Advice on a basic digital camera

[davejonesbkk]

Im looking at buying a basic point and shoot camera for the mrs for when we travel, Id rather not spend more than 10k baht, is that enough and any recommendations?

I saw a Nikon coolpix S6900 for 9,900 on the Nikon site but then saw its about 25% cheaper in the UK where we will be heading soon, are there better prices on cameras in the UK?

[NeverSure]

Hi, There is a Photography and the Arts forum on here. I don't know the answer to your question but those people are up on the latest of things.

I don't know about the UK but I find all electronics and many consumer goods to cost a ton more in Thailand than they do in the US. Many Americans buy themselves a new laptop or camera and anything like that they want on visits.

Sorry I can't be specific.

[lopburi3]

Might it not be better value to buy a good camera/phone? Believe that would be easier to use and always be available - they do have some with good optics these days.

We have cameras but nobody uses them anymore - the phones are used.

[SheungWan]

Some cameras are cheaper and others are more expensive in the UK. For 10,000 baht you can choose anything you want from a vast range. Even the most sophisticated cameras have an auto function so you don't have to restrict yourself totally on the point and shoot spec front. If you are a little bit flexible on the price then go for a pocket zoom camera and consider a Panasonic Lumix with a Leica lens.

[Chicog]

If you are stopping in the middle east then Duty Free is a good option.

I saw them giving away a free (basic) mobile with cheapie cameras simply because they had so much overstock of both.

[xen]

Most people are using phones instead of point and shoot and consquently they have got cheaper and most likely not as well made. I however still use a point and shoot in preference to the iPhone i have for work.

I use a 6 year old cannon IXUS 100IS set on low resolution so i don't have to stuff around with size to insert in a emails or report which will usually be viewed on screen anyway , and only very occasionally i need to email the photo to anybody before i compose a report . It has a date stamp ,( very important for me to verify the dates) and it has an old fashioned view finder so no mucking about with dirty sun light screens etc and framing the photo is much quicker, and the cannon is slightly smaller than a smart phone. I can even do a drive-by photo with it,or moving shot, something i find impossible with the iPhone. This probably doesn't apply to your needs but worth taking into consideration.

I have have had other brands and most of them have been good but nobody seems to want them anymore as everybody likes looking so teck whizz bang with their 30,000 baht samsung or iphone you will probably find somebody with a good camera at the back of their cupboard, the only problem may be the battery or finding the re charger that goes with it.

Or else for a reasonable amount you can look at the compact SLR s like the Olympus PEN or the Sonys with interchanable lens and so on. The best of both worlds but it depends on how serious you or your wife want to get with photography .

[crabdog]

I've had experience with the Nikon Coolpix and Sony Cybershot and both were very good for their intended use. However I would agree with Lopburi3 above that it would be more convenient to have a smartphone with a decent camera. I just recently had a look at the cameras on the Samsung Galaxy 5 and iPhone 6 and they take remarkably good photos. I know that is more than the price you were wanting to pay but if either you or your wife need a new phone go with that over a separate device. In this smartphone age most point and shoot digital cameras spend the majority of their life gathering dust on a shelf.

[Gsxrnz]

It depends if you want to take a snapshot or a photograph.

Phone cameras have certainly improved over the years and many now have apps that give the camera all the apparent flexibility of a DSLR.

However, the final output is largely down to the quality of the lenses. A phone camera lens will not compare to a decent point/shoot, and is a million miles away from a DSLR.

Point and shoots can deliver some pretty outstanding images and if you go further than just using the auto setting and use the other available settings you can get some great results.

If you want decent photos and intend viewing them on a screen larger than a phone screen or having prints made, a decent point and shoot will outdo a phone cam any time IMHO.

But then I'm a firm believer that a phone is a phone, a watch is a watch, and a camera is a camera. I'd rather have them all specialised because you just can't role my Omega Seamaster, my Galaxy s5, and my Canon 6D into one piece of equipment and expect them all to perform like the originals.

[lopburi3]

And that is where I have to disagree - I have stopped wearing a watch as cheap phone gives me access to time and if I don't need the phone I don't need the time. I still have dedicated camera but 99% of the time it sits in a drawer doing nothing. If I were willing to have a smart phone (just have cheap Nokia as not tied to charger and not working so have access to normal computer for internet) I would have good enough camera function to replace unit in drawer (which is really not all that great - cheap film cameras provided a lot more to work with if you did darkroom functions).

I also believe a snapshot can be a photograph and it is more often the person behind the lens than the lens itself that provides the quality. I do accept better quality in the same hands can provide better quality output if used to best advantage - but most casual use people would not have time to study photography/equipment (nor should they be expected to do so) and additional features are likely to be a disadvantage.

Actually wonder why we are stuck with yesterdays technology when HD video is available and cheap and utube is a fact of life - if I had young family suspect I would be using that for memories these days rather than grandfathers (mine) Kodak moments.

[gerryBScot]

Warranty may also be a consideration. If you buy a camera in Thailand from a legit company you'll have some sort of guarantee for repairs etc if it goes wrong. A UK warranty will be useless in Thailand unless you go back to the UK regularly. Given that you are looking at a spend of less than 10K that may not be such a big issue for you. It might also be worth taking a look around MBK in BKK - there seems to be a never ending number of new cameras coming onto the market and this means that 'late' models get reduced and can be picked up at good prices. A late model may suit as your good lady probably doesn't need the latest model with all the bells and whistles. There is one camera store in Bangrak I would recommend and I will happily send you contact details if you wish.

[coulson]

I think point and shoot are redundant and add just another chunk of junk that ends up in your carry on/ day pack. Endless headaches such as incompatible battery chargers/ usb cables that invariably get lost amongst other junk or left behind when you make a trip.

Photograph-wise, the only advantages of a point and shoot is the ability to preset functions for more difficult shots your phone can't make & can be used with a mini stand for low light exposures (another piece of junk that you can lose or forget).

Without functions such as bluetooth/ infrared you need a pc to process, paying for those functions in a camera would make you enter a budget range that could almost get you an entry level DSLR, for all other point and shoot requirements, a good smartphone is the way to go.

[davejonesbkk]

Ok thanks for the input guys. I have weighed up the pros and cons esp against camera phones (myself and the Mrs have iphone 5s) but I think what one person said about the lenses is a valid point. Dont pretty much all camera phones have terrible zooms? Ive always found camera phones only good for mid range or close shots.

Anyone have any experience with the Canon S120 too btw?

[Ace of Pop]

Here's an Apple I phone 6 plus zoom

[Ace of Pop]