Best Camera for best price

[ameh78]

I am in the market for a new camera.. My old camera was hot stuff when i got it, now...it makes me sad lol.. the macro doesnt work as well and it just frustrates the heck out of me.

My budget - $300. I could go higher.. but im trying to keep it as low as possible.

I really want two things with my camera - Killer Macro shots and good color for shooting nature pics.

I am a macro ho and love love love taking macro shots of things.

So far i have found this camera - COOLPIX S8000. Does anyone have this camera or has anyone worked with it?

I love all these great macro shots I see people do on here but.. yeah im cheap and dont want to spend the huge bucks for the biggies.

[sheffernan13]

If you are not wanting to purchase an DSLR then the camera that I had that I loved was the sony H20 it took near SLR photos and it was around 250.00

[RhacHead]

SLR is the way to go.I personally use a canon Xsi which you could pick up for around $600 I know that is more than you want to spend but you can do Sooooo much more with a DSLR including get diffrent lenses to achieve the diffrent types of shots you would like to take.There are other models that are cheaper such as the XS(slr) but I would skip a point and shoot altogether if you really want to take excellent photos.

[Beardedragon]

Look into the Sony CyperShot DSC-H7. It takes AMAZING pictures, macros, and is not super expensive.

[MustBeSatan]

I recently bought a camera in preparation for a trip to Germany. I decided to look for a camera with a full manual setting, because I've never used one and would like to learn more about it. Like you, my budget stopped me just short of the cheapest DSLR's.

I ended up getting a Canon SX20 IS and I can't say enough good things about it. Full auto to full manual with everything in between! 20x optical zoom, macro and super macro settings. 720p video! It's a little above your price range, but I would definately recommend looking at Ultrazoom cameras. Sure, you could probably get slightly better results with an SLR, but while you're unscrewing, and putting away your telefocal lens to switch to a macro, I've already flipped the switch, got the shot and am moving on. Lets not forget that any additional lens you want to get for your SLR can easily cost as much as the camera itself.

Just my thoughts

[Darkice]

This is my camera and also where i bought it from. I love new egg.
Also i love this camera. Its all automated so i dont have to learn how to use it. But it doesn't take video and thats the only draw back. But the pics it does take are Awesome.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16830120278

[MustBeSatan]

Nice camera, Darkice. You should take some time to learn the non-auto functions though. You'll be glad you did!

[Oxylepy]

DSLRs are pretty awesome, however the costs of them are astronomical. First off they often come with a zoom lens, which means you will end up with some distortion in your pictures due to how the angle of light taken in cuts through the glass, it's a heck of a lot worse if that zoom lens is bellow the 35mm mark. Personally I'm a fan of a nice lens with a good aperture rating, and a close minimum distance and those will run you in the 300+ range alone.

If you have a budget of a few hundred dollars and you save up for a DSLR, you're going to be stuck with whatever lens it comes with, and you probably arent going to shell out 600 dollars for a new lens.

Dont let people try and convince you to save for one unless you can support the purchasing of lenses in the future, and a tripod, case, lens filters, and ultimately setting up lighting. Just find a nice all in one camera unless you really want to get into photography.

Just kind of ranting because I've had a DSLR for years and have barely done anything with it because I never spent the 600 on the lens I want, and with the lenses I have the apertures arent large enough to do decent night photography, either end of the zoom lenses look crumby, etc. So unless you know you can afford that amazing awesome superfly lens you want, it isnt worth it. And everyone seems to hype them up, like a little clique trying to suck you in, but they fail to mention the downfalls that SLRs have always had. But any photography book would tell you about all the costs, how many lenses you end up needing, etc.

[Lolo76]

I had a cheaper version of the Coolpix, but will say I was NOT happy with it... I found the photos to be grainy overall, and forget about getting decent indoor or macro. In fact, I disliked it enough that I quickly replaced it - and gave the Coolpix to my roommate. My new camera is a Panasonic Lumix, purchased on sale at Best Buy for like $130. So far I think it's great!

Check out this close-up shot... no special settings, aside from hitting the "macro" (flower) button.



Now compare with a close-up from my Coolpix, taken in the same exact spot & lighting... not bad, but this was the closest I could get without blurring or washing out.

[Lolo76]

Oh, and here are a couple of outdoor shots with the Panasonic Lumix... I need to study the settings, because I just had it on "auto" for these. So they could definitely be better!