What kind of digital camera would you recommend? [General]

2010 May 31
On the outset this appears to have nothing to do with food. However in an attempt to bring myself into the 21st century I am considering purchasing a digital camera. Most of my outings these days involve food (my recent trip to the food pavillion at the Tulip Festival comes to mind) so I would like to take pictures to post here and also to share with friends who live out of town. I have an old-fashioned SLR camera but that doesn't help if I want to post photos here or on facebook. So I am looking into purchasing something fairly basic. Most photos will probably be taken outdoors during the daylight hours. (I may also take pictures of my own creations but I live in a well lit apartment.) So could any of the photographers here recomment something fairly basic?

2010 May 31
I was with Pej Daddy at East Side Marios and I was amazed at what he does with the smallest and cheapest cameras. He says it's all about how you handle light and he even took the shots with my camera phone! So I just say get the best you can afford and play with light.

2010 May 31
It depends how much of a hobby you consider taking photos of food. If you're just documenting, then I agree with KC Foodie. There are moments where I look at my Nikon DSLR and think, "I could just use my iPhone".

And then I upload photos from my niece's birthday and realize that sure, there are good photos of food, but even better are the ones with people and food and a context. Shots of candles being blown out or the mixer mixing cookie dough turn out much better with a higher quality camera.

There's a difference between documenting your adventures in food, and creating photos that also act as a piece of conversation themselves.

It depends on what you want and whether you think you'll get your money's worth from a DLSR.

I can only recommend based on my own experience. Personally, I have only ever owned Nikon digital cameras, but I have shot with Canon as well and my two SLRs are Canon and Pentax. I own a Nikon D40, and if you want, you're welcome to take it for a spin one weekend. As for point-and-shoot, I used my sister-in-law's Nikon Coolpix S700 and was amazed at the capabilities. It's a good little camera for about $200.

There have been other debates on this in the past:

Forum - Food Photography
Forum - Food Photography in Ottawa

And, a wonderful article by the folks at TheKitchn: www.thekitchn.com

2010 May 31
Something that takes standard AA batteries so you can use standard rechargables.

Something with the best optical zoom you can get.

Does video WITH SOUND. Some cams with video do not have sound (duh!)

Has manual mode for things like flash/no flash, portrait mode, macro mode (inches from subject) and the likes.

8 megapixel is way more than enough for most humans

I use a Canon A590 (which is not available anymore) and find it pretty good for the most part. The replacement for the A590 does not have as many features as I recall.

Examine the battery chamber open/close thing really closely to see if it seems sturdy. I've had 2 cameras now bust the opening. Have to tape them shut.

2010 Jun 1
The Fujifilm Finepix F200 is reputed to do very fine low light (no flash) pictures.

2010 Jun 1
Hmmm, I think it was the Fuju Finepix that I had 2 of the above problems with - the battery door busted after about 3 or 4 days, and the video mode did not have audio. But I recall that the next model up from mine did have audio with the video.

2010 Jun 1
I've heard great things about the Canon PowerShot line of cameras. How about the SD980?

www.henrys.ca

$280 at Henry's right now. Decent zoom range, built-in image stabilization, and durable metal housing.

Doesn't take AAs, though. Has its own rechargeable.

2010 Jun 1
i'm happy with my canon powershot. i'm on my second one. the size is great - small enough to carry in your pocket. pictures are great without flash in the right light settings, though you have fairly good control with manual settings if that is your thing.

2010 Jun 1
If you're not looking for an SLR, but just a point-and-shoot, I have to warn you against purchasing a Sony.

Although my camera does take pretty decent pictures, the memory sticks (and the AC adapter) are distinct to Sony, and so porting/backing up photos to your computer becomes more difficult than it has to be.
If you're using one of the more generic memory sticks, often you can just stick it right into a computer's card reader -- but not with this one. Same goes for printers, etc.

It doesn't sound like a big deal, but I certainly regret buying it. Also, I'm lazy.

2010 Jun 1
Since Momomoto mentioned it again, I'm going to counter the recommendation of cameras that use AA batteries. I've only bought Canon cameras in the past decade (point-and-shoot and DSLR), but every single one of them came with its own battery charger. Sure, their Li batteries are proprietary, but they last waaaay longer than AAs ever would. I've never had the need for a second battery because I recharge the camera every night while on trips. The batteries in modern cameras charge quickly and are good for 300-500 shots.

The vast majority of consumers are better off with a proprietary lithium battery than they would be with rechargeable AAs.

