film cameras is to get one picture per roll, that I can englarge to 8x10. And many times that is the kids or a critter. The 3 and 4mp are just not adequate. The picture I sent you in the mail is a 3mp camera (Nikon), and it just is not crisp enough, even at 4x6.

If your goal is just to post picture on the Internet (which I would guess you would do with 90% of your shots), then anything over 1mp is adequate.

But, as much time as you are outside, if you were to ever slow down, and start looking at pictures, you would be able to get some "Art Quality" shots, and then you need the 5-6.3mp cameras.

By the way, there is nothing wrong with starting with a 1-2mp camera, getting the hang of it, and then upgrading. The kids will love having the 1mp camera, to take alll sorts of pictures...

And if you will hurry and buy the Digital Rebel, I'll borrow it....... smilies/wink.gif

[1_pointer]

I've got a Sony that has 4X optical and 6X digital zoom. It's not a bad camera and does a good job for snapshot kinda things, but as Gunner stated for larger prints you need more than 4mp. The downside is it's kinda bulky. If I had to do over I'd have gotten and smaller one with the same mp and dealt with less zoom. The 256mb cards are definitely worth the ching.

Anyone have a digital SLR? I'd like a digital SLR as I'm not too confident in my photography skills yet and that slide film is pretty pricey. I'd like to get one that prints at least 8X10 close to film. I know that someone came out with a 14mp digital SLR, but it was about $14K out of my price range.

[schmalts]

I use a digital SLR at work. Its the camedia e-10 , it doesnt impress me much.
You guys need to realize that MP is only half the battle to good 8X10 pics. I printed out some very nice 8X10's with my camera. You still need a good high end lense. I have a picture I took with my 3.2MP on best setting that i will email to anyone that wants to try to print out a 8x10, you may be surprised.
It seems to me that those compact cameras with 5+mp and that little dime sized lenses are kind of a joke. Kind of like buying a pair of 20X binos for 50$
MP is important but most point and shoot cameras dont have the lenses to make it any advantage. Something to keep in mind , Check out the PANASONIC....

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 12-22-2003 07:30: Message edited by: schmalts ]</font>

[JoseCuervo]

1-ptr...

The Canon Digital Rebel SLR is under a Grand, but you can't find them in stock, at the Electronics stores. The Camera stores have them in stock, but want an extra $300, which would go a long way to a nice lens. BestBuy.com and the others all seem to have them on back order.

It will take 6.+ mp, and the quality is matching Film. And with the digital, you don't need two cameras, one for B&W and one for Color.

I know two Enthusiasts who made the switch to Digital this fall. One to the Digital Rebel, and one to the 10D Canon (its' bigger brother, magnesium case), and they are just sold.

[Moosie]

MOOSIE --------->>> STILL smilies/confused.gif smilies/confused.gif

If I buy a Nice one.... Looks like I'll be giving up hunting to afford it
smilies/eek.gif

[JoseCuervo]

Uhhh Moosie.... Look in your freezer.... It looks about like mine, as in you DID give up hunting.... smilies/wink.gif

The nice thing about a nice camera, is that you don't have to spend all the $$$ on the Kidde Kandids photos over at the Mall, as you can do better pictures, that have more meaning. And with all the kids you are planning on having, you would actually save money. smilies/cool.gif

It just depends on what you want to do with the pictures. If it is to look at them online, on a 17" screen, then your choices are easy.

Look at Ovis' pictures in his gallery, and then look at mine. His were with a 5mp and mine were with a 1mp. But if you remember looking at his printed out, there is NO comparison. (And as another note, Ovis does an awesome job on composition and lighting.)

Kind of like the 17 year old kid at the store will ask you.... "Sir, what do you plan on doing with your pictures?"

[dgibson]

For online use, any reasonable camera available today will do fine. Web browsers, by definition, can display a maximum of 72 dpi, no more. So, it doesn't matter if you have a gigapixel camera that takes photos so realistic you'd swear you were actually sitting there...on the web, they'll look just like anyone else's. smilies/biggrin.gif

Moosie, my opinion is speaking here, but unless you intend to be SERIOUS about your photography you'd be wasting your money to buy a high-end SLR-type digital camera. The price-to-performance ratio just isn't practical for the average, non-professional Joe. You will be just as happy with the current Coolpix model, one of the Sony's mentioned, or a few of the different Canon Powershot models. If you buy one of those and find it lacking, you can always step up later.

