I figured out the camera I am getting!

So I have really picked up photography. I have a fuji film A850. I was gonna get a Nikon D40 but until I really know if I am gonna get into this. I am gonna get a Canon Powersht710 IS. My mom has one and I really have figured out all the really cool features. She is gonna let me use hers until I buy mine so expect some awesome new pics soon!

Your better off getting the Nikon d40, IMO that one is much better than the Canon. I just bought a Nikon d60 and it is the best I have used.

My thinking was if I use the Canon for a while it will be great, but my Aunt who is huge into photgraphy said she would give me hers sometime when I come see her. She has the D90 i think

The difference is that your fuji and the canon are point and shoot cameras while the Nikon d40 or 90 are SLRs which are so much better for photography. For everyday stuff the fuji and the canon would be great but if you want to get into photography I suggest getting an SLR, plus snakey pictures come out much better too lol.

Thats is true, My Aunt is gonna have me come down to her house in NC soem weekend and show me how to take some really good pics, with her D40 and D90

I love photography, especially wildlife photography. I have a photography website if anyone wants to take a look at some of the photos I have taken. I use to use a Kodak Easyshare camera with 8.1 mega pixels and 12x optical zoom and it had tons of awesome features on it. I miss having my camera. I had to pawn it earlier this year so I could take my snake Diamond to the vet cause I thought she/he was sick at the time. But anyhow, I don't know much about Canons or Nikons except that they have really good cameras out from what I have heard. I love Kodak but thats just cause when I bought my first one 2/3 yrs ago I fell in love with it. I've had two others since then and haven't had any problems with them at all. The next one I get will be a Kodak Easyshare with 12.1 mega pixels and 24x optical zoom. Even though they are not SLRs or what not they take fantastic photos. The color quality is superb and the cripsiness of the photos are great. Once I remember what my website is I'll let you know.

If I were you if you can afford (I spent all the money I made this summer on mine ugh) it I would still go with an SLR over the point and shoot but if you can't afford it the Kodiak seems like a good option. My point and shoot is a Kodiak and I love it.

snakemaster24 said:

So I have really picked up photography. I have a fuji film A850. I was gonna get a Nikon D40 but until I really know if I am gonna get into this. I am gonna get a Canon Powersht710 IS. My mom has one and I really have figured out all the really cool features. She is gonna let me use hers until I buy mine so expect some awesome new pics soon!

Click to expand...

The 710 IS is a danged sweet camera. We have a 560 IS, and the 710 is basically the newer model. Same sensor, same optics, etc.

Any point-and-shoot digital camera you get will give you roughly the same performance. Period. Some have more knick-knacks, some provide idiotic amounts of digital zoom capability, and the different brands have different user interfaces and processing software. Other than that, everything else is marketing hype. Sure, you can spend twice the money for another point-and-shoot with a higher pixel density (that you'll never use), or you can spend five times the money and get an entry-level digital SLR that'll let you agonize over which lens to use so you miss the shot. If you've used your mom's camera, and have already figured out the vast array of cool features (and they are cool!), it wouldn't make any sense at all to go with another camera to accomplish exactly the same thing. Excellent choice!

If you decide later to get into digital SLRs, you should think seriously about the Canon line. Again, the performance of any of the comparable-level SLRs is within a gnat's hair of each other. They all have a vast array of lenses, software features, gimcracks and gewgaws, but they all take essentially the same quality of picture. My recommendation of the Canon line (the 40D or 50D will probably be available for several more years) comes back once again to the user interface. If you know how the 710 thinks, changing to a 40D or 50D will be a cakewalk.

In case anyone is wondering, yes, I have some experience. I've owned SLRs for 34 years(!), took my first photography class 36 years ago, and have been using a camera for 44 years. Right now, in addition to the 560 IS, we have a Canon 10D and a Canon 50D. We've settled on three high-end lenses, and have gotten rid of the rest (although I want to get a good macro lens). To go with them, we have a flash system and really nice tripod. I just went digital four years ago; prior to that, I had a series of semi-pro and pro grade film SLRs, and did some pretty exotic things with experimenting with film. In the early days, I had a Brownie, a couple of Kodak 110-format cameras, and a Kodak Disk camera (ick). My first SLR was a fully-manual Minolta. I also had a really old bellows-style Polaroid Land camera for years. At $3 per exposure, it was a wonderful camera for forcing myself to learn photography to get decent shots. Since 1986, they've all been Canons, purely because I liked the Canon interface best when I went to replace my Minolta. IMAO, once you get used to an interface, changing brands just adds confusion and frustration, causing you to have to concentrate more on the camera than the shot. That's a Bad Thing.

I'm not an expert at cameras, all I know is what I'm use to and what I like personally which is Kodak Point and shoot...which I've used a Sony and a Canon point and shoot camera as well , from my dad's camera to the canon I bought and the next day I returned it to the store because I could already tell I would hate it. So I switched back to my Kodak. Which I love very much. I personally can tell a big difference in picture quality and performance of Kodak compared to Sony or Canon. And for me Kodak takes much better quality photos then the other two. Plus, the handability and ease of menu use and button placement is a sitch to use. And for the most part the battery life is excellent. Especially if you get the rechargable battery pack. I know the SLRS are way better but if you are not a professional photographer that has many years and years of experience and education then they aren't worth paying 1,000-6,000 bucks for. I'd call myself a semi-amateur photographer and I wouldn't dare spend that much money on a camera that I'm not going to know how to use or be able to learn to use easily. The zoom lens on the Kodak that came out this year or late last year has a 24x optical zoom lens and has an option for a flash unit on top that can be added. The zoom to me is very important because I use it mostly for outside photography-birds and insects, and other animals that you can not always get very close to without scaring them away. And the Kodak has an excellent macro lens option for close ups of insects and butterflies and flowers which I do as well. I've taken some excellent photos with my last Kodak I had-especially of birds-Northern Cardinals, Blue Jays, American Goldfinch, Morning Doves, The red bellied woodpeckers and Red headed woodpeckers and several other types of birds that are hard to get close to without making them fly away to quickly. So having the Zoom with 24x optical would be superb for that purpose. And I know the mega pixels aren't as important but if I ever took great photos and wanted to blow them up big that would help me be able to do that with out it coming out to grainy. But thats just my opinion. Good luck with yr camera and just explore all the options on the menu and use different settings to get different results that is a fun thing to do with a camera cause a lot of time you get different exposures with messing around with the camera and it's neat to see.