What is...........?

Question

be the worst digital camera to buy? like what brand name or model?

please dont say something like one does not work. i want to know an actually brand or make

Answer 1

Olympus Digital Cameras
http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_digital.asp?CMP=ILC-homedigital

Kodak Digital Cameras
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=19&pq-locale=en_US

Sony Digital Cameras
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_BrowseCatalog-Start?CategoryName=dcc_DIDigitalCameras&CP=newsonycom_navbar_el_diCameras

Can on Digital Camera
www.canon.com

Nikon Digital Camera

The Best Digital Cameras
This review is intended to help you choose the best compact digital camera for your goals. In coming up with these recommendations for my friends, I looked carefully at Canon digital cameras (often the highest technology), Kodak digital cameras (great balance and simple user interfaces), Sony digital cameras (an alternative to Canon), and Olympus cameras, which can be good values and have some unique features such as weatherproofing.
Digital cameras fall into the following categories:

ultra compact: good for slipping into a pocket or purse, but the controls and viewfinder are very cramped
compact: what most people buy, reasonably pocketable, reasonably easy to control
creative compact: more features and options than "compact", $200 more expensive; good for techno-junkies
SLR-like: chunky, easy to control with fingers, larger sensors and better image qualty in low light
SLR: large and cumbersome, best image quality, best low-light capability, best tool when you are going out specifically to take photos (covered in separate article)
[Each of these categories gets a separate section below. If you don't want to wade through this article, my current best recommendation for most people is the Kodak Easyshare Z730 (about $240)]
Decide if you're buying a camera to carry with you all the time, and therefore it must be compact, or if you're buying a camera that you will take out when you are specifically engaged in a photographic project. If you only use a camera during your child's soccer game, for example, the responsiveness and controllability are much more important than the camera's size. For travel, on the other hand, you probably don't want something so heavy that you are tempted to leave it back in the hotel.

In shopping for a good digital camera, the one specification that you can safely ignore is the number of pixels, which has almost nothing to do with image quality. A 3 MP camera will produce acceptable prints up to 8x10" in size. The interesting question is not the number of pixels, but their quality. Is the photo in focus? Is the high contrast and punch of a scene captured? Are the edges of objects rendered sharply? Physically larger and more expensive cameras generally do a better job at satisfying these harder-to-quantify objectives than small and cheap cameras.

Ultra Compact
Whatever the advertisements might say about megapixels, these cameras suffer from mediocre image quality, especially in low light. The sensor in an ultra compact camera is very small and therefore it picks up a lot of noise along with the image. Your images will look "snowy" if taken at twilight or indoors without flash.
Canon and Casio have been the traditional leaders in this category. Casio digital cameras have the style and Canon digital cameras have the image quality. These cameras are about the size of a mobile phone and can be slipped into any pocket. They qualify as "best digital cameras" only if you are willing to extend the phrase with "best digital cameras that fit into a shirt pocket".

latest and greatest
Casio Exilim Card EX-S500 (the EX-S600 is coming out soon and might be slightly better)
Canon PowerShot SD550 Digital ELPH (big 2.5" screen; 37-111mm (equiv.) F2.8 - 4.9 lens; first picture 1.4 seconds; next picture 0.5 seconds); the manufacturer's underwater case is a fun accessory for SCUBA divers and snorkelers
older and cheaper
Canon SD400 (slightly smaller and lighter than the newer, higher-res, SD550; a lot less expensive); the Canon AW-DC30 is the snorkel case (good to 10' underwater)
Nikon Coolpix S1
Lens Note: Lens focal lengths in this article are specified in terms of the equivalent perspective on an old 35mm film camera. A normal perspective is 50mm. The world of wide angle begins at 35mm and becomes noticeably wide at 28mm, dramatic at 24mm. A moderate telephoto or "zoom" perspective is achieved at 100mm. Sports photography from the sidelines begins at 200mm. The f-number after the focal length indicates the light-gathering power of the lens and is important for indoor or low-light use. The lower the f-number, the better. An f2.0 lens requires only half as much light as an f2.8 lens. When there are two f-numbers, they refer to the light gathering capability at the extremes of the zoom range. The lens may go from a "fast" f2.8 at the wide end to a "slow" f4.9 at the long end, where nearly four times as much light will be required.
Timing Note: "first picture" is defined as the time between turning your "best digital camera" on and capturing the first image. "next picture" is defined as the time between pressing the button on top of your already-woken-up "best digital camera" and capturing an additional image. A digital SLR such as the Canon Digital Rebel XT will turn on almost instantly. Compact digital cameras were often painfully slow until mid-2004 when faster processors became standard. A camera will be referred to as "responsive" if it has been tested and found to turn on and capture within 2.0 seconds, with subsequent pictures being captured in less than 0.6 seconds.

