Page 2:
Choosing Which Digital Camera To Buy

Trying to decide which digital camera to buy? You've come to the right place!

There are a lot of digital cameras out there. Most of them are about the same, as far as image quality and the kinds of pictures they'll allow you to take. But a few cameras do stand out.

The problem is, most people will only differentiate between cameras using the features that marketing highlights (e.g. number of megapixels) and the features pointed out by the salespeople (which may make some things slightly more convenient). Most people sadly do not take into account equivalent focal lengths (i.e. the field of view), the lens aperture (which determines how fast your shutter speed can be in low light), or how much grain the sensor sees at higher ISOs (even more important for low-light shooting). These are the features that actually impact image quality. And the same is true for video: Many cameras can shoot HD video, but most don't allow you to zoom in and out while recording, which greatly diminishes the results you can get. Very few cameras get this kind of stuff right, especially when it comes to features that improve image quality.

Unfortunately, those very few cameras do not get the attention they deserve from salespeople or from advertising. Salespeople and ads try to sell the cameras that are most profitable (because they just came out and are thus way overpriced) or the cameras that are easiest to sell (because they have lots of megapixels, something that actually makes low-light images much grainer).

Which cameras actually take good pictures? I'll tell you.

Ready? Here we go.

Note: This guide was last updated in May of 2010. If any cameras come out that are better than these, I will update it again. But the cameras announced for the next few months don't look like they'll be any better, so this guide should be good at least until the end of the summer).

OVERALL BEST   Especially for outdoors use and trips: Panasonic ZS3 ($299 at Amazon.com)   The focal-length range of the ZS3's lens is a dream come true. First of all, it goes as wide as 25mm, which is just about as wide a lens as you can find, unless you have an SLR. That's is terrific for photographing interiors (the inside of a room, car, etc), taking pictures of buildings or groups of people without having to step back, and capturing a whole panoramic landscape (or the huge crowd at an event, etc) in a single shot. I LOVE having a lens that wide, since you can capture so much of your field of view in each picture. Sure, several cameras out there have this feature... but none zoom all the way to 300mm. That's 12X zoom! Enough to take pictures of athletes, birds, aircraft, boats, wild animals, cars, and other things that are usually pretty far away. Or, alternately, to zoom in to a small object and have it fill the picture. A lens that goes as wide as 25mm, and zooms in all the way to 300mm, in such a small package, is a real feat of engineering. Oh, AND it also shoots HD video, and unlike almost every other camera, it allows you to zoom in and out while recording video. In other words, it's also a camcorder. And for people like me who like to tweak the exposure settings while taking those hard-to-get shots (pictures in low light, long-exposure shots that capture motion, wide-aperture shots to capture depth, etc), the ZS3 offers full manual controls. That was the one thing that this series of camera had been missing for years, and now Panasonic finally included it. You can use this camera as a point-and-shoot (just turn it on, leave it on "Auto", it does all the work for you), or you can grow as a photographer by exploring the consequences of tweaking each exposure setting (you can see the result right away on the screen) and learning more photography techniques.   Especially for indoors and night-time use: Canon S90 ($365 at Amazon.com)   Why do professional photographers use SLRs and not compact cameras? In short, because compact cameras are much noisier/grainier, especially in low light. There are things that manufacturers could do to make compact cameras less noisy: use a bigger sensor (which drives up the price), cram fewer megapixels into the sensor (which hurts sales), use a faster lens that can capture more ligh (also drives up the price), and use a wider (and well stabilized) lens so that you can use slower shutter-speeds without too much blur. Camera manufacturers tend to not do most of these things, because these cameras wouldn't sell: people in general go for the megapixels and the zoom range, and ignore the features that actually increase picture quality in less-than-ideal ligthing. But Panasonic decided to try making a camera optimized for low-light shooting, and released the LX3. It had a really fast, wide, stabilized lens, a large-ish sensor with a low-ish number of megapixels, etc. The LX3 flew off the shelves, because tons of professional photographers realized that it was the only compact digital camera that took good pictures in low light, so it was the only acceptable "SLR substitute" that you could take to dinners, parties, etc, and get good pictures without having to haul the SLR around. Released at $400, soon you couldn't find an LX3 for less than $800, because demand was so high (and because all the people buying it were used to spending thousands of dollars on cameras and lenses, so it was worth getting such a good and relatively tiny camera for $800). Canon, smart as they are, decided to get in on this action. They designed a camera with specs like the LX3's, but even better! It's called the S90. I actually bought one for myself, and sold my LX3 - and since then I learned that many top photographers really really love the S90. (It's always reaffirming when I independently reach the same conclusion as the pros, as has been happening for about 7 years now). At high ISOs, the Canon produces pictures that are much less grainy than the Panasonic - and much, much less grainy than any other compact camera. That by itself puts this camera on a class of its own. On top of that: Canon's lens is not quite as wide as the Panasonic's, and not quite as fast when you zoom it, but it's still wider and faster than most compact camera lenses, and it has much more zoom than the Panasonic. (The Panasonic only zooms in to 60mm, which is pretty pathetic. On most digital cameras, this would be less than 2x zoom. The Canon has 3.8x). Most importantly, the good high-ISO capabilities of the Canon, combined with a lens that is much faster and a little wider than most digital cameras, makes it easily the best camera out there for low-light shooting such as at parties and dinners. The Canon is also surprisingly compact; It slips in and out of a pocket much more easily than the Panasonic (which has sharp rectangular corners and a bulky lens that sticks out a lot), and the Canon's overall dimensions are smaller. Also, the S90's interface mimics that of Canon's SLRs quite closely (The designers knew who their target market is!), making it very easy to tweak any of the important settings with the flick of a finger. So if you have an SLR and want a compact camera whose image quality meets your high standards... or if you just want a small camera with great image quality even in low light, without breaking the bank... get an S90. Any professional or semi-professional photographer will tell you that it's the best compact digital camera you can buy.   Which of these two should you get?   The ZS3 is the perfect camera for wandering around during the day, and the S90 is the perfect camera for going out at night. So look back to your digital pictures over the past few months: Were most of them taken outside, or indoors? Outside, get a ZS3. Indoors, get an S90. But you can't go wrong with either, because both of them do the other thing pretty well too: The S90's lens is pretty wide, and it has a good amount of zoom, and its image quality is just superb, so it's better than average as a daytime camera... and the ZS3 has a larger-than-average sensor and a pretty sharp, wide, well-stabilized lens that makes it better than average for low-light shooting. To be honest, I think most people would be happiest with a ZS3, since it's more versatile (nice wide lens, lots of zoom). But if you care about image quality above all else, especially in low light; Get an S90.

