View Full Version : Time for a Digital Camera Upgrade???

Bob Weisner
07-01-2006, 2:23 PM

I still got the old Kodak Digital camera from a couple (few) years ago. It is a 2.8 Megapixal (SP?) Is it time to upgrade to a better camera?


Mark Rios
07-01-2006, 2:42 PM
Bob, I don't know where you are but you should have a Costco near you. I recently got an Olympus FE-130 at Costco for about $170. 5.1 megapixels, blah, blah, blah......

That being said, these might help:
(Sorry, you'll have to reference pic "CAM 5" to sync the features and test resultsto the ratings)

Randy Meijer
07-02-2006, 5:24 AM
To me that is like asking if you should upgrade from a car that goes 180 to one that goes 210. If your camera is working well and taking good pictures.....ones that you are happy with, then I see no need to upgrade. If your camera is shy of some of the more current features that you would like to have or you want to print all of your pictures at 12 x 18, then maybe an upgrade is in order.

People keep telling I should spend about $1500 and upgrade my computer.....Pentium II, 512 ram, Windows 98. Know what, that $1500 won't help me type messages any faster here or send a few emails to my friends any more efficiently. Think I'll use that money for something else.:D :D

Mark Pruitt
07-02-2006, 11:06 AM
Given the deals that are out there theses days, if my digital camera was a 2.8 I would definitely upgrade. Anything 4.0 or higher has the capability to yield "print-worthy" photos that can be printed onto photo paper, if that interests you. I get kinda sick when I see how prices have come down since we bought our 4.0 Sony. Great camera, but dang, if we'd just waited another year......oh well....

Peter De Smidt
07-02-2006, 12:02 PM
Whether you should upgrade depends completely if your camera isn't doing something that you'd like, and you can get one that you can. 2.8 MP is enough to make an excellent 4x6, a good 5x7 but only an ok 8x10.

Shutter lag, the time from pushing the shutter to the camera's actually taking the picture, has been continuously improved over the years; and so that might be some reason to upgrade.

Finally, the ergonomics of a camera are very important. I highly recommend getting your hands on a sameple before buying one.

Check out dpreview.com for some pretty good reviews.


Bart Leetch
07-02-2006, 12:23 PM
Kodak is still making good cameras. Some that look more like a 35MM have German made lenses now days. I just purchased A Z740 on close out (it doesn't have the German made lens) but seems to work fine. $156 with tax. 38.380 lens with 10x optical zoom

Peter De Smidt
07-02-2006, 12:52 PM
Kodak is still making good cameras. Some that look more like a 35MM have German made lenses now days. I just purchased A Z740 on close out (it doesn't have the German made lens) but seems to work fine. $156 with tax. 38.380 lens with 10x optical zoom

Some Kodak cameras get good reviews, that's true. Btw., using famous named lenses on these cameras is purely a marketing ploy. The Carl Zeiss, Leica, Schneider badged lenses on these digicams are made in the same place that the cameras are. At best, the named companies designed the lens. At worst, they simply got paid for their name.

This is not to say that the lenses aren't any good. For example, I have a number of made in Germany Zeiss, Schneider and Rodenstock large format optics, i.e. lenses for use on 4x5 and 8x10 view cameras. They are very good lenses. Nonetheless, my Fujinon and Nikon lenses are just as good. Hence, some lenses made in the orient are outstanding, whereas others are not. So don't let a camera salesperson (I was one once) talk you into a more expensive camera with a fancy-named lens, unless you have some objective evidence that it's worth it.

Just as a side note, during the 1940s, 50s and 60s, Kodak made some of the best camera lenses in the world. I used a 203 Ektar from 1953 for about a decade. I switched because of the dodgy Supermatic shutter, and not because of the optical performance.

Ken Garlock
07-02-2006, 1:49 PM
Our ole buddy Ken Salisbury highly recommends the Canon Rebel.

Hey Ken, jump in.:)

Jim Becker
07-02-2006, 1:59 PM
Everyone has their favorite brand. Ken's is Cannon. Mine is Nikon. There are many very nice cameras available these days...the selection is much better for quality than only a few years ago, too. A lot of the older cameras really were marginal due to the earlier electronics, but today's versions, even the less expensive ones, really take nice pictures.

Ken Fitzgerald
07-02-2006, 2:51 PM
One thing I'd suggest. Try a camera like the one you think you want to buy! I bought my wife a highly rated digital camera. Bought it for her.....didn't test drive it first. While it's got a really nice 10x analog zoom and 4x digital zoom that's never been enabled, the shutter delay sucks! There is a very anoying delay between the time you depress the expose button and the actual moment the shutter activates. End result......I get a lot of comments here and elsewhere about fuzzy..out of focus images. Even when using a tripod it can cause a problem. Test drive one if you can before you buy it!

Bob Weisner
07-02-2006, 3:05 PM
That is the same thing with the old Kodak digital camera I have. :( I press the button and I have to wait 2 or 3 seconds for the camera to actually finish taking the picture. I did not want to get anything fancy. Just a simple easy to use digital camera with a good zoom lens to take good pictures both indoors and outdoors.

Al Willits
07-02-2006, 5:07 PM
Might be easier to help if we knew how much money you planned on spending.
Nikon has some exelent SLR digital camera's for lots of money.
We spent about $200 for a Panasonic that takes great pictures.


Jason Roehl
07-02-2006, 10:29 PM
The "delay" you are experiencing is known in the industry (or at least in the online specs) as "shutter lag". My old Olympus C2100UZ was an excellent camera for its time, but it had the dreaded shutter lag, and we wanted something smaller that we would be more likely to take with us. So, on Father's Day, a Canon Powershot A620 followed us home. 7.1MP, 0.1sec shutter lag (about as good as you'll find without getting one of the high-dollar units), 4x optical, 4x digital, many auto, manual and movie modes It's highly rated by Consumer Reports (#1 in their latest review), but didn't get the "Best Buy" moniker due to its price. However, the price in CR was roughly $100 more than what I paid: a price comparable to the camera model CR termed a "Best Buy". With more batteries, a charger and a 2GB SD card (off eBay for $50 delivered), I spent that $100 difference to bring the total to about $330 or so. The camera was $230 at H.H. Gregg.