Any reccomendations for a good midrange (thinking $300ish) digital camera that is good at taking indoor pictures without a flash (for pictures of art in museums where you are not allowed to use a flash).

Ideally it would be easy to use, fairly small, use SD cards and not use AA batteries (but instead the rechargable kind).

Reason is my wife is into art and many art museums do not let you use flash photography to take pictures. We have a trip coming up and I am thinking of getting a new camera for it. With the camera that we have now I take a bunch of picture w/out the flash and sometimes I am lucky to get 1 good photo. If there is some sort of camera with some super technology to solve this I'd consider going up in price.

Indoor (aka: Low Light) will be best on an DSLR obviously.
The sensor is at least 4x that of a pocket/super-zoom digital camera and can capture much more.
Here: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/C...or_sizes_01.htm

If you're staying in the $300 range that's what my Panasonic DMZ-FZ28 was in '08. It's got pretty much all the manual features of a DSLR or a nice "auto" plus all kinds of situation modes. I like Pana's because they use Leica lenses but there are other brands that are just as good as well.

This is by far my favorite "digital photography" site I've found: http://www.dpreview.com/

Everything from VERY in depth comparo's to educational pieces on what stuff like "aperture" "depth of field" etc are!
Learn page: http://www.dpreview.com/learn/

Here's the latest "super-zoom" comparison: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q110superzoomgroup/

I've been pretty happy with my Canon Powershot S3 over the years, and it takes pretty good low light pictures.

It looks like the current equivalent is the SX20, which has a suggested retail of $399, but a quick Google search shows they can be had for around $320.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/pro...wershot_sx20_is

There may be much better cameras out there in the price range, but this is the only one I've got personal experience with (well, with one several generations older), and can recommend from personal use.

Canons are great too.. I've had one and my son uses it still to this day!

So, that review I posted is 20 pgs.. but in the end the Pana and Canon (both next gen's of what Brian and I have) get the joint Gold rating and both are rated/tested the best in low light shooting.

Results summary:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q110superz...roup/page19.asp

PS, if these are too big/complex look at the the Pana Lumix hand helds.
They have a Leica lens that still does 10X zoom on a pocket camera "frame" haha

With low light size and stabilization is key. Look for the biggest CCD possible so a older DSLR would be better than the latest 14mp point and shoot. If you do go point and shook look for optical image stabilization, you may want a tripod too as less light means longer exposure, more sensitive to movement. You will also want to iso limmit the camera, at low light the camera may want to goto a iso of 800+ but the pictures will be grainy and may have artifacts.

www.dpreview.com has many reviews with good photos at all iso settings.

I don't know what the review is on this camera, but it may be worth looking into. Otherwise I would find a used DSLR. A Nikon D40 must be down low enough.

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?...t83&topnav=

Nikon D40x
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B00...;condition=used

Nikon D40 is what I have. I'll see if I can find the link but there is a lense that when paired with the D40 would be perfect for what you're looking to do.


Not the link I mentioned but a good link for camera info http://www.kenrockwell.com/

another great link for camera goods: http://www.adorama.com/

Looks like an SLR is about $850 new plus lens, I think that's a little more then I'd want to spend right now.

How easy is an SLR to use? I'd want something my wife could use without me and she is not too tech savvy. I know I've used Rob's at the autox, but he set everything up for me.

Regarding a used SLR, are they generally pretty reliable and long lasting?

Regarding the tripod, most museums do not allow use of tripods.

Thanks for all the info so far. Have just had time to skim all the links, will dig in more later today.

The DSLRs can be used in point and shoot mode and there are many canned settings (portrait, sports, bright sun, etc) like a regular digital camera. The other extreme is to use it in complete manual mode. I use mine in program mode where I adjusted some of the settings like sharpening, color saturation, etc.

I find Nikon and cannon to be super reliable unless you run them over with your car like I did with my first one! I would buy a used one off ebay or amazon from someone that has a store front and a good rating with lots (thousands) of items sold.

It appears you can get a Nikon D40x body for about $350 and a Nikon zoom lens for $125 - $150. If you go with Sigma or Tamron lens you can spend less.

