Seems Deb's found a solution and rather than start a new thread perhaps this is as good a place to start as any?

My criteria AA, point and shoot, flat pocket-able point and shoot cam under $200. Now I've found a lot of interesting possibilities within the price range but most I've considered don't fall into the pocket carry category. Sooner or later I will buy a large camera with extra features out of simple desire but my immediate need is for a camera similar in size and features to my current clunker which will soon become the tackle box camera or random work truck spare. It's a 10 megapixel General Electric branded made in China. It has been a decent camera for what it is and my uses but I would like to work my way into a camera brand camera with a little more "oomph". It was a gift and it works, no cash or trade value, I'll use it until it dies (and if nothing else it has been reliable).

My uses are as general as anyone else, I am not a photographer nor do I aspire to be. But I do desire a better camera.

Considering yet another sub $100 unit, the Nikon Coolpix S3600 @99 bucks . I figure at that price point it's no major loss if it breaks or gets damaged. Obviously most cameras under a few thousand dollars aren't cost effectively repaired. Doubling my budget offers so much more, but I need a back pocket camera most of all.

Curious about opinions / experience with general purpose pocket size cameras of recent manufacture.

Any input appreciated!

Wes,

We've got an earlier version of this one and it kind of frustrates me with how slow it is to acquire focus. Also, the S3600 doesn't take AAs so that doesn't meet that criterion that you mentioned. The amazon.com reviews look okay, in the main, but this site isn't kind to it : http://www.dpreview.com/produc...

The dpreview.com site has a search feature that's really fantastic here:
http://www.dpreview.com/produc...

I put in the criteria for "ultra compact" and "compact" using AAs and AAAs and came up with this one as maybe a good choice, tho I'm reluctant to recommend what I haven't used:
http://www.dpreview.com/produc...

It's a little pricier at $150, but...I'm not particularly a fan of Nikon pocket cameras. This one also has a viewfinder in addition to the LCD screen...which is kind of a must for me, at least.

Mostly, I guess, it comes down to how you want to use the camera. Neither of the two mentioned (the Nikon and Canon) would work very well for me because they shoot at a maximum of 1 frame-per-second. And that's just too slow for some of the stuff that I like to do. But that's not going to be a concern for everyone.

I suggest you fool around with the search feature on the dpreview site and see what you can come up with and then have a look at the reviews across the Web. There's a side-by-side comparison feature there, too (the auto-focus assist lamp in the Canon is huge...less hunting for focus under many conditions):
http://www.dpreview.com/produc...

I'm interested to know what you end up getting - and more importantly how you like it.

(finally, here's a side-by-side-by-side with the one that I think I really like...but it's more a pocket cube than a pocket card):
http://www.dpreview.com/produc...

But you can see the difference in features and usability going up in size.

evermorelawnless said:Shady,

What did you like best about having a film camera? Apart from the simplicity, I mean?

What lens(es) do you have for the Sony?

When you decide to upgrade, my advice would be to find a brand that you like and be loyal to it...because as I'm sure you know, it gets to be about collecting lenses pretty fast. I'm partial to Pentax (from my first K-1000), but there are other fine brands, too.

I actually liked working in the darkroom and being creative with the materials. In alternative process, I did an experiment on the best watercolor paper to use. I still have that diary. I must have tested 100 types of paper. I liked the hands on process.

My work life is spent 99% on a computer. The last thing I want to do is to photoshop my photos on a computer. It is like work to me.

So I'd rather take a hundred photos to get the "shot" rather than depend on photoshop to make any repairs or changes.

Thankfully I only have one lens for the Sony so far as I was contemplating a Pentax. I learned on the K1000 and I do like the brand a lot. I was going to purchase their medium format before the rest of the world went digital.

The lens came standard with the camera body. It is the 18-70/DT 3.5-5.6 and has macro stamped on it, but I know it is not a real "macro" lens. It can take the 055mm filter size.

I already have a substantial Bogen tripod so I don't need any help in that department.

Which Pentax do you recommend? I'm really thinking about just keeping this camera as a backup. I really kind of dislike using it and many times I just use my iPhone instead.

Melissa,

I'd look at the Pentax K-3. We have one and we love it. And the price has dropped precipitously. But then it becomes a question of how much you want to put into lenses, of course. Pentax has also announced a full-frame camera which is really, really interesting. And that might be worth waiting for (although it's going to be monstrously expensive at first).

The K-3 doesn't have nearly as many automatic presets as others do...so the learning curve is steeper. But it might annoy you less.

Sorry that today's darkroom is about the mouse rather then the visceral. Don't know what to say there. However...I still shoot 100 shots looking for the "right one". Or more, really.

The other side of this is that you might just end up hating the digital world...so a substantial investment in great gear might not be the right answer. The other thing is there are a lot of online places (and around here, local places) that will let you rent a specific camera and lens combo for a few days (tho I've not seen any Pentax offered online that way). So maybe try that and see how you feel about using a professional-level camera (shooting RAW) and processing what you shoot? Dunno. But the K-3 is a fantastic camera and has really produced some stunning results for us (even me).

Thanks, Asa.

I read the reviews and it seems perfect for what I want. I love that it has extra weather sealant. I sometimes take photos at the horse shows and it is dirty and dusty. I have no use for the video part because I have my own pro video set up (that actually needs to be upgraded).

If I can score a deal on one, I may pick it up. I need to figure out which lens to start with. I usually go for a portrait lens as it has the basic mid range and enough close up functionality to be useful. Right now, I am only interested in my orchid photos and many are minis. I will probably have to figure in a macro at some point.