That's my $0.02, anyway. smilies/rolleyes.gif Go here (http://shopper.cnet.com/4032-6501_9-0.html?tag=txt) for prices, reviews, comparisons, etc. Gunner's Digital Rebel goes for $788 with one retailer here.

[schmalts]

Dis is da chit right here for wildlife shots when you need a zoom, most stores do not have them in stock and most are pre-sold. I would buy one myself but i am still having a hard time with the size of the camera. However, i just bought one on the company charge card for use at work here smilies/biggrin.gif
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fz10-review/index.shtml
smilies/biggrin.gif

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 12-22-2003 09:29: Message edited by: schmalts ]</font>

[1_pointer]

Thanks for the info on the SLR's guys. I will have one, just have a few other things to iron (ie buy) first. I have a film SLR and while fun and takes great pictures, it is purely manual focus. Which for a novice like me makes taking pics of critters tough. They always seem to move before I can get the light and focus set. But, I do want one with the option.

I'll look at the Rebel, as Canon has a good rep.

[JoseCuervo]

DGib,

Without following the link to the $788 Rebel, my guess is that it is for a "Body Only", and then, if you do buy it, it will be from a company in New York or New Jersey. Price an EF lens, and you soon approach the $1000 point.

The availability of the "Body Only" will be "usually ships in 2-3 weeks", after they call you, asking if you want to buy any accessories.

If you agree to the overpriced accessories, (Flash Card, Tripod, Filter, Lens Cleaner, and Private Label Lens), then they can ship it sooner. If you say no to the accessories, good luck.

I forgot the website (maybe Retailer.com?) but it had reviews on all the sellers at the low end of the Price Scans, and almost all of them had horror stories. Usually I like to shop around, but on this, I think I will take the $999 price at BestBuy for the Camera "Kit", that includes the Lens.

I know enough about SLR's to not need to go to the local Camera shop and pay $1300, that includes a free class and lens cleaner. But, I also know enough about Electronics to know that I want somebody who will be in business if I return it in 90 days.

Now of course, since the camera is not anywhere to be found, it is all an academic exercise, as Santa will not be able to deliver it on Thursday Morning... smilies/frown.gif

My guess is by next Christmas, you will be able to buy a Digital SLR 6.x MP for $600. But then I would be missing another year in high quality Digital, and just relying on Film, which has only been around for 100 years... smilies/eek.gif

[dgibson]

Just so, Gunner. It is all of the things you mention.

Sure, you can wait until next year for the 6Mp SLR for $600, but by then there will be an 8 or 9 Mp SLR for $1000 and you'll be wanting that instead. smilies/tongue.gif

Here's my thoughts on film, as a TV man and by no means a photography expert. Film, particularly 35mm film, has been around for a very long time indeed in technological terms. It is inherently grainy and just gets worse when you blow it up (have you ever really LOOKED at the quality of the picture on a movie screen, for cripes' sake!?!). Digital technology, on the other hand, keeps getting better and better, with more and more resolution, crisper images, and greater detail in every upgrade.

That said, what are digital cameras constantly compared to and pushed to emulate? 35mm film. What is the ultimate goal of HDTV and all its ilk? To make it look like 35mm film. People LIKE that grainy, filmy look. Harsh, detailed photography is for science; art dictates something with a little more character. I love new technology and would love to have an umpteen-megapixel digital camera, but I'm not quite ready to discount my film camera either!

That now takes me up to $0.04. smilies/biggrin.gif Let's see if the Threadkiller is on a roll! smilies/wink.gif

[JoseCuervo]

l
http://www.a-digital-eye.com/index1_files/F828_FHoodrsa2.jpg

And here is Sony's description of their soon to be available 8mp camera...
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Take a giant leap in digital photography. Sony's new Cyber-shot 8.0-megapixel digital camera gives you quality photography that truly rivals professional 35mm.
Designed with the serious photographer in mind, the Cyber-shot DSC-F828 is the only consumer-available digital camera to boast 8.0 megapixels for spectacular digital reproduction. Want to blow up that favorite photo? Enlargements come out beautifully, keeping their fine details and vibrant colors.