Kev,
I def want a DSLR one day but the reason I went w. a "zoom" point and shoot was the price, something w. manual features so you can learn what they do, and the big thing for me was I like to take my camera hiking/biking/general adventures where size (they're quite a bit smaller) and replacement value were big.

Do some research, go hold them, and hopefully you and the ol' lady will develop a passion for it!

So the reccomendations from Brian and Jason are both mega zoom cameras and the comparison mentions that in order to fit mega zoom is such small cameras they have to reduce sensor size.

Since ability to take pictures in low light with no flash is my main priority is there some other class of cameras I should be looking at that has larger sensor sizes at the expense of zoom capability?

There's really only 2 classes of camera DSLR and "point and shoot"

DSLR = Large sensor, best low light perf.
Super zoom (point'n shoot) = Smaller sensor, larger lense for .5 to 18X "optical zoom" typical.
Pocket size (point'n shoot) = Smaller sensor, small lense for 0 - 3X "optical zoom" typical.

Here's some low-light shots from my "super zoom"
































The city lights shot and the bridge in Page, AZ the camera was sitting on something and there was a extended exposure but the rest were all down w. me holding the camera.

I do have some long exp. shots and I use this tripod:



Its cool! Like $15 @ Fry's Electronics..

Jason - Those are some excellent photos! The one of Antelope Canyon (?) looks like the pro pics you see in publications.. V. nice.

First of all, thanks for all the advice/info. It is greatly appreciated!

Regarding the difference between superzoom and pocket size, since they are both smaller sensor is there an advantage to the super zoom cameras in close up, low light, no flash situations? Do the superzooms tend to come with some additional feature or technology or ???? that makes it superior to the pocket size? Do the superzooms come with better stabilization (to accomodate the super zoom) or better optics or ????

Reason I'm asking is that for the way we use the camera and I anticipate we will continue to use the camera, the smaller size would be advantageous so if I can get the same low light/no flash performance in a smaller package that would be a plus.

Again, thanks for all the advice and I'm not doubting or questioning your advice, just trying to understand what might be best for our situation.

There is "compact super zoom" which are nice.. Usually 25-300mm or 0.5-12x zoom
55mm = what you see, so 25mm would be wide angle and 300mm would obviously be 12x.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q210grouptravelzoom/

They usually have slightly better lenses and due to their zoom capability usually the best mechanical stabilization the company makes. The bigger camera will have better Aperture settings which gets you in to shutter speed and exposure.. You can read up here:
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/E...Aperture_01.htm

Not a huge or possibly noticeable difference to you though..
For $300, most camera's are great..
I just don't care for the Kodak types where they dumb them down for grandma to use stripping all the useful features away.

<The atrophotography nut chimes in> I have a lot of experience with using digital cameras for low light and long exposures (up to 15 minutes!). I'll be nice and not geek out over CMOS/CCD sensitivity and noise characteristics.

All the feedback here is good. Wide aperture and large sensor (actually it is physical pixel size that relates to noise) are important. The ability to control all of the camera capabilities is critical. At a minimum, you want a camera with a good sensor and optics that allows you to set the ISO rating, shutter speed, and aperture where you want it. Everything else is pointless if the camera is allowed to assume how you want the picture taken.

Also, there are programs that can reduce noise levels without much impact to the clarity of the photo. I had a photo at the AZ Science Center that I cleaned up with similar software. I don't know if there are free equivalents, but NeatImage and Photoshop do a good job.

Things to look for:
1) Aperture will be more important to you than overall zoom range. You can have large aperture and wide zoom range, but the price will go up significantly.
2) Image stabilization works. Mechanical stabilization (optical or sensor) is far better than software stabilization.
3) You'll want something that can set ISOs somewhere around 100-800. Anything above and below that is cake.
4) Ignore the megapixel hype. Optical quality is far more important than number of pixels. Don't buy a 20+Mpixel camera with a crap lens that can be outshot by an ancient 3Mpixel DSLR.

