Digital Camera Suitable for Skiing Pics

CONTENTS DELETED

I went through this last year.  My old Sony died. I was looking for a ski blogging camera - and I posted a thread on Alpine Zone. I got a lot of good feedback, some which was beyond my level of understanding.

I ended up with the Canon SD1200. At the time I got it, I thought it was pretty good. It was definitely an improvement in many ways over the Sony. Smaller, faster to turn on and off, much better video quality. But as time goes on I'm less satisfied with it. The color isn't rich enough for my taste. And like many digital cameras, it doesn't respond as fast as I would like. And low light is an issue as well.

Steve over at TheSnowway.com has pointed me to the Canon SD4000.  It looks very promising. List price is above your price range, but you might be able to get it for less.  I'm going to look into it.



One more thing ... last year I was very focused on a having a viewfinder. On my old Sony you couldn't see the LCD in bright sun. Seems like that is no longer an issue. The newer LCDs have very bright settings.  It burns your battery, but you can definitely see what you are doing.

Blue Toes got me a Pansonic Lumix FH20 for my birthday this year. I had been making noises about taking her "big camera" (a Pentax DSLR) on ski trips, so she was being proactive. It was the only camera our local guru Jim would let her buy (and this from a guy who also sells Nikon, Olympus, Canon & Pentax). According to him, any camera in a given price range will do more or less the same thing but the Panasonics stand head and shoulders above everything else as far as reliability, quality and durability are concerned. He also claims that they have the best LCD screens out there (which makes sense, given what else Panasonic makes).

I have only begun to scratch the surface of what this camera can do but so far am very pleased with it. The thing seems very robust, a good feature for me, and I am sure that the power and zoom switches could be operated with gloves on. It is in your price range, has 14.1 MP, can shoot HD video and also has burst speed shooting of up to four frames per second, which (once I figure out how it works) should be good for action shots. It also fits perfectly in the padded Pelican 1010 micro-case, a bonus for outdoor use.



I did a quick comparison of specs on my Lumix (MSRP: $229 CDN) and Snowway Steve's Canon (MSRP: $349 US). I'm no camera expert but they seem pretty similar and the Lumix has 14 MP rather than 10. Given the significant price difference, the Lumix is a lot of camera for the money.

Just as a quick heads up, I have no experience with the Canon but suggested it as an option for consideration due to its specs. I purchased a Samsung TL-350 but had I known about the new Canon, I would have likely purchased that instead.

Regarding megapixels, the fact that the Canon is 10 and the Panni is 14 gives you MORE reason to buy the Canon instead of the Panni. Do a search about the megapixel war in cameras. More megapixels does not equal a better image. In a matter of fact, higher megapixels have reached the point of diminishing returns. If the sensor is not improved (and the sensors on P&S models are already pretty much maxed out for the pixel counts) then the image does not improve. If you increase the megapixels without increasing image quality, the resulting photo is less good than a camera with fewer MP. If you don't believe me, open a picture in your favorite editing software and try to increase the megapixel size of the image and see what the results are. Don't be fooled by the megapixel war. Quality of the lens, size of the sensor, and quality of the image processing software are what is important for digital cameras. And long zoom don't mean anything if the image distorts as the lens zooms out.

That Lumix is indeed a lot of camera for the money. But generally when the price difference is that much, there is a good reason for it. I suspect that the Canon I suggested is the superior camera. But that is without having tried either, so take that with a grain of salt. Personally, I look at 10 MP as a reason to buy a camera and 14 MP as a reason not to buy a camera rather than the other way around.

Thanks for the input all.  I'll let you know what I end up purchasing.

In my experience, one is most likely to carry a smaller camera. I own a couple of DSLR's that are just too bulky to carry skiing unless I'm shooting for a special project. the Canon SD1200 (or similar in the series) is excellent and durable. If you want more features and you're willing to compromise a little bit on size, the Panasonic Lumix series is excellent. This series is co-developed with Leica. Serious photographers know Leica as the gold standard for lens quality. The Panasonics sell for hundreds less than the Leica's, but benefit from the Leica engineering...not that Panasonic engineering is anything less than innovative.

Before I buy, I check out www.dpreview.com for a comprehensive review of digital cameras.  