The first to have a Super HAD CCD with unique four-color filter, this new Cyber-shot boasts superb color accuracy — closer to what the human eye sees — while the Real Imaging Processor offers increased speed with lower power consumption. It takes an 8.0-MP image faster than a typical 5.0MP camera.

New manual controls, along with a Carl Zeiss-designed Vario-Sonnar T* lens, give advanced photographers a wealth of focus, exposure and recording options for all-around better picture quality results.

The DSC-F828's images easily store on CompactFlash Type I and Type II media, or on a Microdrive hard disk drive or Memory Stick PRO media.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

vs. the Digital Rebel

http://images.bestbuy.com/BestBuy_US/images/products/5992/5992848_ra.jpg

And the Canon description of....
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> 6.3-megapixel effective image resolution (6.5MP total) for outstanding photo detail; high-sensitivity, single-plate CMOS sensor with RGB primary color filter




18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 EF-S zoom lens with optimized coating for digital imaging, reducing ghost images and flare; Canon EF lens mount accommodates a wide range of Canon EOS EF lenses for a versatile shooting system that adapts to any circumstances




1.8" color TFT-LCD monitor with 118K pixels and 5-level brightness control; eye-level SLR viewfinder with adjustable diopter, fixed pentamirror and 0.8x magnification




Canon's high-speed DIGIC imaging processor works in tandem with the CMOS sensor to greatly reduce stray light and off colors for enhanced picture quality




7-point cross-pattern, wide-area autofocus with auto and manual point selection; modes include 1-shot, predictive AI servo, AI focus and full manual; TTL-CT-SIR (through-the-lens, secondary image registration)




Auto and manual exposure mode; program (settings for full auto, portrait, landscape, close-up, sports, night portrait, flash off), shutter- and aperture-priority, and depth-of-field AE; depth-of-field preview button




AE lock, FE lock and 3-image auto exposure bracketing; 3 exposure metering modes, including 35-zone evaluative (linked to AF points), partial center and centerweighted average




White balance settings for auto, daylight, shade, overcast, tungsten bulb, fluorescent light, flash, manual and custom; white balance bracketing captures 3 images with 1 shot (+/- 3 steps)




Built-in retractable E-TTL auto flash with auto pop-up, built-in red-eye reduction and 18mm lens angle coverage; automatic flash output reduction to balance illumination in backlit daytime conditions




Drive modes include single, continuous (4 shots at approx. 2.5 fps) and 10-sec. self-timer




CompactFlash Type I/II media slot (memory card not included); playback modes include single (with and without image info), 9-image index, magnification (1.5x to 10x with left/right and up/down scrolling), auto play and auto image rotation
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 12-23-2003 12:38: Message edited by: ElkGunner ]</font>

[dgibson]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Sony's new Cyber-shot 8.0-megapixel digital camera gives you quality photography that truly rivals professional 35mm.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I rest my case. smilies/smile.gif

[JoseCuervo]

DGib,

You can't just rest your case, as that KILLS Threads!!!

I have had SLRs for 20 years, and I love the quality of the pictures from My Canon SLR, but the conveinence of Digital is becoming attractive.

I also like the ability to control shutter speeds and exposure settings, so my leaning is toward the SLR, but if I will soon regret not having 8MP, then I will be bummed... smilies/rolleyes.gif

[Oak]

If you want to see some outstanding pictures taken with the Canon 10D, go to Monstermuleys and do a search for "Saskman". Find threads that he started, and check out some of the pics he's taken. I know that megapixels don't make any difference on the net, but there's something about his pictures that makes them look about 10x better than anything I've seen from anyone else.

Oak

[dgibson]

Convenience is a very big factor, I'll grant you that! I HATE having to wait for pics. smilies/mad.gif

Oak, I expect you'll find that the big difference between Saskman's and everyone else's pics is ability and experience. I have demonstrated that I can take the exact same picture of the exact same subject with the exact same camera as my father-in-law, one right after the other, and he gets a better pic--every time. smilies/shhh.gif

[Ovis]

I agree CO, Saskman takes some outstanding pics with that camera.

