Howdy all, I've been looking at getting a new carry everywhere / do-it-all camera. I need something that takes non-proprietary batteries (AA) so as not to be caught without juice, that shoots photos primarily but also does decent video.
I'm looking at IS (image stabilization), high ISO (1600, 3200, 6400), a minimum of 10x optical zoom and at least 640x480 video, preferably 1280x720. After careful research I've come up with the below models. This is not the pro caliber stuff that people hear are used to just the mid range "high zoom" market. The reasoning being it's better to have a camera (any camera) with you when you need it then no camera at all. I realize most people on this list are also looking at this from another perspective... video first, photo second. There's still quite a huge gap between these two perspectives but I'm glad it's finally at least starting to fill. Anyway, what follows are the models and primary specs. I'd appreciate any feedback / recommendations or alternatives. == Kodak 1012IS == - 2 AA batteries - IS = image stabilization, ALL cameras in this range have IS now - 12x optical zoom - 3200 ISO standard, up to 6400 at 3.1mp - 1270x720 video / 30fps - http://www.google.com/products/catalog?btnG=Search&cid=15232942994291666965 *high ISO ranges are not usually useable (to many artifacts and to much color distortion) they're merely an indicator of what the camera *might* be capable... usualy 400-800 ISO max with moderate grain and color distortion == Fujifilm FinePix S2000HD == - 4 AA (bulkiest of the three) - 15x zoom - 1600 ISO standard (3200 and 6400 at 5mp in "high iso" mode) - 1280x720 / 30fps video (cannot use zoom while recording) http://www.google.com/products/catalog?cid=9218357819657745871 == PowerShot SX110 IS == - 10x optical zoom - 2 AA - 1600 ISO (3200 mode at lower mpixels) - 640x480 30fps - much more compact than Kodak or Fuji's comparable models - http://www.google.com/products/catalog?cid=8592811692719816882 All these retail for about $200-250 dollars. It is in fact amazing the value you get and how far cheap cameras have progressed in the last few years. The one thing the specs can't tell you is what kind of image and color quality you can expect. Compounding this is the fact that all these are two new to be well shot with and well reviewed so all i can do is look at the reviews of last years cameras and what people are shooting with them on flickr, vimeo and elsewhere. Even though the Fuji is far and away the best by specs I believe it's image quality to be a huge gamble. It's also the most bulky and you cannot zoom while recording video which is a hare chincy. The Canon has a known and actually very good image quality and is the most compact of the three but is lacking in the specs. Lowest ISO, lowest zoom and only basic 640x480 video. This leaves me with the Kodak. The image quality is a small bit of a gamble but I believe I'll be happy with it. It's also very well spec'd. As far as video is concerned I intend to use this camera for shooting short 30-90 second unedited set shots in HD. (I'm going granular.) I intend to host these on Vimeo and Flickr.... maybe even youtube should youtube start supporting HD for free... but I would not pay for youtube. I already have a Flickr Pro account and will will consider going pro on VImeo should I find I use it enough, but won't need it to start with due Vimeo's gracious posting limits. I think that sums it all up. Hopefully others at least find this interesting. I'd love to know what others think. I hope as well that I've not overlooked previous like discussions in my research prior to posting this. If so please let me know. Peace, -Mike mmeiser.com/blog flickr.com/photos/mmeiser2