I've been looking for a waterproof digital camera to take kayaking and skiing. I want to check out the Pentax Optio W90. The Panasonic Lumix has a waterproof version that looks promising. (My brother, the professional photographer, has a non-waterproof Lumix for his point and shoot camera.)  I have looked at the Olympus and the Fuji, but the images have a lot of noise (grainy) in anything but bright light.  

Lost my small camera last Saturday at Whitafece. This is an opportunity for my wife to get me new one for end-of-April birthday. I am all over dpreview.com, consumerreports.org, amazon.com, yet no clear idea what to get. My goal is to have camera with best image quality that fits in a pocket. So I have Canon G12 and Olympus XZ-1 in my shopping cart. Another obvious choice is Canon S95. So far I owned mostly Canons and few Panasonic cameras.

Any suggestions?

There's a thread in this forum on this topic from last Aug or Sept.  Maybe Harv can combine the two threads.  I also got some excellent information from a thread I started here.  Same thing happened to me, Denis.  Lost my camera on vacation at Cape Cod last Aug.  However, we still had it's two predecessors, and I never actually replaced the lost one.  The most recent predecessor (it's pink, ugh) was not too much older, and we're still using it.  Maybe some updated information posted here will help me finally replace it.  I'm not cheap, just thrifty.  

Adk Jeff wrote

There's a thread in this forum on this topic from last Aug or Sept.  Maybe Harv can combine the two threads...

Done.

As stated above, all the pics on the blog (James and I) and in my forum posts are currently coming from the Canon 1200 IS:



If the pictures look good enough to you, it's pretty cheap. (Cheaper now then when I bought it for $189).  I can't seem to make the continuous burst mode give a proper exposure and the controls, to me are not super intuitive, but both of those things could be operator error.

Denis.N wrote

Lost my small camera last Saturday at Whitafece. This is an opportunity for my wife to get me new one for end-of-April birthday. I am all over dpreview.com, consumerreports.org, amazon.com, yet no clear idea what to get. My goal is to have camera with best image quality that fits in a pocket. So I have Canon G12 and Olympus XZ-1 in my shopping cart. Another obvious choice is Canon S95. So far I owned mostly Canons and few Panasonic cameras.

Any suggestions?

The Olympus XZ-1 looks incredible. Canon S95 has set the bar for top of the pocketable P&S. You could add the Panny LX5 to your list. It is a little more bulky and I think they retained the manual lens cap for whatever reason. I hesitantly might add that Samsung TL-500 as a suggestion. I have the TL-350 and really want to love it but the camera has some quirks that makes me concerned about Samsungs in general.

I recently decided that photo quality trumps all but DSLRs are too big. Micro Four Thirds won out for my dollars (and lots of them, ugh). You need to either get a kit with a pancake or buy a pancake to make one of these ski jacket pocketable. But it works! Barely. You'll have a visual bulge but it should fit inside most chest or hand ski jacket pockets. I went with an Olympus E-PL2 for a variety of reasons but the Panny GF2 is slightly smaller and the Sony NEX even smaller still. Waaaaaay bigger than a P&S. But all will fit into a ski jacket pocket with a pancake lens.

If I was strictly keeping it to the P&S market, it would be the Olympus XZ-1 hands down for me.

Gentlemen, thank you for your input. I made my choice: Nikon P300. There is a "preview" at DPRreview.com, there is also 3-way comparison with S95 and LX5 here

I've never owned a Nikon before (lost Canon PowerShot SD900, have Canon Rebel XS, my first digicam was Canon G3), we'll see how it works out. I like 24 mm focus equivalent ( wide picture ), it's supposedly very fast (7-8 short per second), sold at Amazon for $314.

Harvey, SD1200is is awesome in it's segment. Something similar to my lost camera - it has optical viewfinder, which i like, i don't think they make them anymore. I want something more higher end.

Jeff, check out P300, it's very fast in "Switch on Time to Taking a Photo": 1.3 sec (vs 1,8 sec in S95) and  in "Continuous Shooting (at full resolution)": 7-8fps (vs. 2-3 in S95). It is also close to your price range.

River, I am a bit hesitant to shop out of my "comfort zone" ( that is Canon, Nikon to some extend ). I had bad experience with Panasonic ZS7). LX5 seems too big, I'd rather have good camera in my pocket then excellent one at home. Olympus ZX-1 has rave reviews but it is $499.

I'll go for Nikon P300, will let you know how I like it.

Thx for the input Denis.  I'm gonna get something pretty soon, will definitely check out that Nikon.