 

EASIEST AND MOST CONVENIENT   Casio EX-Z77 ($194 at Amazon.com)   Casio has been making the best, easiest to use, and smallest super-compact digital cameras for several years now. These cameras have so few buttons (they do everything for you) that a trained monkey could probably use one. They're so tiny, they fit easily into a shirt pocket. Image quality in good lighting (i.e. outside during the day, indoors using the flash) is just fine. The only problems come when you try to take a picture of something indoors, and it's too far away to illuminate with the flash (or you don't want to use the flash, for whatever reason). This is rare enough that, for most people, a Casio would be an ideal camera: Tiny, super easy to use, and with pretty good image quality (good enough for a computer desktop wallpaper and for modest enlargements). Of course, if you want to tweak the exposure settings and do other "fancy" things, on this camera you can't do it directly, but it has so many scene modes that you can probably find the option you're looking for: Taking macro shots of small objects, short-exposure shots that freeze the action, long-exposure shots to emphasize motion blur... are all possible if you simply choose the right mode from the menu. But most people won't care about that. They just want to point, and shoot! And not carry a bulky gadget around. This camera is perfect for that. I have bought my mother two of these (got the second one when the first one broke after years of faithful service), and I can't think of a better endorsement than that!

 

MOST CAPABLE AND VERSATILE   Panasonic FZ35 and Canon SX20 ($322 and $369, respectively) I can't bring myself to decide between these two cameras as the best "almost SLR". I learned photography on Panasonic FZ cameras, so they have a special place in my heart: Their enlightened interface makes it easy to change each of the settings and to see the consequences on the screen immediately, which for me was the ideal way to learn what all the settings do. And they're just ridiculously capable cameras, in any lighting conditions. The FZ1 was the first digicam with 12x zoom and the first with image stabilization, and its lens stayed at f/2.8 all the way past 400mm which is just ridiculous even today. The FZ-35 has even more zoom and more features. And from the point of view of design and ergonomics, these cameras combine the comfort and ease-of-use of small point-and-shoots with a functional SLR-like layout and a hint of Leica's rangefinder legacy. They're just a joy to shoot with. But other manufacturers have been catching up. Canon's SX-series (all the way back to the S1-IS, now including the SX20-IS) are as capable as Panasonic's FZs. They actually now have a little bit more zoom than the Panasonics. And the Canons' flip-out LCD screen can come in handy, such as when holding the camera up over your head to shoot over a crowd. Another great feature is that the Canons use regular AA batteries instead of some proprietary rechargeable battery, and this has all kinds of advantages: If your batteries run out while you're out on a trip, you can just buy some new AAs and pop them in; No need to find an electrical outlet (and the time!) to re-charge the camera batteries. And if you want to buy extra batteries to carry around in case this happens (always a good idea), you won't be charged an arm and a leg by the manufacturer for another proprietary battery. Besides, proprietary batteries won't be available for ever, effectively limiting the camera's life. So I'm a big fan of cameras that use AA batteries, like these big-zoom Canons. (And hey, you can buy yourself a set of rechargeable AAs and get the best of both worlds). Both these cameras are practially SLRs.Their big lenses capture a lot of light and are solidly stabilized, making good low-light photography possible. Their 18X-20X zoom lenses allow you to take good pictures of things that are too far away or too small to even see properly with the naked eye; You can literally take a picture of an airplane that is a mile away, or of a bird that is too far away to positively identify until you look at the picture you took. Not only that, but the lens also zooms out all the way too 28mm: This wide focal length (not as wide as the ZS3's 25mm, but almost) works well for photographing interiors (the inside of a room, car, etc), taking pictures of buildings or groups of people without having to step back, and capturing a whole panoramic landscape (or the huge crowd at an event, etc) in a single shot. So you can zoom all the way out, zoom all the way