2010 Jun 1
I've had those proprietary Canon batteries too FF, and they are great while they last, but eventually the battery dies and you are on the hook for $75 or so for a new one. If you can even find one by then because the company has moved on to a different format. You can get Lithium Ion AA rechargables and you are way ahead. They are harder to find but they are out there - MEC has them.

2010 Jun 2
Not sure I would call Pej's G11 (or was it a G10) cheap but... :)

Fully agree it's about the light, the fastest lens you can get will perform better in the low light conditions you often experience indoors.

The aforementioned Canon G10 or G11 is a good one. I've heard good things about the Canon S90 as well.

I have a Leica D-Lux 4 that has a fast F2.0-2.8 lens and it does great in low light, it even has a Food mode!!

The Panasonic DMC-LX3 is exactly the same camera (Panasonic makes the electronics, Leica makes the lens). I bought the more expensive Leica for sentimental reasons (ie. I'm an idiot...)

2010 Jun 2
I'm going with FF on the rechargables on the cannon's. They last forever - when you need a new one or two - go to eBay. I got 2 batteries from HongKong for $15. They both work great and actually last longer than the original before recharging. I've been using the HK batteries for over a year. BTW I got a repacement battery for my Motorola cell phone for $2 - same source, shipping included. (Bell wanted $80.)

I'd buy another Cannon in a heart beat.

2010 Jun 2
Thanks everyone for the suggestions. Cameras have changed alot since I bought my SLR in the 80s! I could get a DSLR, a basic point and shoot type, or an iphone - lots to think about! Tips about batteries, rechargers, etc. are all appreciated. I will keep you posted...

2010 Jun 3
Pasta lover, I had a look in Consumer Reports and won't go into all the ratings but will say that the 2 most recent "best buy" subcompact cameras are both Kodaks - Easyshare C160 (a little more highly rated, and cheaper) and Easyshare M320...they might be worth checking out. On a side note my daughter was visiting last week and thanked me for buying her the Kodak digital camera we gave her for a high school graduation present (based on Consumer Report reviews back then) - it's 7 years old and she says the pictures are still excellent and the camera still works really well (and the battery door hasn't broken). She has been learning to use a DSLR the last few years as her hubby is into nature photography big time and she still loves her little Kodak.
One thing I would caution against is a camera that has issues with first-shot delay and/or next-shot delay - either is vexing, though maybe not for food shots.

2010 Jun 4
This looks like a pretty good deal from crappy tire

www.canadiantire.ca

2010 Jun 4
That's a good deal at crappy tire, but the camera likely stinks (www.digitalcamera-hq.com). If you can afford more you can surely do better. Definitely consult online review sources for any camera you choose...

2010 Jun 4
If you buy a Kodak, I would not recommend getting a "C" series. They destroy batteries way too fast.

I bought a Canon PowerShot SX200 IS that I am very pleased with.

Also useful for us foodies, samsung came out with a new digicam that is loaded with toys. For example, one of their new cameras will GPS tag your pictures with the location where the shot was taken. I'm thinking this can be useful in remembering down the road where you ate what dish. Kinda cool!

2010 Jun 4
I'd recommend Canon all the way. There's actually a very good deal on a "last years model" at Future Shop and Staples. It's the Canon SD1200is (image stabilization). It comes in gray, blue or pink, has a nice feature list, is small/discrete, and best of all takes good pics. Oh, and it's $99.

There are also very good deals on the Rebel XS if you're going the D-SLR way. I have both D-SLR and point and shoot for different situations. I can't always carry the SLR discretely and my particular SLR doesn't shoot video.

2010 Jun 4
Here's a source for camera reviews: www.testfreaks.com

You can drive yourself crazy reading them, mind you. I think you are best to trust your own judgement as you do have experience, and do handle them to find what feels comfortable to use once you've picked a few to try based on what people tell you, what you read and what you already know.

As for Kodak destroying batteries I wouldn`t know, but some of the C series have among the highest battery life of the 90+ cameras rated - up to 550 shots.

Anyone have other good review sites for such stuff?

2010 Jun 4
I think it's best to go in knowing what you plan to shoot. Do you need a high frame per second? low light? good optical zoom?

Other factors are battery life, position of controls, size, weight, etc etc...

Overall, it's safe to go with a top camera manufacturer. Price shouldn't be the ultimate decider, within reason...buy something you'll be happy with. If it costs you $50 more, it'll be well worth it. This said; if you can be happy with a $99 Canon, why look elsewhere unless it really lacks one of your major criteria for a cam.