Compact
These cameras are small enough to fit in a coat pocket, a purse, or a belt case. They have larger sensors than the ultra compacts, which results in better low-light performance. The Compact cameras can have heavier, higher quality lenses as well. Compact digital cameras are a good choice for travel when you know that you'll want to take a photo every 15 or 20 minutes.
My favorite: Kodak Easyshare Z730, not the greatest specs but the results are great; a simple, effective, and cheap (just over $200) camera. The camera is very responsive. It turns on quickly. The lag time after pressing the shutter is minimal, even when the camera decides to use flash. The Kodak Z730 has an orientation sensor. If you take a picture while holding the camera vertically, the image will show up on your computer in the correct (vertical) orientation. Like professional digital SLRs, the Kodak does not have a "playback mode" in which you can get stuck. You press the review button to look at photos you've taken. If you see something interesting to photograph, press the shutter release and the camera instantly switches to "recording mode". The camera includes a lightweight rechargeable Lith-Ion battery that should be good for at least 300 photos between charges.

Everyone else's favorite: Canon PowerShot A620 (2" screen; 35-140mm F2.8-4.1; power-on delay of an extra 0.3 seconds keeps this from being labeled "responsive"); WP-DC90 is the SCUBA case; if you aren't going to make big prints, you can save yourself a few dollars and enjoy faster response time with the very similar Canon A610. I don't like these cameras as much as the Kodak Z730 for the following reasons: (1) The A610 and A620 use four AA batteries, which are heavy and will last for only 50 pictures (you can go out and buy four rechargeable NimH batteries, but these are even heavier), (2) the A610 and A620 have a record/play switch (if you are going through photos that you've already taken and something interesting catches your eye, pressing the shutter release does nothing--you must first remember to switch the camera from playback to record mode)

For camera nerds and wide-angle fans: Canon S80. (2.5" screen; 28-100/2.8-5.6 lens; responsive). The 28mm wide angle lens setting makes this camera much better for scenery than the typical compact digicam. The S-series is Canon's "gearhead" or "photo nerd" line. An S-series camera is more expensive ($100-200) than a superficially equivalent A-series camera and the menus might be overwhelming for some. Canon WP-DC1 is the SCUBA case.
Olympus SP-700. Huge 3" LCD screen.
Olympus Stylus 600 and Stylus 800. Similar capabilities to those above, but weatherproof and good for use in the rain or at the beach. Stylus 800 is a bit sluggish, taking its first photo in 2.7 seconds and the next one 0.8 seconds later. The 600 might be more responsive because it is using the same processor and doesn't have as many pixels to deal with.
If you are on a tight budget, this is the category of camera that you want. You can get a reasonably good compact digital camera for around $150. Here are some safe low-cost bets:
Kodak Easyshare C330 -- the Kodak digital cameras have a simpler user interface than the Japanese brands and sometimes produce better overall image quality (most folks buy this camera in a kit with a printer)
Sony Cybershot DSCS40 (lens zooms out to a reasonably wide 32mm equivalent)
Canon A410
Canon A510 (lens goes wider than A410 and also longer; slower operation times); WP-DC60 is the SCUBA case
Creative Compact
These cameras aren't much bigger than the compact digital cameras, but they offer a lot more user control. The lenses might be bigger, heavier, and of higher optical quality. Almost all creative compact cameras offer the option of storing images in RAW format, usually proprietary but sometimes in Adobe's standard DNG format. A standard JPEG is convenient for uploading to the Web, sharing with friends, or getting prints. Unfortunately, a lot of shadow and highlight detail that was captured by the sensor can be lost with a standard JPEG. With the RAW format, the photographer has the option of bringing out that shadow or highlight detail in an image editing program on a personal computer (or letting a professional lab do it and make a really great print).
Don't buy one of these cameras unless you are prepared to spend an evening reading the manual and learning the settings. Otherwise the results will be the same as if you had used a simpler compact camera.

