Camera question for those who have them, and those who can give good insight

[Cosmic_Subie48]

Hey guys, so im not sure if this belongs in off-topic, but im in the market for a nice camera. I dont want a SLR, bc frankly i wont use it for its capabilities, but i will show you the 2 camera's i am looking at, and you guys give me your knowledge.

When it comes to photography, i really enjoy it. From taking pictures of cars, and whatever else i find nice, to taking video's. I know a camera isnt supposed to be a Video Camera, but between these 2 camera's, they both take good quality video. So heres the 2.

Meet camera #1

The Canon IS S5


This camera i liked before the other, bc i hadnt heard of the other untill a friend of mine told me about it. What i liked about this camera, is it felt nice in the hand, was visionally appealing, and had a lot of nice options to play with. The lens also seems a little bigger than the 2nd option.

This camera is $349

Meet Camera #2

The Canon G9



This camera my friend told me to buy after i showed him the IS S5. Comparing the 2, like i said b4, the lens looks a little smaller. The digital screen in the back of the G9 is slightly larger than the S5. Which isnt really a concern for me. The thing that sets this camera aside tho, is its 12Megapixel shots. I looked at pictures from this camera, and they were sharp, and just great looking. I have got nice pictures tho, from camera's that arnt this extreme.

This camera is $499

In conclusion, im looking for a camera that im going to be able to learn with, and not have to worry to close down the road of needing to upgrade. I want to make this a nice hobby, help me decide what would be best for my interests now, and down the road.

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

[ezramoore]

In my personal experience, a low end Nikon is significantly better than a low-end (non SLR) Canon digital.

If you love photography you should get yourself a DSLR like a D70 or Rebel XT (if you like Canons) used, cheap. You can always use it in auto mode, it will provide a lot better versatility in terms of lighting, etc. Plus, if its something you enjoy doing you want it to challenge you to get better at it. DSLRs allow lense interchangability, with cars, and other REALLY common subjects, its nice to not only be able to differentiat yourself with your eye and skill, but also nice to be able to get really intriguing photos that you otherwise would miss if limited by your equipment.

Costco has like $150 off DSLR packages till the fourth I think.
My two cents.

BTW this really does belong in OT

[el_guapo]

I have a #1 and it is fine for what I do which is take pics when I need to of family, car, wildlife, etc..... I like it because it is light and fits in the hand good and has a nice zoom. That said these cameras are still just for causal users. If you think you wanna make photography a "hobby" etc..where you maybe take classes, then you will quickly outgrow either of these believe it or not.

[SimonJ]

When it comes to photography, i really enjoy it

That phrase there tells me you should get a dSLR. While the cameras you posted are nice, and certainly have capabilities - they are for taking pictures, not doing photography.

I bought a Sony Cybershot DSC-H9 last Christmas, because all I did was take pictures. But then I got into photography, where composition, lighting, background, foreground, subject, etc all contributes to the picture, and I had a hard time capturing all of those things with the Cybershot.

I bought a dslr 2 weeks ago and i haven't looked back. I just bought an additional lens yesterday, so I can go even further with my growing hobby.

Do yourself a favor, for an extra 100-200 you can get into a really nice slr...then the possibilities are endless and you won't be wondering 6 months down the road why you wasted money on the "point and shoot".

[ezramoore]

Originally Posted by el_guapo

I like it because it is light and fits in the hand good

Exactly what these are good for. I have a little point & shoot in my glovebox at all times, they're easy to carry.

["B"]

Between the two, I'd go for the G9. It can shoot in RAW mood which is INVALUABLE if you're into post-processing. Trust me. The G9 won't grow with you, no point-and-shoot can, but many of my pro-friends have a G9 for when they don't feel like lugging around a DSLR. I could never do that to myself though.

That being said, I'd still recommend a cheap DSLR first. It's just...necessary.

[Superglue WRX]

Get a real SLR if you're spending that much money. You'll probably learn faster on an SLR. I tried to learn on one of those tweener cameras and I regret it. Those camers you listed will just hold you back and you'll end up getting an SLR. Just get one now and stop tip toeing around.

/thread

[LokiV7]

I have #1, and like it a great deal ... as ... long as it's outdoors, on a very sunny day.

For anything indoors, it's silly bad, and makes me wish I had an XSI or something similar. The ISO goes up to 1600, but the pictures are impossibly-grainy at that level so it really isn't worth doing. I've mostly given up on indoor stuff unless I've got a tripod and the subject isn't going anywhere.

I actually got the S5 for free, when my S1 broke. Dropped the S1 off at their repair place, and the S5 is what Canon sent back to me.

[Lone Wolf 75]

I started with a G5, upgraded to the 20D, and now use both a G7 and a 20D. I also had a Nikon Coolpix 5700 before the G5, I liked Canon's menus and layout much better than the Nikon's. But to each his own, both manufacturers make solid cameras and lenses, I just happen to like Canon better and have invested so much money into lenses that it does not make any sense to switch.

I found very quickly that with my G5, I outgrew it's functionality, as I wanted to take longer exposures than 15 seconds and wanted more zoom, usable high iso, etc. I ended up upgrading to a DSLR (the 20D) about two years after buying the G5. The G5 got stolen and replaced with a G7 (similar to the G9, but with 10MP and no raw). I take the G anywhere that I woudn't feel comfortable taking the 20D (including really dusty places, underwater, etc.). The 20D still does everything I want it to do, I don't feel like my level of experience has exceeded the camera's capabilities. If you think you are going to get into photography (it becomes a lifelong and very expensive hobby - trust me), you may want to consider going right to an SLR, as others have suggested. You'll begin to buy different lenses and learn that the camera body doesn't matter much any more, it's the glass that you are making a lifelong investment in.

If you don't want an SLR, the G-series is a good little camera, and I think it is a little better put together than the S-series. But, the S5 does have 2x the zoom (like 420mm equivalent). I seriously considered the S3 when I was replacing my G5, but I liked the portability and better quality feel of the G7.

My advice is to go to any of your local stores and fiddle around with the cameras to see which one you like better. Which one do you like the best? I would have considered a Rebel XT or XTi, but my hands are too big and the 20D just felt much better, and was worth the few extra $. You may feel the same way about the G9 vs. the S5, or the equivalent Nikon or other camera.

Good Luck!

[emorphien]

Originally Posted by ezramoore

In my personal experience, a low end Nikon is significantly better than a low-end (non SLR) Canon digital.

I'd disagree. Nikons cameras have gone through changes and gotten better as of late it seems, but I'd still say the G9 (in spite of it's stupid sensor having too many megapixels like every other P&S) is definitely one of the most capable P&S cameras out there. Nikon doesn't really have anything I feel is as capable.