Digital Camera for £100

[Nifty1Pound50]

That's the challenge. What is the best digital camera available on the market, at a limit of £100 (for the camera). Additional costs for memory, rechargeable batteries and a case can be added.

I'm currently looking at a Samsung S85, pictured below. It has an 8.2mp resolution, with a 5x optical zoom (plus 5x digital).

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0707/Samsung/samsung_S85-001.jpg

Cameras, however, have never been a strong point of mine. Can you find me a better camera for the budget? Excellent. Please do. :happy:

[ads]

Have a goose here mate http://www.pesgaming.com/showthread.php?t=56254

;)

[Original?]

Samsung do not make particularly good digital cameras in my opinion, there are better models available from more reputable manufacturers. The only intriguing aspect is the 5x optical zoom, which is hardly a necessity for most and will certainly bulk up the camera. Here are a few suggestions, price low to high.

Nikon Coolpix S200

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21n09L83zfL._AA160_.jpg

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21n09L83zfL._AA160_.jpg - £93

Olympus FE-280

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21FKkXN3AZL._AA160_.jpg

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Olympus-FE-280-Compact-Digital-Camera/dp/B000VAI8FI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1200524971&sr=1-1 - £99

Canon Ixus 70

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21%2BRri4WbDL._AA160_.jpg

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-IXUS-70-Digital-Camera/dp/B000NUWJOM/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1200524484&sr=1-4 - £126

Canon Powershot 720IS

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21eCG23vlbL._AA160_.jpg

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-2092B008-Powershot-A720-Silver/dp/B000V3OC3M/ref=sr_1_38?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1200524544&sr=1-38 - £133

It should come as little surprise that you get what you pay for, the 720IS is a fantastic camera and if you can afford it, it's worth paying the extra if you want that extra bit of zoom and some crisp photos. For the truly compact cameras it's between the Olympus FE-280 and the Ixus 70 as I'm not a huge Nikon fan. Though overall the 720IS is just the out right winner.

[EDIT]
TrustedReviews Verdict
The Canon PowerShot A720 IS is an ideal camera for anyone who wants a bit more creative control than most pocket compacts can provide, and would be an excellent choice for anyone who wants to learn more about photography. Build quality, design and performance are all first rate, image quality is superb and the range of features is hard to match at the price. Battery duration could be a problem, but the ready availability of AA batteries offsets this somewhat. - I'm not just making all this crap up!

[Kevthedrummer]

I just recently got the fujifilm finepix s5700 (for christmas) and it cost 116 pounds (if that's not too much? Includes postage)...

7.1 megapixel... 10x optical zoom, looks like an SLR (very posh) and has really good manual controls (if you fancy being arty) perfect for normal daily use as well.

I'll try and upload some pictures at a later date.

[Original?]

I just recently got the fujifilm finepix s5700 (for christmas) and it cost 116 pounds (if that's not too much? Includes postage)...

7.1 megapixel... 10x optical zoom, looks like an SLR (very posh) and has really good manual controls (if you fancy being arty) perfect for normal daily use as well.

I'll try and upload some pictures at a later date.

A decent camera for the money though the 10x optical without OIS is disconcerting but it is a very good price. For the most part though, it's the size of a small SLR which is the problem for most. The 720IS is smaller, better image quality, manual controls and still has a 6x optical zoom which is roughly the equivalent of 210mm lens on an SLR, which is more than enough for most people.

[mufcsean]

Yeah i had a Samsung camera and i must agree it was shit. I have a Canon one now and that is a great camera.

[Nifty1Pound50]

I tried that Samsung camera out I was considering buying, as someone at work has it - it's awful.

It has the world's brightest flash, entirely ruining the colours of any pictures you take with it on. I'm very much a novice at this whole camera stuff - but surely these new cameras are meant to take photos that are better than their analogue counterparts?

[Original?]

I tried that Samsung camera out I was considering buying, as someone at work has it - it's awful.

It has the world's brightest flash, entirely ruining the colours of any pictures you take with it on. I'm very much a novice at this whole camera stuff - but surely these new cameras are meant to take photos that are better than their analogue counterparts?

Not really, for a long time digital cameras produced a worse picture than an analogue. You're also doing a somewhat unfair test as the Samsung is dire, pick up a real camera and then see what you think.

[Nifty1Pound50]

Not really, for a long time digital cameras produced a worse picture than an analogue. You're also doing a somewhat unfair test as the Samsung is dire, pick up a real camera and then see what you think.

So what you're saying to me is that Samsung have released a camera for £100, which granted has fairly clear 8mp images, with a flash that is so excessive it ruins any picture it takes? This to me seems far-fetched, although I am happy to accept it as true if someone says so.

Having consulted the powers-that-be (the camera isn't for me), here is the specification of what this camera needs to do.

Take a good quality photograph (this generally isn't an issue as the base mega-pixelage is fairly high these days). However, what seems to be the most pressing concern is that she wants to be able to simply turn the camera on, not have to fiddle with settings, point it, shoot it, and have a good quality photo. She then wants to be able to move from the dimly-lit room to the back garden, filled with natural light (be it sunny or a bit cloudy or overcast but moderately bright - obviously night is a different matter!), and point the fucking thing and shoot it again, and to get a result that reflects what the eye can see.

I wouldn't have thought that to take a photo where the colours of objects are true-to-life, with the light provision being that of the surroundings, was such an unreasonable demand!

Middle-aged women and technology don't mix. However, I have the rather annoying problem that she won't listen to my advice and actually go to a shop to see for herself whether the camera she's considering buying is "usable" because she "has no time."

[Original?]

So what you're saying to me is that Samsung have released a camera for £100, which granted has fairly clear 8mp images, with a flash that is so excessive it ruins any picture it takes? This to me seems far-fetched, although I am happy to accept it as true if someone says so.

Having consulted the powers-that-be (the camera isn't for me), here is the specification of what this camera needs to do.

Take a good quality photograph (this generally isn't an issue as the base mega-pixelage is fairly high these days). However, what seems to be the most pressing concern is that she wants to be able to simply turn the camera on, not have to fiddle with settings, point it, shoot it, and have a good quality photo. She then wants to be able to move from the dimly-lit room to the back garden, filled with natural light (be it sunny or a bit cloudy or overcast but moderately bright - obviously night is a different matter!), and point the fucking thing and shoot it again, and to get a result that reflects what the eye can see.

I wouldn't have thought that to take a photo where the colours of objects are true-to-life, with the light provision being that of the surroundings, was such an unreasonable demand!

Middle-aged women and technology don't mix. However, I have the rather annoying problem that she won't listen to my advice and actually go to a shop to see for herself whether the camera she's considering buying is "usable" because she "has no time."

What I'm telling you is that the Samsung cameras are poor as they're made by people who have little knowledge of how to make a good camera. Mega-pixels mean little if you don't have the lens and the chip to make the use of them. Megapixels are just the resolution the sensor can save the photo as, however when the lens isn't of a high enough standard, the sensor and chip's colour reproduction are poor it doesn't matter what resolution you save it at you'll just have a high quality render of a poor image. What I'm telling you is that Samsung have released a £100 (cheap) digital camera with a high number of megapixels to sell to misinformed customers, sound plausible? Good.

It would be possible to get a better photo out of that Samsung but you would have to mess with the setting profusely and continuously. Unfortunately you get what you pay for, I've just listed above four cameras all of which will meet the specification before you even posted the specification, the reason being that I sell cameras to people all day and know what the average person wants. Point and shoot any one of those cameras and they will give you good results in any weather, because the chips are programmed to work out the settings for you.