Ok, here's where I'm at in case anybody has any comebacks, otherwise this is just to organize my thoughts:

In the compact travel zoom class I'm considering:
Casion EX-FH100 - but it says not good for novice photographers whgo don't want a lot of options (that's me )
Nikon Coolpix S8000 - real tempting but it doesn't offer a lot of manual control, I don't understand if that means no iso, aperture or shutter speed control
Panasonic Lumizx DMC-ZS5 - uncoated screen tough to see in the sun and I'm not sure what adjustments it has either
Samsung HZ35W - seems more expensive, for the GPS feature that I don't care about?

Moving on up to the compact super zoom, seems like it may come with more adjustments/features but I'm not sure I'd use them and if the increased size is worth it, but
Canon SX20is or the Pansonic FZ-35.

The dpreview website also led me to some larger sensor size (but more expensive) compacts:
Panasonic DMC-LX3 and the Canon S90
Not sure if there are others in this class I should consider

I checked out the Olympus PEN E-P1 at Costco that Rob found, but I think that may be a bit more camera then I can handle.

I'm gonna try to get my hands on some of these. Any suggestions where to look locally? Only places that come to mind are Best Buy and Kits (now Ritz?).

Thanks again for all the advice, I don't think I mentioned this but our departure date is July 27th so I appreciate all the help I can get. I had asked the wife if she wanted a new camera for the trip some time ago and she said no, then just a couple days ago she mentioned she might want a new camera for her birthday (july 23rd).

I went to Ritz and Best Buy and actually took pictures in the store w. them..
Ritz will have better people to help you w. it I'm sure.

Ya, those "high end" compacts are nice!

Just bought the Canon S90 at Fry's, doesn't have that much zoom but seems to have a bigger sensor size, a neat setup for adjusting aperture, shutter speed and iso, plus I believe it has better optics.

Got some pretty good advice/service when I looked at Ritz and suprisingly helped the guy at Fry's seemed pretty knowledgable and helpful. Not quite so much as best buy.

Thanks again for all the advice here, definately helped me get a way better camera then I could haver gotten trying to figure it out on my own!

Nice! That's a "high end" compact.
Not as much zoom, view finder, and 640 is the max video but it'll make up for that in the quality dept. and once you get the hang of that ring that'll be nice to use!
DP did a huge review on it if want to see it "flex" it's muscles!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons90/

Yeah, I read the review before I bought, (ok I read some of the review, beginning and end)

So here are some examples of my the poor indoor quality of my Canon Powershot SD850. Is there something I could be doing wrong or does the camera just suck at the low light no flash scenario? Honestly these weren't taken in "low light" in my opinion. Is that considered "noise"? I consider it suck!

Looks like your ISO is set pretty high..
I limit mine to 400 but if I have a tripod/stable surface and can crank up the exposure time I'll put it to 100 and get some good shots.
ISO is the artificial amplification of white light by the camera.. as far as I understand it!
So the higher it's set.. or is allowed to go (Set Maximum ISO) and it picks automatically, you start getting "grain" and washout like your shots above.

Here's a couple from the other night:

100 ISO 60 sec of exposure



400 ISO 25 sec of exp
(I also "un-saturated" it in picasa to make it look diff)



So when you limit the camera to a low ISO it will compensate w. longer Exp. so you'll have to try being very still.. but 400 ISO should'nt be too bad for snapping shots inside.



Yo, KEV?? Where's some samples w. your new camera??

Ok I don't think I can set the ISO where I want It just has "AUTO" and "HIGH".

Incorrect sir!

Manual (advanced) for your camera.

http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/9/0900009919/0...0ISCUGad_EN.pdf

Go to page 69.

Read all about how to adjust your ISO from 80 up to 1600.

Profit!

We took about 5 gig of pictures, mostly artwork for Tomi, so I haven't even gone through the photos yet (been focused on shopping for a car with working ac since I got back ), I'll need to go through them and find some good examples. From what I've seen (mainly on the camera display) the photos seem to be a big improvement on what my old digital camera.

Thanks again for all the advice from everyone.

Awesome thanks Brian! I will be messing around with the camera soon. Maybe I can even figure out to get the damn flash to stop turning itself back on!