I can say one advantage of digital over SLR is the fact "learning" how to use the camera and all of it's options becomes much more easier with a digital as opposed to film.

If it were not for my digital, I would still be shooting either (boring) auto mode, or making over/under exposed pics with my Minolta SLR.

[RogueWarrior1957]

Convenience is the biggest advantage of digital cameras from my viewpoint. With a mid-range priced camera and a decent photo-ready printer, you can eliminate the photo shop guys for most practical purposes. You can't beat the convenience for adding your own snapshots to web-pages elimimating trying to scan a good image from a photo.

Like someone said earlier, digital cameras are like computers...soon outdated after you buy them. I bought a HP C618I a few years back when they were affiliated with Pentax. Pentax built the optics and mechanical part, and HP built the electronic part. It has been a great camera for my purposes, but there are much better cameras out there now for about the same money. I would not buy HP at this point, due to horrible service standings as of late.

One more point, then I'll give the countdown of the top ten. Get a camera with good optical zoom capabilities as well as the megapixel (MP) consideration. Basically anything over 3 megapixel will work adequately unless you're a professional photographer. Optical zoom is important because of the magnification power of the optics. Digital zoom narrows the view to a smaller area of interest on the pixel array, and when you enlarge, sometimes it is grainy. Optical zoom uses the whole pixel array.

In a range from $200 to $600 as per the January issue of PC World Magazine, the two best buys for the money are the Nikon Coolpix 3100 and the Cannon Powershot A70 @ $300 each, and 3.2 megapixel. Both have a decent optical zoom.
#3 is the Canon Powershot SD3100 Digital Elpf @ $300...it's forte is it's small size (about the size of a pack of cigarettes), downside it lacks on optical zoom.
#4 Kodak Easyshare DX6440 @ $400, fantastic optical zoom, 4 MP.
#5 Pentax Optio 555 @ $550, great optical zoom, 5 MP.
#6 Sony Cybershot DSC-P10 @$450, says photo quality unimpressive smilies/tongue.gif.
#7 Kyocera Finecam L3v @ $250, bargain priced camera with aperture-priority override, 3.2 MP.
#8 Minolta DiMage G500 @ $400, high resolution, good image quality, 5 MP.
#9 Fujifilm Finepix F700 @ $500, good optical zoom plus high 6.2 MP, includes both shutter and aperture priority exposure modes.
#10 Minolta DiMage Xt @ $300, small size, good optical zoom, and improved controls are this ones forte. 3.2 MP

I hope this will help someone in making their selection. I figured hey, I get the magazine, so I'm glad to pass along the information.

Good luck,

[brassmonkey]

I got a Kodak DX 4330 a little over a year ago and love it. It was on sale for $279, plus another $70 for the docking station. It's treated me very well so far. It's 3.1 megapixel and also has a video mode. At the best photo taking, it does take photo quality pictures. I took some pictures one time and compared them to pictures taken with my wife's 35mm, and you can't tell the difference.

[RogueWarrior1957]

Fortunately for you guys, I don't know how to post images to the board yet. smilies/tongue.gif
Have any of you ever tried to take pictures of the moon, or something else with low light? I wasted film doing bracketed shots for years, only to be disappointed. When we had the lunar eclipse back in May 2003, I shot some professional looking frames of the moon in eclipse. What I found through expiramentation was to set the digital camera on a tripod, put it in full auto mode with flash over-ridden, and used the remote to snap off shots. The tripod is a must, because of the extremely slow shutter speed necessary to catch a dim image. No matter how still you think you are, you'll get fuzzy images without the tripod. I got about 17 frames of the lunar eclipse that were magazine quality. One was actually published in my local paper. Now I'm imagining what it could do with low-light game animal shots.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-03-2004 10:38: Message edited by: RogueWarrior1957 ]</font>

[Ovis]

Rogue

I've taken a few shots of the moon, but my favorite type of night photography is of the aurora borealis. I love to hunt the aurora, and have a number of fantastic shots.

Any low light photography requires a tripod or a very steady hand...preferably the tripod, because as you stated, the slightest movement and you'll get a blur.

