The Current State of the P&S Camera Market...

[riverc0il]

Sucks.

The MegaPixel war rages on. At what point will consumers stop thinking "more equals better" and begin realizing we are long past the point of diminishing returns. More MP means longer processing time which means slower continuous shot modes. Horrendous for any action photography in which you have an extremely small window to capture a good shot and most P&S cameras will only let you fire off one shot (at best) per second. That is lame. All for what? More MegaPixels without increases in photo quality? Increased storage space when you just need to resize down the pictures for the internet any ways? More lame.

Here is all I want: A digital P&S camera that takes respectable picture quality for a P&S with a FRIGGIN VIEW FINDER (or at least a LCD that does not freeze or black out between continuous shots) and a full quality continuous shot mode of 2.0fps or better. Way too much to ask I guess, at least for less than three bills. Ricoh CX1 almost seemed to fit the bill but without a view finder, the LCD shows each shot which is not great for action. Canon P&S models are all shooting at a lower fps than when I bought my most recent Canon (I think 1.5 is the best they offer whereas my last PowerShot A Series was 1.7fps as I recall).

Why the heck did my dog go and chew up my camera? Okay, why the heck did I leave it out on the counter and turn my back? I am stunned that at least one camera is not offered with these specs in a reasonable price range without dropping the MP down excessively or lowering quality.

/rant

 

[polski]

I certainly don't mean to laugh at your misfortune, but ... your dog ate your camera? Chewed, whatever -- first time I've ever heard of anything like that.

 

[mondeo]

He left it next to his homework.

 

[Clarkl23]

Steve,

What are you calling a P&S, something on the pocket-able end or just not a camera with interchangeable lenses. I think the latest version of the Canon S series, SX1 I think, which looks like a small interchangable style camera, but with a permanent lens is something like 4 fps. I have a number of Canon's (I'm a professional photographer in the real world) and I think their frame rate will go up slightly if you choose a smaller image size. I agree, most cameras are now overkill if you want them just for web or small prints, but my personal P&S is a G10 which is 15 mpix, but again that's because clients will call me at odd times knowing I almost always have it with me and it's a matter of shoot right then or not at all because a piece of equipment is about to be put into a shipping crate. I can attest to the ruggedness of the G10. I fell on it while hauling gear down from a race course and didn't realize I was about to ski over the finish area netting which had only been laid down and not rolled up. I weigh about 235 and the greatest damage was to my ribs.

I think the biggest issue with shooting while skiing is how do you carry a decent camera in a way that doesn't cause impact damage to you or the camera if you fall. Back in my really crazy days I use to ski with a Canon F-1 with drive and a 100-300 f/4 lens, but with that swinging around my neck I was always a bit more careful.

Clark

 

[riverc0il]

I certainly don't mean to laugh at your misfortune, but ... your dog ate your camera? Chewed, whatever -- first time I've ever heard of anything like that.

Oh, laugh away, by all means. Laughing about these things is the only thing that keeps me sane. It has become my firm believe that a dog's inclination to cause mischief is directly correlated with how cute they look. And at this point, I am starting to think about beating my dog with an ugly stick.

She got a hold of my camera and started chewing it, which broke off the battery door. She did not bother eating any of the batteries that fell out (thankfully) but she did effectively make my current camera useless as there is no way to get the thing powered up.

 

[riverc0il]

Steve,

What are you calling a P&S, something on the pocket-able end or just not a camera with interchangeable lenses.

Should have specified, I am looking at compact models. When you make the jump into the $500+ market, the quality goes significantly upwards in regards to these types of specs. But I don't take photography seriously enough to merit that kind of price tag nor do I have that kind of money. The lower end of the Cannon S series is in my price range but the continuous shooting on the lower end of the S line is dog slow.

 

[RootDKJ]

I'm pretty happy with the Canon SD790 I bought last year. If my dog ate my camera :lol:, I'd get the same model again.

 

[severine]

I don't have advice, but my sister's Mastiff ate her camera, too. Just so you feel better about it.