in, or anywhere in between. You can leave this camera on "Auto" and have it do everything for you... or you can learn how to properly harness such a powerful machine, and squeeze the most out of it, by using all the manual controls you'd find in an SLR: Aperture, shutter-speed, ISO, white balance, focus... All can all be manually tweaked for the best possible picture. (And if you don't know how to use these things, messing around with a camera like this is the best way to learn: You can see the consequence of tweaking each setting, instantaneously on the screen. That's how I taught myself photography). So if you want a camera that will take whatever picture you can envision, and that will grow with you as a photographer if you choose to learn how to tweak all the settings, then you can't do much better than an FZ35 or an SX20. Fuji, Sony, and other manufacturers also make big-zoom cameras. But when it comes to value (i.e. cost), ease-of-use, and (most importantly) image quality, they can't compete with the Canon or the Panasonic. Which one should you get? Mostly, it's a matter of going to a store and seeing how these feel in your hand. You might prefer the way that a Panasonic feels like an SLR, or you might prefer the Canon's simple and friendly layout. You may prefer the Panasonic's lighter weight and smaller size, or the Canon's heftier and more solid feel. Really, you can't go wrong with either one. Both are very powerful, take great pictures in "Auto" mode (so you can just ignore all the fancy functions if you want), and take fantastic shots if you know (or are willing to learn) how to exploit all the adjustable settings. Here's a more detailed comparison that you may find helpful, but I should warn you that that author found the cameras to be pretty much equivalent, like I did. So it's up to you!

 

DIGITAL CAMERAS ON A BUDGET   Ok, so you want to buy an inexpensive digital camera. Sure, you could plop down $100 and get a chubby camera that won't fit in your pocket, has only 3X zoom, breaks easily, and doesn't take very good pictures... or you could spend a little more and get one of these. Of all the cameras that actually take good pictures and that actually have good lenses and the kinds of features that you will want to harness in order to take better pictures, these are the least expensive I could find:   Stylish, Compact, Easy-to-Use: Samsung SL420 ($121 at Amazon.com) This camera is beautiful, small, slim, and easy-to-use. Its lens has 5X zoom, which is not as much as most of the other cameras on this page, but is a lot more than any other camera you can get for 120 bucks. And believe it or not, it actually takes very sharp pictures, of far higher quality than many more expensive cameras. (Don't believe me? Check out reviews such as this and this). Between the amount of zoom, the small size, the exceptional image quality, and the cool-looking design, the Samsung SL420 is far better than any other camera in its price range. So, that's an easy pick for my top "budget" camera.         Most Capable And Versatile: Samsung HZ10W ($159 at Amazon.com) The Samsung HZ10W (also known as the WB500) zooms all the way out to 24mm, which is a wider field of view than any other camera on this page (narrowly beating the Panasonic ZS3's 25mm). This means that when sitting inside a room or inside a car, you can capture your whole field of view (not just what's right in front of you) in the picture. You can photograph a large group of people or a big building without having to step back. You can capture a whole panorama in one shot. It's really great. Or you can zoom in a little bit to take a "normal field of view" picture that would look the same as on any other camera... or keep zooming in and make use of the 10X-zoom lens! No other camera goes as wide as 24mm, AND offers 10X zoom. This camera also gives you the option to manually set the aperture and/or shutter-speed and/or ISO, so if you're a photographer who wants to nail those tricky or artsy shots (or if you're an amateur who wants to learn how), this camera will let you do it... or you can leave it on "Auto" and it does all the work for you. Oh, and did I mention that it can record HD video? In short, if you actually want to buy what I (as a photographer) consider to be "a decent camera", one that is versatile and powerful enough to take all kinds of remarkable pictures that will make people go "Wow!", then the Samsung HZ10W is the least expensive way to do it. If you don't believe me that a camera this cheap can be so great, check out video reviews like this and this and this.

