Annoying to shop around for a camera (and I guess other such items) - to find an interesting looking model at a good price - then go to manufacturer's site - or review sites to find the model doesn't exist - then spend ages trying to guess which it might be before re-badging. I recall similar issues with washing machines and dishwashers. My main concern is not wanting to get fobbed off with an obsolete model.
In article , John scribeth thus
You just have to take what's current today, safe in the knowledge that it will be obsolete tomorrow;!..
What will piss you off more is buying it for £xxx today and in a few weeks time finding that will be several £££ less;!...
Product life can be very short these days. Much less than a year for the camera that I have. Prices drop very quickly towareds the end of the product life.
Indeed - and if you can. find a local, indepedant shop. My wife went shopping for one about a year back and the local Jessops, etc. just wanted to push the model they (probably) made the most proffit on - a local shop in Exeter actually took time to explain things to her, and more importantly, listen to what she wanted out of a camera before they the sale was made.
Gordon
The model that's just gone obsolete can often be the best buy. Many manufacturers have aggressive planned obsolescence policies and try to tempt people to ditch what they already have in favour of the latest model by adding a few minor features that you might not need or even just making a few styling changes. If the discontinued model does what you want and has a good mark down on the price then go for it.
Exactly; When I decided that a Nikon D200 was what I needed if anything, it was £1200.
I got mine £495 cos its been replaced by the D300.
Our local car trader had a very low mileage XJR going for 6 grand...
Mike Clarke pretended :
Very good advice....
Often the manufacturers will design with new minor features already in mind, but hold them back to enable later models to be created.
Best site I've found for decent reviews is
For example, when I bought a compact I wanted one that was fast in action, small and with a decent screen....and a logical menu system. I ended up with a Sony Cybershot, and very pleased with it I've been. When I bought a digital SLR my priority was a live-view facility - and I ended up with the superb Canon 450D ( a bargain, frankly, and with one of the brightest viewfinders I've seen ). I've owned a few film SLRs ( Canons, Nikons etc. ) in my time, and this Canon is more fun than the lot of 'em put together.
I'd also second the comment that it's worthwhile seeking out an independent retailer. Chain shops ( Dixons, Jessops etc. ) are fine if you know what you want and you're buying on price, but you can't beat actually getting your hands on the good and trying them out. I had three or four SLRs on my shortlist, but spending an hour in a shop comparing them all showed the Canon to be streets ahead - much more so that the reviews and specs suggested. It even beat the more expensive Canon 40D.
I thoroughly recommend Park Cameras if you're in the vicinity ( Sussex )
Regards,
In these times..never mind the product....I'd worry more of the manufacturer might be obsolete. (nods head, sagely)
Arthur
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Stephen Howard saying something like:
Ditto everything wot he said. It's also worth bearing in mind that pixel count isn't everything, no matter what the makers say.
yes.
It isn't. Ive got lenses a tad better than my 8Mpx camera, but they are rare and expensive.
Well I like my Nikon: had to go Nikon to use the old lenses I had. The D200 is everything a film SR was plus more.
Trouble is, you pay for that advice. I went online and read and read..then bought off ebay.
No its not. Most cheapo compact lenses wont stress a 2Mpx camera. Top of the line 35mm lenses are good up to around 24Mpx. Then you are getting towards medium format quality of the lens is up for it. Most are not.
Its also true to say that most of e CCD's come from only one or two places, and the actual performance camera to camera is pretty similar at a given px size.
What you are paying for is the features and convenience of the camera and the quality of the glass strapped on the front. You wont get a better CCD from a different manufacturer.
Sure you do, but when I'm spending the best part of half a grand on kit I reckon an hour's worth of time with a expert who knows his stock inside out pays dividends. Great after-sales service too. I'd probably have gone for the Canon 40D based on the reviews I read, but the 450D handled much better for me, and weighs a great deal less.
Regards,
Digicams have now reached the point where last year's model can provide everything needed and more for a lot of people. If you buy last year's model for half the price and upgrade it twice as often, you end up with on average amore up to date cam for the same money per year, so paradoxically if you want the most upto date you can get it by buying the not up to date.
Re megapixels, again its reached the point where few applications benefit from the highest pixel count cams.
This is all a big change from the early d-cams, where pixel count & other features were much more of an issue.
NT
And sometimes these features can be enabled later wiuth a firmware upgrade.
Most "features" are a waste of space, anyway. Especially with cameras. What matters is the glass, not the box on the back.
Well..yes and no.
Looking at te back of MY box..
select film speed. Vital White balance. Not essential, but saves photoshopping to remove daylight/sunset/bright sun color casts. select manual lens max stop and focal length. Vital if using old manual lenses to get exposure right! depth of field preview. Not essential, but damned useful. qualit button. probably not a issue as shoot at max quality with huge cheap flash cards.. autoficus settings. not used beacause i dont.
metering..half dozen modes but I don't bother much.use spot. shutter motordrive/self timer delay. very useful both.
All those gadgets are as useful as you know they will be.
If you just want to point and shoot, whats a digital SLR worth? not a lot.
I only use 10% of the features, after initial setting up, but those 10% are VITAL.
I agree - what's important for me is to be able to set the camera up in the way that best suits me...and thereafter I leave most of those settings well alone. Ease of adjusting the common 'tweakables' is essential - a third of a stop exposure compensation either way, a quick change to the shooting mode, auto bracketing etc. - it all adds up.
Regards,
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Huge saying something like:
Utter c*ck.
I have 10x8 blow-ups from my 4mpx camera. That works out at about
10px/mm, which is better than my eyes. The lens is the limiting factor on it. Why they put 10mpx behind a mobile phone lens is beyond me. On second thoughts, it's marketing.Mine is a "bridge" camera, not an SLR; it's good enough for many purposes, even though it's AF only and a bit slow.
The glass, OTOH - *that's* the limiting factor.
Andy
Glad to see that GC is continuing to fully justify his killfile entry.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.