Q: The camera on my mobile phone is really handy, but sometimes I’d like to take better quality photographs. What kind of camera would you recommend?
A: Image quality from digital cameras has improved exponentially over the past few years, while prices continue to fall daily. A plethora of new shapes, sizes and camera formats in recent years has made choosing a new camera more difficult than ever.
In order to narrow your selection there are a couple of fundamental rules to consider.
First, megapixel counts are irrelevant. Entry level cameras now come with sensors of 10 megapixels (MP) or more, while high-end cameras push that figure to 24 or even 36 MP. But even a 10MP camera is capable of producing glossy prints up to 20” across. Switch to a more forgiving medium like canvas and you can get a perfect 4ft-wide print from a 10MP camera.
A benefit of lower pixel counts is that you need less space to store the files, so you can fit more pictures on your memory card and hard drive at home.
The second rule is that, for any given budget, a bigger camera will produce better pictures than a small one. The flip side of that argument is convenience – a big camera is worthless if you can’t stand lugging it around.
For budgets under £300, my advice is to choose a “point and shoot” (aka compact) camera based on the zoom range you’re likely to need. Longer zoom ranges like 10x or 18x are great if you’re planning to take pictures of the kids playing sports but, if you’re able to get up close to your subject, a similarly priced camera with a shorter zoom range (3x or less) will always produce brighter, sharper images.
For budgets over £300 there are three main types of camera to choose from:
Compact Cameras
These pocket-sized cameras typically have retracting lenses that make them as svelte as possible and always have fully automatic modes that you can’t go wrong with.
Pros: Compact, lightweight and easy to use.
Cons: Can be slow to focus. Not great for capturing fast-moving sports... or children.
Mirrorless interchangeable-lens cameras (MILC), aka Compact System Cameras
MILCs typically have small bodies like compact cameras but are characterised by their protruding lenses which can be swapped to give different angles of view. The most compact lenses give a very wide angle of view, while lenses with a good zoom range are often bigger than the camera itself.
Pros: Faster focussing, higher image quality and better at capturing action shots than their compact cousins.
Cons: Relatively bulky. Extra lenses are expensive and can be awkward to carry.
Digital SLR Cameras
These cameras are big, bulky and featured packed, just like the models used by professional photographers.
Pros: Ultra-fast focussing and fast shutter speeds make these cameras ideal for snapping sports or rampaging children. Large image sensor makes it easy to get attractive, out of focus backgrounds typically found in professional shots. Clever automatic modes make Digital SLRs as easy to use as a compact.
Cons: Big and heavy, these cameras require a lot of commitment.
Recommendations
As outlined above, the main considerations in buying a camera are budget and the size of camera you’re prepared to carry. Here are my top picks by budget and size:
Compact:
Around £300:
Ricoh CX6: Clever ultra-fast hybrid focus system makes this model stand out from the crowd (£269).
Around £500:
Sony Cyber-shot RX100: Amazing image quality in a compact chassis (£479).
MILC:
Around £300:
Nikon 1 V1 with 10-30 lens: Great low light performance and the option of full manual control (£299).
Around £500:
Sony NEX-5R with 18-55 lens: Ultra-thin body, fast focusing and built-in Wi-Fi (£599).
D-SLR:
Around £300:
Nikon D3100 with 18-55 lens: Great budget D-SLR with endless future upgrade options (£299).
Around £500:
Canon 650D with 18-55 lens: Variable angle-touch screen makes this one of the simplest D-SLRs on the market (£530).
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article