Point and Shoot Camera

[santosh_kumar8]

<p>Hi,<br>

I want to buy a easy to use compact camera, which can be used by any one in the family.<br>

I have shortlisted Nikon s6300, Panasonic SZ7 and Sony DSC WX50.<br>

Though S6300 looks tempting because of its long zoom and features at its price, I have heard its picture quality is not very good in varied condition.<br>

The SZ7 and WX50 boast of good lenses from leica and Carl Zeiss and better build quality.<br>

I would appreciate if any one could help me in deciding between these cameras purely based on image quality especially in low light conditions.<br>

Regards.</p>

<p> </p>

[ralf_j.]

<p>Recommend SZ7, very good reliability, build and image quality. In the class that you are buying you will get a very decent point and shoot, but don't expect miracles in low light shooting. See Amazon for reviews by users like us; you should be able to distinguish 'mom and pop' type reviews from more serious hobbyists on a budget. Also consider DMC-zs15, Adorama has it for $40 more. Has longer zoom and superb image quality (have this one myself). Good luck.</p>

[Stock-Photos]

<p>Two features I strongly recommend in a point and shoot:</p>

<ol>

<li>An "optical" viewfinder (composing a shot via the LCD can be awkward for many people)</li>

<li>An ergonomic hand-grip</li>

</ol>

[dthew]

<p>The Sony has the ability to get more low light shots for two reasons. First, at 25mm it has a wider aperture than the Panasonic by 0.5 f-stop (f2.6 for Sony, f/3.1 for Pana). Secondly, the Sony goes up to ISO12,800 whereas the Pana only goes up to ISO1600, so this is effectively another 3 f-stops. Having said that, high ISO shots invariably become more grainy and thus although the Sony can take pics in lower light conditions, the image quality might not be good enough anyway.<br>

There is a <a href=" scene on Flickr from the Sony at ISO6400</a> and you can start to see the graininess, particularly in the sky and the darker areas at the bottom of the pic.<br>

The trade off with the Sony is that it only zooms to 125mm equiv. with an aperture of f/6.3, whereas the Pana zooms to 250mm equiv. with an aperture of f/5.9 at the long end.</p>

[ann_overland]

<p>If you don't mind a more DSLR like bridge camera, you have the Panasonic Lumix <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz200/13">DMC-FZ200</a> It has a 25mm to 600mm Leica zoom, with a constant f2.8. Flickr group <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/cybergate9/8235783134/in/pool-2060141@N22/">samples</a>.</p>

[edbrown]

<p>I used a Panasonic Lumix tz5 for a long time and found it light, easy to use. It took pretty good pictures. my daughter has used one and liked it as well. Recently I bought a Sony Rx100. It has a relatively large sensor, which appealed to me. I ignored the fact that it was overpriced. I haven't noticed any better performance than I got with my tz5. The Rx 100 is also heavier and the controls are not as easy to access as on the tz 5.</p>