This orchid is about 1/16" from petal to petal. I took this with my iPhone last summer.

Melissa,

The weather sealing is indeed a big deal. And it works. The only weather-sealed lens that we have is the 100mm (macro) and it's pretty amazing (tho the bokeh doesn't compare to the Tamron 90mm macro - but it lacks the weather sealing).

If I were going to get only one lens for the K-3 (and weather sealing were an issue), I'd get the 18-135mm WR. It's comparatively quick and people have been getting some pretty astonishing results from it - even fairly close:

http://www.pentaxforums.com/fo...

It's obviously not a prime, but there's something to be said for having a capable zoom, too.

Asa,

Those are some inspiring photos! That really makes me want to pick up the camera again. I basically swore them off when everything went digital, because I didn't want to make the investment until they refined the cameras and the prices came down to earth.

I will have to begin my search.

One thing to remember about the mid-sized sensor-frame cameras is they place the lens farther away from the sensor than traditional SLRs do from the film. The effective result of that is a 1.5 multiplier to the focal length.

In other words, if you use a 50mm legacy lens, it will behave as if were a 75mm lens on a DSLR. So the 100mm macro lens that I shoot a lot of shots with on the K-3 is acting like a 150mm lens would on my K-1000.

Hope that makes sense. So if you want a regular "nifty fifty" to use as a prime, get a 35mm for that focal length (effectively 52.5mm).

Asa, I appreciate your reply and links. The comparison feature beats shopping Amazon or box store websites. Very cool and it doesn't hurt that I'm not in a huge hurry but I do want a better camera by July. Daylily season 'round here. And pretty much everything else that I enjoy most.

The AA thing, I have a dozen and AC/DC chargers. Not a must as much as a convenience. 3600 came up on a web store search but I obviously skipped a step or clicked a related ad.

The DP review site is bookmarked and certainly will be helpful in making a choice.

I've got a buddy that just dropped 3k on a camera. Not a photographer but he aspires to be. Same guy bought a high end famous electric guitar to play a video game with no formal guitar lessons.

Cheers to good credit!

I'll die broken, not broke.

evermorelawnless said:One thing to remember about the mid-sized sensor-frame cameras is they place the lens farther away from the sensor than traditional DSLRs do from the film. The effective result of that is a 1.5 multiplier to the focal length.

In other words, if you use a 50mm legacy lens, it will behave as if were a 75mm lens on a DSLR. So the 100mm macro lens that I shoot a lot of shots with on the K-3 is acting like a 150mm lens would on my K-1000.

Hope that makes sense. So if you want a regular "nifty fifty" to use as a prime, get a 35mm for that focal length (effectively 52.5mm).

Well, I learn something new every day. I had no idea that the focal length was different on the DSLRs! I did know that the higher ISOs caused what we called "grainy" and is now called "digital noise." I used to shoot Ilford 120 ISO100 and ISO400 film because it was very easy to manipulate.

I want to avoid noise issues especially for closeup photos. I'm thinking the lens you originally suggested is a great starter.

evermorelawnless said:One thing to remember about the mid-sized sensor-frame cameras is they place the lens farther away from the sensor than traditional DSLRs do from the film. The effective result of that is a 1.5 multiplier to the focal length.

Should read:

One thing to remember about the mid-sized sensor-frame cameras (DSLRs) is they place the lens farther away from the sensor than traditional SLRs do from the film. The effective result of that is a 1.5 multiplier to the focal length.

Also, for reference, we're talking mostly the APS-C size range here because that's the range in nearly all DSLRs (whereas the size of 35mm film is shown in the illustration as "full-frame"):

Coming full circle back to this thread, I used the Sony A100 DSLR all year and just as I was starting to get the hang of it and really producing some nice results, I tripped over the tripod (camera attached) and down it went. Of course, it hit right on the corner where all of the technology resides. Hubby fooled with it and it still works, but the frame sensor is all screwed up. When I look in the view finder, that is not what comes out on the display screen.

Because of this, I have to bracket in order to get in frame. When I am at home it is no biggie, but when I am trying to photograph for the judging center it is a lot of pressure.

So after 3 months of trying to make it work, I decided to upgrade. I found a nice deal on eBay for a Nikon D5200 that had less than 5 shutter clicks. Standard kit lens Nikkor 18-55mm. Plus it had a 32GB SD card, wireless remote, wireless adapter, extra battery, and the Nikon D5200 field manual. $450 and included a case as well.

I decided on the Nikon instead of the Pentax because of the price and lens availability for the price. I love Pentax, but the Nikon was so significantly less expensive for very close in the quality based on reviews. I am hopeful that the Nikon is more user friendly than the Sony.

I looked at the Sony A300 first and decided against it because of the extreme proprietary nature of Sony. This really limits the lens availability. We will keep the A100 as a backup for now, but likely I will list it for parts on eBay at some point in the future.

I have looked into the macro lenses for the Nikon and there are many reviews. Not sure yet what I will get. I want to see what the limits are on the 18-55mm lens. I hope that I have made a good choice. It should arrive on Wednesday.

It's so rotten that happened to your camera Melissa. But I bet you're happy you're getting a newer, better one. Show us photos when you get it!

Melissa, that sounds like a great deal on a great camera. Congratulations. When I was looking at the specs, I noticed this firmware update mentioned:

http://www.dpreview.com/articl...