Best camera for around =?iso-8859-1?Q?=A3400=3F?=

I'll supplement David's response with a passing mention of the Canon (I
remembered about the extra 'n' this time - there isn't one) S1 IS

Just a little tip too - for cropping make sure you max R&R first then crop
afterwards

look for the phrase "superfine" or "super-fine" associated with JPEG image
formats

Have fun on the search and remember that the more twiddly bits there are on
the camera usually mean the more complicated it is to use (but the default
Auto mode seems just right in most cases)

Keep us in the picture - it doesn't seem fair asking without sharing
afterwards

10X zoom? (or more?) Nothing less will suffive for me

Aerticeus

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor.RemoveThis@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:30obg7F33bpd4U1@uni-berlin.de...
 > Odie Ferrous wrote:
  >> Just lost my Olympus C3020 to the toilet (thanks daughter.)
 >
 >
 > The mind bog/gles!
 >
 > []
  >> Do I go for another Olympus (the C5060) which is only 4x optical zoom
  >> or do I consider the Panasonic Lumix DMCFZ20BB?
 >
 > The Panasonic FZ20 is a camera with fine optics, good image quality and
 > full controls. The image stabilisation is excellent, and is you want the
 > longer zoom IS is the way to go. F/2.8 leans across the zoom range. Try
 > one down at your local Jessops or whatever. There has been some
 > discussion about the camera (and others) in the new ZLR group:
 >
 > rec.photo.digital.zlr
 >
 > For low shutter lag, either pre-focus or use manual focus. DSLRs may give
 > you less lag but are very expensive in other aspects (size, weight and
 > cost).
 >
 > Cheers,
 > David
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Best camera for around =?iso-8859-1?Q?=A3400=3F?= 

Aerticeus wrote:
[]
 > look for the phrase "superfine" or "super-fine" associated with JPEG
 > image formats

With respect, these terms indicating JPEG quality level are meaningless
between camera brands. They might as well call the levels 1, 2, 3 or
Good, Better, Best, or (as Nikon do) Basic, Normal and Fine. What matters
is the quality achieved by the JEPG compression at the file size you can
tolerate (if you weren't worried about file size you would be shooting
RAW). There are parameters which the manufacturer can tune within the
JPEG compression algorithm to make it more suited to a particular camera.

Unfortunately this tuning varies widely between camera brands with Nikon
having some of the best results and Minolta some of the worst results that
I have seen in my own comparative tests.

Cheers,
David<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Best camera for around =?iso-8859-1?Q?=A3400=3F?= 

Good point DJT - it's an even slippier slope than I thought

To the OP: zoom in on the camera display looking for hard edge artefacts -
they usually indicate aggressive compression & sharpening dsp circuitry

Aerticeus

Ta DJT - this is new to me. I was assuming med, fine superfine were
technical terms from official terms or nomenclature

A

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor.TakeThisOut@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:30osmkF32n4jjU1@uni-berlin.de...
 > Aerticeus wrote:
 > []
  >> look for the phrase "superfine" or "super-fine" associated with JPEG
  >> image formats
 >
 > With respect, these terms indicating JPEG quality level are meaningless
 > between camera brands. They might as well call the levels 1, 2, 3 or
 > Good, Better, Best, or (as Nikon do) Basic, Normal and Fine. What matters
 > is the quality achieved by the JEPG compression at the file size you can
 > tolerate (if you weren't worried about file size you would be shooting
 > RAW). There are parameters which the manufacturer can tune within the
 > JPEG compression algorithm to make it more suited to a particular camera.
 >
 > Unfortunately this tuning varies widely between camera brands with Nikon
 > having some of the best results and Minolta some of the worst results that
 > I have seen in my own comparative tests.
 >
 > Cheers,
 > David
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Best camera for around =?iso-8859-1?Q?=A3400=3F?=