 

SLRs   I'm not going to recommend an SLR here. Picking the right SLR for you is a process that should take into account all kinds of things, such as what SLRs your friends have (you'll want to be able to ask for tips and for troubleshooting help, borrow lenses, etc), what kind of photography you want to pursue the most (Birds? Landscapes? Sports? Night-time long exposures? Portraits?), and of course on the line of products available at any time from different manufacturers. (As I write this, Canon's latest offerings are a lot less appealing than Nikon's... but the opposite was true a few years ago and the pendulum will probably swing again as Nikon gets complacent and Canon works hard to re-take the lead). Really, the best thing you can do is talk to people who have the cameras you are considering, and ask them why they chose their camera. Each will give the reasons that are most compelling to them. From all those reasons, you must pick which reasons seem the most compelling to you (and which camera is optimized for those considerations). But I can say a few things that will help you figure out what's right for you. So here are my tips for choosing and buying an SLR. The thing that people ask me the most is whether it's worth buying a camera that's not in the entry-level line. Why do people buy the 50D, when a Digital Rebel costs less than half as much and has similar specs? And why does anyone at all spend $4000 on a camera? I will list four reasons. If you are buying your first SLR, you will see why an entry-level camera is almost certainly all you need (and also why, for certain kinds of photography, the more expensive ones are worth it). - One reason is reliability and durability. A more expensive camera is made to last a lot longer. It's internal mechanisms take a loooooong time to wear out. Its case is resistant against bumps and drops, and sealed to keep out splashes of water. In other words, if you're going to keep your camera in a padded bag, not take it out in the rain, and only take some dozens of pictures per weekend, then an entry-level camera is fine. But if you're out trying to capture action in the real world, where things are dirty and wet, from platforms that move and hit bumps, and you'll be shooting thousands of pictures a day for several days a week... you want a more expensive camera. - One other reason is the burst rate. More expensive cameras can take more pictures per second when you hold your finger down. Now, for the vast majority of photography, you really don't need 10 shots per second. Three is just fine. So, again, unless you really want to rapid-fire that shutter so that you can be 100% certain that one of those pictures captures a critical moment, you don't need a more expensive camera. - Another reason is the interface. More expensive cameras tend to have a button for each setting that a photographer wants to change, and multiple click-wheels. So anything about the camera can be changed with a quick flick of your fingers. Professional photographers don't want to dig through menus. Beginners, on the other hand, are intimidated and confused by too many buttons. Because of this difference, entry-level cameras hide the more advanced features by burying them in menus, and only have buttons for the more important and commonly-used features. So, again, if you're a beginner, you're probably ok with an entry-level camera. But if you're a pro, and don't want to take the camera away from your face as you adjust for changing conditions, you'll want a button for everything. - The main reason is autofocus. This is why I shoot with 1D-series cameras and not Digital Rebels. If Digital Rebels could focus like a 1D, I would switch right over. For the most part, the cheaper cameras have pretty much the same sensor as the more expensive cameras. So put the same lens on them, and use the same settings, and you'll get the same shot, right? Well, only if the lens is focused the same. And more expensive cameras focus more quickly, and more accurately, than cheaper cameras. The very same lens will take sharper pictures on a 1D or 7D than it will on a 5D or Digital Rebel. This is especially true for fast moving subjects, when the autofocus will struggle to continually adjust and keep up. When you're shooting things that move at the speed of sound, you want the best autofocus that money can buy! Another question that people ask is whether it's worth spending money on a body or on the glass. The answer, in general, is: more so on the glass. You'll probably get a new camera body every few years at the most, since better ones are always coming out and old ones get worn out. But a piece of good glass will last you a