Canon PowerShot G6 (35-140mm F2.0-3.0 lens (exceptionally good for low light); first picture time is a slow 4 seconds; the next picture can be taken after 0.8 seconds) -- this camera came out in the summer of 2004 and the G7 will presumably be along soon to replace it; the G7 should have a faster processor, be more responsive, and possibly include a lens that zooms out to 28mm or wider
Panasonic LX1 (28-110mm F2.8-4.9 Leica lens; good for wide angle). The camera is noisy at higher ISO settings, but the optical image stabilizer makes such settings less necessary. No optical viewfinder; images are composed on a bright 2.5" rear display. Slow first picture time of 3.6 seconds; subsequent photos can be taken in 0.6 seconds.
Ricoh GR Digital. This has a fixed focal-length 28mm equivalent lens that will be superb for wide-angle scenic photos. It is not clear if this camera is going to be sold in the United States.
This product category seems to have gone out of favor and therefore there isn't much to choose from. Camera companies are concentrating their energies on the "SLR-like" category (below) and SLR category (separate article).
SLR-like
These are physically large cameras, often built around large, heavy, and high-quality lenses. "SLR" stands for "single lens reflex", a camera in which the viewfinder and the film or sensor see through the same lens. In a film camera or true digital SLR, there is a mirror behind the lens that directs the light up into a beautiful bright optical viewfinder. When you press the shutter release, the mirror flips up and lets light through to the sensor. The drawback to this approach is that the LCD display on the back of the camera cannot offer a continuous preview.
The SLR-like cameras get rid of the optical viewfinder found on the standard compact digital camera. In its place you have the screen on the rear of the camera and an electronic viewfinder rather like that on a video camcorder. The electronic viewfinder is good in very dim light but traditionalists will have trouble adjusting to it. One advantage of an SLR-like camera over a true SLR is that the rear LCD display offers a continuous preview.

If you are serious about sports photography, for example, you'll find the true SLRs more responsive and will want to read my "Building a Digital SLR System" article.

SLR-like cameras have lenses that zoom in to substantial telephoto magnifications, up to 200mm. Magnifying the scene also magnifies any shake of the camera body, so unless it is very bright out, you risk blurry pictures at long telephoto settings. The best cure for blur is to mount the camera on a tripod. In-lens image stabilizers are also quite effective if you cannot use a tripod.

Here are some high-value SLR-like cameras:

Kodak P880 (24-140/2.8-4.1 lens). The 24mm widest setting on this lens makes for much more dramatic wide angles than the standard 35mm widest setting. The sensor records 8 megapixels for poster-sized prints.
Canon PowerShot S2 IS (36-430/2.7-3.5 lens; slightly unresponsive). Bad for wide angle photography, good for super telephoto (birds, sports), especially with the built-in image stabilizer.
Panasonic DMC-FZ30 (35-420/2.8-3.7 image-stablized lens). Bad for low-light photography due to excessive sensor noise. Budget for Adobe Photoshop to process the RAW images.
Sony makes a couple of higher-end SLR-like cameras that come with very good lenses, but the $1000 prices make you question whether you wouldn't be better off buying a real SLR. One is the DSC-F828, introduced late in 2003, and built around a high-quality 28-200/2.0-2.8 lens. Especially for such an old camera, the first picture time of 1.6 seconds is remarkably good, as is the next picture delay of 0.2 seconds. The second camera is the newer DSC-R1. The DSC-R1 has the same APS-C size sensor found in the true digital SLRs, which yields very good performance in low light (though not as good as the Canon Digital Rebel and Nikon D-series). The DSC-R1 has a 24-120/2.8-4.8 lens that would be an expensive addition to a digital SLR. The R1 rounds out its bid for "best digital camera" with a very responsive processor.
SLR
You should look at a real digital SLR if you need any or all of the following features:
reliability; SLR bodies almost never fail; by comparison, point and shoot cameras are built for light weight and low cost
big bright accurate optical viewfinder
good quality images in low natural light, e.g., indoors without blasting everything with flash
ability to attach specialty lenses, e.g., very wide angle lenses for interiors, scenery, and architecture, or long telephoto lenses for sports photography
Choosing the right camera system is covered in a separate article on this server: "Building a Digital SLR System".
Accessories
You might want a lens cleaning kit.
You will definitely need at least one memory card. Most of the compact digital cameras take SD cards. If you are taking JPEG photos rather than RAW, you'll be able to fit between 250 and 500 images in a 1 GB card. If you are using a 5 MP or lower resolution camera, you might consider a 512 MB card because you can have the entire card copied to a single CD-ROM at a lot of photo shops worldwide.

512 MB SD cards: Kingston; SanDisk
1 GB SD cards: SanDisk
2 GB SD cards: SanDisk (good for a long trip into a remote area where you can't copy images to a computer)
Personally, I have found that it is more convenient to use a single memory card for an entire project or trip rather than juggling multiple cards.
If you want to keep the camera on your belt, consider a small padded case. Lowe and Tamrac are generally the highest quality brands. The manufacturers' own brand cases are generally the lowest quality. Tamrac publishes a useful fit chart. Lowepro's is a huge PDF.

Tamrac Ultra Compact
Tamrac T17
Tamrac Digital 1 (slimmer digital cameras, plus extra pocket)
Tamrac Digital 2 (compact cameras)
Tamrac Digital 3 (SLR-like)

Answer 2

had a great deal of difficulty with a canon coolpix 995 that failed time and time again and ruined photo cards

Answer 3

Reported!!!!

Answer 4

Argus..was hopeless.