[RogueWarrior1957]

One day I hope to visit the your area, smilies/smile.gifvis. Down here at the 37th parallel, we seldom get even a hint of the aurora borealis. One time when I used to work shift work, due to a fluke condition of some type, we did catch a glimpse of the aurora. With the filtering effect of the atmosphere at the viewing angle, it appeared as a flickering orange-red glow on the northern horizon...kind of like what a distant forest fire would cause. Would be nice to see the real thing first hand instead of just what I've seen on TV.

-RW-

[Ovis]

I have not seen the aurora since living in Idaho. All of my northern lights hunting took place in Alaska. It was almost a daily show during the winter there.

[schmalts]

Thanks for the list of cameras. But has anyone but me looked at the new Panasonic???
It has not had any reviews yet because its new but it will blow away all of the listed cameras with high zoom. Its 12X optical Leica lense and Imaga stabilization ROCKS!!!
Deerking Just bought one and so far he really likes it. I played with one at the store and took pics with and without the image stabilizer on and it was a huge difference. Those who want great wildlife high zoom shots without dragging a tripod everywhere need to check out this camera!!

[Ovis]

Face it schmalts, the panasonic sucks! Image stabilization is for people who don't know how to use a tripod smilies/tongue.gif

[schmalts]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ovis:
Face it schmalts, the panasonic sucks! Image stabilization is for people who don't know how to use a tripod smilies/tongue.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Face it Ovis, tripods are for guys who cant hunt and take pictures instead smilies/biggrin.gif smilies/biggrin.gif I will carry a bow instead of a tripod smilies/eek.gif

[Ovis]

Little different carrying a bow up a treestand, and actually stalking, but hey...if you say so.

Actually, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, and looked at some reviews on the camera at www.dpreview.com (http://www.dpreview.com) . It does appear to be an "okay" smilies/tongue.gif camera. However, the big drawback is in low light situations. It also lacks in MP and has crappy glass. I don't care for the body either, but again...it isn't a bad camera.

One question for you though...what does a hard core bowhunter need a 12x zoom for if it is your nature to get up close and personal with these animals?

[schmalts]

Ovis,taking pictures from a distance, then putting the camera away and stalk and kill, What else??
I guess you were joking with the crappy glass comment LOL. I agree the body is bigger than i like but i will buy one if no one comes out with a better equipped unit before hunting season this fall. That image stabilization rocks in low light situations when you have longer shutter time. I tried it in the store with and without it on and campared it to other cameras pictures like the Oly 750 and it blew them all away. I am pissed they didnt put a focus assist light on it but not many cameras have it.
That DP review isnt the best place to check reviews. Like one guy said, maybe some of these guys didnt take a few minutes to read the manual. I like CNET for reviews and there are other places where actual photographers rate cameras, not just some tech handicappers.
All i am saying is for a hunter that is packing in some place and wants to get great shots without a tripod this camera is the shit! Go check one out your self and let me know what you come up with for freehand shots under high zoom. Moosies post seems like he was looking for this type of camera, not the type of guy that would carry a tripod every place just for photos, and definitly not a SLR guy, but maybe i am wrong.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-04-2004 12:36: Message edited by: schmalts ]</font>

[Ovis]

I'll see if I can't play around with one the next time I am in a camera shop. I carry a telephoto lense with my cam...so I can reach out and touch something. More weight and more bulk is the down fall.

Here are some reviews of the Panasonic FZ10 Schmalts speaks of if anyone is interested...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinions.asp?prodkey=panasonic_dmcfz10

[schmalts]

heres a review from an actual photgrapher and reviewer. http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fz10-review/index.shtml
ortry this http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/fz10.html 4(pages)
Just so you guys know, the 12X zoom is equivilent to a 420MM SLR zoom!!!

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 01-04-2004 12:56: Message edited by: schmalts ]</font>

[scottymack]

I bought my wife the Kodak last year, with a 128 memory card. The in-laws got me an Oregon Scientific camera for Xmas this year, it is about the size of a credit card, the draw backs to it are once the battery is gone it's gone and then you can't preview pics in the field. I didn't care will probably loose it in the mountians like the Cannon, Minolta and Pentax.

[Tuffbucker]

I bought the Panasonic Fz-10 back in December, and I couldnt be more pleased. It has an awesome zoom, an awesome lens, and a reasonable price. It also has a lot of settings that help to take quality pics in different situations....