I think this is a GREAT camera and a heck of a "first step" into digital cameras. It is very slim and sleek, yet it does not have the 1/2.5" sensor typical of cameras in this size. The 1/1.8" sensor in the SD900 is almost twice as big as most and this will really show in image quality. I'm jealous.
At $400, though, this camera depletes your budget and you really will want a nice memory card to make it worthwhile, so save your pennies just a bit longer for that. The card they link to at Amazon is "adequate," but you will be happier with a Sandisk Ultra II 1GB card, which Amazon has for a nice price. I'd definitely want this card instead of the one they show with the camera. It's only about $25 more and it comes with a limited lifetime warranty and image recovery software. If you don't think you want this, read the other questions here. About 1 in 20 asks, "Is there any way to get pictures back after I have deleted them?" Yes. Buy the Sandisk card and install the free image recovery software on your computer.
http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-SDSDH-1024-901-Secure-Digital-Package/dp/B00065AO0K/sr=1-1/qid=1167590449/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-4383893-2350256?ie=UTF8&s=electronics
2006-12-31 05:44:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jess 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Take a look at the Fuji F30, for an easy-to-use point-and-shoot camera. I think people might be surprised what a lower pixel-count, Super-CCD sensor can do. I believe the fuji is substantially cheaper too, which will afford you an extra battery, a case, and a decent memory card too.
Personally, I think people pay way too much attention to pixel count, and don't realize that ultra-high pixel counts don't mean anything if the photosensors are so small (and ineffective) that they start losing details. These days, with the 10mp generation of CCD sensors, we're are being forced to accept more noisy images, and lousy dynamic range, in the name of pixel-count...which most consumers mistakenly assume correlates to higher-quality images. Yes, you can capture bigger pictures...but not higher quality. You lose the details in the shadows, and your clear blue skys become this noisy mish-mash of blues and off-blues. Even with its 1:1.8 sensor--it's still miniscule with too many pixels crammed in there.
Where you really start to see the problems is when you're challenging the camera with tough low-light scenarios, like being indoors, restaurants, etc, most point-and-shoot cameras start putting out garbage--including the SD900. If you take 90% of your shots outside on sunny days, this won't be a problem for you. If you're like me...you really want your camera with you at night too...problem.
IMO, the question to ask yourself is this: Do you want to print poster-sized pictures? Or do you want your pictures to have a lot of detail? If you want poster-sized pictures...go for high pixel counts. If you want alot of detail, go for a superccd sensor. The F30 is a larger sensor (1/1.7"), and it's a high-performance superCCD sensor. The pixel count limits you to prints that are about 8"x10" before you start degrading image quality.
I actually have both. I gave the SD700IS to my mother, and kept the Fuji for myself. And don't get me wrong, the SD700IS does take really good pictures, and actually has more manual controls. But for a point-and-shoot, simplicity, I shoot with the F30. I have more complicated cameras like my EOS for more ambitious projects.
2006-12-31 15:03:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Driveshaft 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Try cheapest prices search engine. They have almost every merchant on the internet and you save time and money by shopping the internet from one site.
Also over a million reviews.
http://www.cheapestpricessearchengine.com/
2006-12-30 21:36:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by Mike D 2
·
0⤊
0⤋