The only real requirement is 3x or greater optical zoom that needs to be integrated (i.e. the lens doesn't telescope out of the body, which is usually the first thing to go wrong.) Probably going to be a second-hand or refurb purchase, because I don't care about shiny and pristine.
I've looked at some Nikon Coolpix and Fuji Finepix models (and have an old Coolpix S1), but they review badly for image quality and for blurry indoor / low light images. I'd rather have a Canon lens if at all possible, but the only integrated optical zoom assembly I've seen on their models is the D10, and that's a premium offering for being an underwater model.
Image stabilisation would be a plus.
Or can anyone recommend a review site that lets you filter by this sort of stuff?
edit: Leaning towards looking for a Panasonic DMC FP1 after Christmas. Anyone used a recent Panasonic camera?
Any digital camera recommendations?
Panasonic makes some good cameras. The Leica sourced lenses are nice in models that have them. Their large aperture zoom lenses are especially good at telephoto range (not too long ago they has a constant aperture Leica-lensed zoom model that was sweet, especially in low light where many narrow aperture zoom lenses have problems).
But the FP1 has, I believe, a "wide angle" that's the rough equivalent to a 35mm lens for 35mm photography ... not very wide at all so that you may have difficulty getting enough in when taking pictures up close. An FH model — which has a 28mm claimed equivalent — would be much handier. The FX with 24mm equivalent may be handier still if you frequent places where the picture taking is especially constraining (say if your favorite bar has small booths and narrow isles).
But the FP1 has, I believe, a "wide angle" that's the rough equivalent to a 35mm lens for 35mm photography ... not very wide at all so that you may have difficulty getting enough in when taking pictures up close. An FH model — which has a 28mm claimed equivalent — would be much handier. The FX with 24mm equivalent may be handier still if you frequent places where the picture taking is especially constraining (say if your favorite bar has small booths and narrow isles).
Standup Philosopher
"Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball"
"Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball"
Possibly Leica in the same way Pulsar are Seiko, but I can't see much to complain about in test shots. Barrel distortion and what might be termed a "Dreamwave effect" does annoy, so lack of wide angle isn't a deal-breaker;
http://www.cameras.co.uk/comparisons/pa ... c-w310.cfm
If that guy's more detailed review holds true, I reckon it's a fairly good bet for me, who understands a few of the principles and occasionally manages to frame a good shot, but is ultimately amateurishly ****ing around and in most circumstances benefits from the camera deciding how best to treat what's in front of it.
Additional optical zoom at postcard-print resolution and optional long exposures (something I'd like to play with when I get time) are plus points. For the price point and form factor, bearing in mind the competence of the person likely to be behind it, I think I've talked myself into it.
http://www.cameras.co.uk/comparisons/pa ... c-w310.cfm
If that guy's more detailed review holds true, I reckon it's a fairly good bet for me, who understands a few of the principles and occasionally manages to frame a good shot, but is ultimately amateurishly ****ing around and in most circumstances benefits from the camera deciding how best to treat what's in front of it.
Additional optical zoom at postcard-print resolution and optional long exposures (something I'd like to play with when I get time) are plus points. For the price point and form factor, bearing in mind the competence of the person likely to be behind it, I think I've talked myself into it.