What's the best digital camera under $200?

[apropos of nothing]

Okay, I'm a jackass for posting a WTB<$200 thread, but I REALLY WANT TO KNOW! We're going to NYC next month and would like to be able to have some piccies thereof.

Bueller, Bueller?

[Zoltar]

My aunt was just in town, and she bought a HP 4.1 Megapixel with 3X optic zoom for 179 Canadian bucks. her limit was 200, and i thought that was her best option. She bought it at Staples.

I would try places like office depot, walmart, and that kind of crap because all the 4 Mega pixels are just out of date now, so you can get some good deals.

Here is what to keep in mind:

There are a couple standouts as far as optics go. Cannon and Nikkon are a little better than their friends as far as the lenses go. Kodak and Minolta, and close behind am told Olympus are all decent, as I imagine Sony and Fuji, optics wise. These are all fairly close, with some others not quite so good.

two personal bad flavours I have are for Sony (proprietary crap designed to stop working shortly after the warrenty expires) and I think Fuji exagerates their resolution, so I usually round their megapixels down by about 2/3. They seem too specify 'interpolated' quite a bit, which is odd.

Resolution is important, but along with optics. high resolution with crappy optics is like a u87 on something that sounds like shit. so, I think you can aim for a decent 4 Megapixel bad boy here, at least. Those make nice 8x10s.

then, features. Movies are handy to have, I think most cameras have that option. Optic zoom is nice. cameras seem to have either none, 3X or 6-10X. I have 10X right now, and i like it because i can layout some nice shots. what is nice about 3X zoom is that those cameras fit into your packet, which is why i still have my Canon s100. Digital zoom is nothing, and people will say that you can just crop high res photos rather than the large zoom - true but I don't ever bother.

My newer one is a kodak, and the colour is beautiful.

so, I guess what I am saying is that other than Fiji and Sony, the big names are all fairly priced, so just go and see what is on sale at a few places.
hope this helps.

[syrupcore]

If you're ok with <3 megapixels and used, the first round of the canon digital elph series were great (the new ones are two but they're outta 200 range). I had an s100 for a while and loved loved it. very small and really great pictures. I think the s100 can be had for <100 on ebay these days. I'm saving for the current gen for no good reason, I was totally happy with that one.

dont forget to budget for a big card.

will

[cfMC]

I got a Nikon coolpix 2200 for about $150 last year. it is a great enough digital camera for the price. in fact I liked it enough that I gave it to my wife and bought another better version of the same camera (the 4200) which is a little more expensive but better in various ways, e.g. both let you take little movies but the 4200 lets you take longer movies with sound

[kingquasar]

I'll second the Nikon Coolpix series. I bought one last year and love it. I did a bunch of research before hand, and at the time (things may have changed), it had the best lens of the sub $300 cameras. People seem to only look at pixel count and feature doo-dads, without worrying too much about the actual build quality of the cameras. I'm not saying this is on par with a hasselblad(sp?) or anything, but at that price point, it's a pretty well designed (mechanically) camera.

-kQ

[wing]

All of the Canon Powershot series kick total ass for the price. The A80 is a great one on the compact end, and on the more prosumer, you could get a used G2 or G3 for about $200 i'm sure...

[wing]

Re: Nikon Coolpix. My girlfriend had a Canon Powershot A70, it got stolen. Her dad gave her a Coolpix 3100 or something. We both miss the A70 very much. It was faster, lighter, had better modes, took better looking photos, and allowed manual settings of aperature/shutter, whereas I don't think any of the Coolpixes do.

I'm not knocking Nikon-- they make great cameras. But the Coolpixes I've seen are laughable when compared to the competition.

[apropos of nothing]

Thanks for the info, all! I appreciate it. I'm temping and working at a music store so the old income's not what it was when I was a state employee.

The posterity may love or hate you depending (but through no fault of your own. )

[wrenhunter]

I have the Canon A300, an older model but still available. Looks to sell around $200 now. 3.2 MP, video with sound, macro, panoramic, etc. Takes nice pics. Drawbacks: munches batteries (so I use NiMH), weak zoom (don't use it), slow "reset" between pics (oh well).

[apropos of nothing]

Here's another question:
Do any of the above-mentioned or other models under $200 feature built-in recharging?

[waitingroom]

Here's another question:
Do any of the above-mentioned or other models under $200 feature built-in recharging?

My girlfriend's coolpix 2500 has a rechargable battery.