 

[riverc0il]

I'm pretty happy with the Canon SD790 I bought last year. If my dog ate my camera :lol:, I'd get the same model again.

1.3fps continuous shooting. Dog slow.

 

[riverc0il]

Alright, I am getting sick of spending all this time looking for something that does not exist. So I am going to hit up eBay and get something used. Probably another PowerShot A series back when Canon sold cameras with more than 1.2 fps continuous shooting. If I went new, it seemed to be a tie between the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1K (without view finder) or the Sony 130 (but I really hate Sony for not using SD cards... I just hate Sony in general for being Sony, but it had a viewfinder).

Hey, but why settle? I can get better cheap P&S cameras used from two years ago compared to the stuff they are rolling out now (at least as far as important features for skiing actions shots on a camera that costs less than a pair of skis). Better IS options now but whatev. Used market here I come.

 

[wa-loaf]

This looks promising. No viewfinder. 3fps, designed to work in cold weather ...

http://www.casio.com/news/content/70DAC92D-E73A-4069-9F4A-97996227B7D6/

 

[riverc0il]

This looks promising. No viewfinder. 3fps, designed to work in cold weather ...

http://www.casio.com/news/content/70DAC92D-E73A-4069-9F4A-97996227B7D6/

Not really that good when you read between the lines....

Approx. 3 frames per second at 1600 x 1200 pixels (Up to 8 shots)

That is probably right around the 3MP limit for high speed shooting that many cheap P&S on the market currently have. You can shoot high FPS in continuous mode but limited size, not a big buffer (in this case, you can't even shoot for 3 seconds continuously before stopping), and while it does not say it in the specs.... often times these types of cameras force a higher ISO (this may or may not be the case with this particular camera). Essentially, that is no better than cameras currently on the market. Also, Casio image quality seems suspect in general when compared to other equal models from other manufacturers.

As a general update to this thread, I bought a used Canon A570 off eBay for less than a bill shipped in really good condition. At 7.1 MP, 4x zoom, and 1.7 fps (no buffer limit) continuous shooting, it is almost the same as my old Canon A630 with the additional benefit of IS. I will revisit the market place once the CMOS trickles down to the cheaper models and continuous shooting at low ISO and full image quality with a reasonable buffer start being options for less than $600.

 

[Geoff]

Steve,

What are you calling a P&S, something on the pocket-able end or just not a camera with interchangeable lenses. I think the latest version of the Canon S series, SX1 I think, which looks like a small interchangable style camera, but with a permanent lens is something like 4 fps. I have a number of Canon's (I'm a professional photographer in the real world) and I think their frame rate will go up slightly if you choose a smaller image size. I agree, most cameras are now overkill if you want them just for web or small prints, but my personal P&S is a G10 which is 15 mpix, but again that's because clients will call me at odd times knowing I almost always have it with me and it's a matter of shoot right then or not at all because a piece of equipment is about to be put into a shipping crate. I can attest to the ruggedness of the G10. I fell on it while hauling gear down from a race course and didn't realize I was about to ski over the finish area netting which had only been laid down and not rolled up. I weigh about 235 and the greatest damage was to my ribs.

I think the biggest issue with shooting while skiing is how do you carry a decent camera in a way that doesn't cause impact damage to you or the camera if you fall. Back in my really crazy days I use to ski with a Canon F-1 with drive and a 100-300 f/4 lens, but with that swinging around my neck I was always a bit more careful.

Clark

I was kind of pissed when Canon released the PowerShot G11 and didn't add high def video. It's still VGA. On the hill, I do way more video clips than stills.

 

[Clarkl23]

I know what you mean. The 11 came out just a couple of months after I bought my 10, but it seemed like 1 step forward, 2 steps back with the features. I've started doing more clips as well and it was surprising it wasn't HD. Canon is doing strange things with video on a lot of its cameras, maybe because they'd rather sell you both a P&S as well as a small video camera. Me, I want one of the Go Pro helmet video cameras!

It'll be interesting to see how long it takes for CMOS sensors to get into the P&S's. Canon used one in their higher end SX1IS, but it didn't get the greatest review on DP Review.

Clark