lifetime. Also, while the cost of a body drops significantly when it's used (like a car*), the cost of a used lens can easily be 95% the cost of a new one. So for your first SLR, buy a cheap camera body... but don't be afraid to splurge on a nice zoom lens (or a nice wide lens, or a nice fast lens), because 1] you'll keep it forever, and 2] if you DON'T keep it forever, you can sell it and get all your money back. (Which nice lenses should you start out with? Most of the manufacturers make stabilized 18-200 or 18-250 lenses. I'd recommend you get one of those. Tamron's 18-250 is a LOT of fun. (You can get it for your Nikon, Canon, Pentax, or Sony camera). If you have a Nikon camera, you can get this really great Nikon 18-200. If you have a Canon, there's this stabilized Canon 18-200. There's also an 18-270 available for Nikon and Canon cameras; that's 15x zoom!!! Sure, these lenses cost a few times what most other starter zoom lenses cost... but like I keep saying, That's one area that's worth splurging on). * This fact (the prices of used SLR bodies drop fast) reminds me of a great tip: Buy used camera bodies! They're much cheaper than new ones. And like I said above, nicer cameras are very durable, so if you buy a camera that's a couple years old, it will probably work like new. I have owned six SLRs, and all but one were bought used. Save yourself some hundreds of dollars by buying a used body, and put that saved money towards a nice lens or two. Three good tips for buying used SLR bodies are: - Use KEH.com. The company inspects and rates every piece of used gear that's for sale on their website, so you can trust what they say about the condition of every item. Prices are reasonable. Service is good. Can't beat that! - Use eBay. Look for people selling their own gear. It's easy to spot eBay listings that say things like "I'm selling my granpa's camera, I don't even know how it works, but here it is. It says '5D' on it", or "Our store lists eBay items on behalf of sellers; We are not in a position to thoroughly test every item or to ensure that it works perfectly". Avoid those! Instead, look for the ones that say "I am finally selling my beloved 40D. It has always been kept in a padded bag, and never dropped. Here are some of my favorite pictures that I have taken with it. The time has come to upgrade to something better". Of course, only buy from someone who has positive feedback, ideally 100%! - Be one generation behind. I bought my 10D as the 20D was coming out, my 1Dmk2 as the 1Dmk3 was coming out, and my 5Dmk1 as the 5Dmk2 was coming out. When a new camera comes out, many photographers sell their perfectly good gear to upgrade to the latest and greatest. (even though the latest is often not actually the greatest). The time when a new SLR is coming out is the best time to buy a used one of the previous model. It's easy to find them for sale online, in like-new condition. Then again, I firmly believe that Canon's 1Dmk2 can focus more accurately than any other camera out there (including the 1Dmk3 and 1Dmk4), and that the 5Dmk1 can take shots that are wider and less noisy than any camera out there (including the 5Dmk2)... So given that I use two 5-year-old cameras, you may wish to take my SLR advice with a grain of salt ;] On the other hand, I will recognize that the latest Nikons are fantastic pieces of engineering. If I were to start from scratch (or if I lost all my Canon cameras and lenses in an accident or something), I would probably replace my Canon 5D with a Nikon D700 and my 1Dmk2 with a D3. I don't think Canon makes anything that can really compete with the latest Nikons. (As for how they compete in the entry-level market, or how Sony compares... I have no idea. I've stopped following entry-level SLRs a while ago, and never did care much for manufacturers that were not Canon or Nikon since the other manufacturers have VERY limited selection when it comes to long telephoto lenses). Also, a big part of why I stick with my current cameras (other than the fact that all of Canon's newer cameras take pictures with a lot of grain and noise, since they try to cram too many megapixels onto those sensors, for the sake of marketing) is that over the past couple of years I have been doing less and less photography, so it's no longer worth it for me to sink thousands of dollars into yet another upgrade. But my Canons will only last so long, and the day when they break beyond economical repair, I guess I'll have to do all the decision-making I describe above. We'll see.

Thanks for visiting my guide to the best digital cameras out there. Please tell your friends about this site!

Sincerely,

Bernardo Malfitano
Creator and master