I am looking for a decent 35mm camera in the $100.00 price range. I am not much of a photographer, so the easlier to use the better. Thanks in advance.

gemcd,

There are a lot of threads on camera choices you can check out in the photography forum (plus other forums if you want to go the search route). I'll go ahead and give you the short and sweet answer.... Olympus Stylus Epic. This camera has a 35mm f2.8 lens and is the best value out there. KEH has it for $79.95 http://www.keh.com/shop/class.cfm?bid=OM&sid=newused&crid=3234080 (look under the Point & Shoot listing). B&H has it for the same price http://www02.bhphotovideo .com/default.sph/FrameWork.class?FNC=ProductActivator__Aproductlist_html___131332___OLSE___REG___CatID=376___SID=EE219905700 . For $10 more, B&H has it with the date imprint function (if that matters to you). If you can't live without a zoom, I highly recommend a (now discontinued) Minolta Freedom Explorer (MFE)(28-70mm, f3.5-8.4 lens). (The replacement MFE Ex is 28-75mm and has a noisier zoom motor (and exceeds the budget)). I got a used MFE for $50 some odd dollars on eBay a few weeks ago. I was so impressed with my test pictures that I got a new one for even less money on eBay the next week. Ritz Camera seems to be selling quite a few on eBay. Prices seem to run up to $75 plus shipping on the past auctions I checked. Here's one ending tomorrow (May 20th): http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1353349015 If you'll be shooting indoors and can't use a flash (like in churches & museums), definitely get the fixed lens Olympus over the Minolta. Hope this helps.

Mike Williamson

Mike,

I have a Canon Sure Shot 105 Zoom (38-105mm) point and shoot camera. On previous trips to Europe I've taken numerous pictures with it, but I am not totally satisfied with how the pictures came out. Mainly, I like to take scenary pictures with people in them. What happened was either the person in the front or the background came out of focus. I don't know if this is the case with all point and shoot cameras or only with zoom cameras. Also, my camera never does well in low light situations, even with a flash. Like the pictures we took after dark at the Eiffel tower or the Colosseum all came out poor. Would like to buy a new point and shoot camera if these problems can be corrected.

Thanks,
Yifeng

yifeng:
The problem you are experiencing is called "depth of field" which is simply a distance range which is in sharp focus. On manual cameras this can be adjusted by changing the aperture (f-stop setting) and the shutter speed. These two variables adjust the amount of light that gets into the camera to expose the film.
First an explanation of the f-stop settings; basically it is a ratio of the diameter of the opening on the lens to the distance from the lens to the focal plane or the surface of the film. Therefore, an f-stop of 16 is 16 times smaller than the distance from the lens to the film while an f-2 is only half of that distance.
If, for example, you have a setting of f-2 and can take the picture at 1/500 of a second and you get a properly exposed picture, you will also notice that it has a very short depth of field. With the smaller the aperture the opening must remain open for a longer period of time to allow an equal amount of light to hit the surface of the film. So with an f-16 you may have to slow the exposure to about say 1/60 of a second to obtain the same proper exposure. However, during the additional length of time the aperture is open allows the light from the surrounding objects to reach the film and these will also appear in focus.
On the point and shoot cameras, however, the shutter speed is fixed. What the camera does is focus on the major feature in the viewfinder. It will also determine the light bounce from the object and set the appropriate f-stop. That is, if the people are in front of the camera, in good light and comprise a major portion of the picture, the people will be in focus and the background will not. If, on the other hand, a person is in the shade on the side or periphery of the scenery shot, the focus of the camera will be on the background well lit trees or buildings and the person will be in the dark and out of focus.
Unfortunately, with automatic and point and shoot cameras you can only get one or the other. With some practise you can achieve a moderate compromise. Really good photos often require good luck or good equipment.
I know it isn’t much consolation, but I hope I explained it for you.
Don

gemcd

I would suggest this one - 650PZ model from Vivitar has cute features and is within the budget.
http://shop3.outpost.com/product/3070689/


I started out taking pictures with another basic vivitar camera and I find that camera still takes good photos even after 18 years. The best shots however are those taken in well-lit areas. It is necessary to clean the lens in between film changes if using the camera in a hot or wet climate. Otherwise taking pictures with it seems effortless.

Don,

Thank you for the explainations. Now I know that this problem of focusing has to do with "depth of field". So, even if I get a different point and shoot camera, I might still experience the same problem?

What about those fancy digital cameras? Does any one of them do better than the rest with "depth of field"?

Thanks,
Yifeng

yifeng:
That does seem to be one of the problems with point and shoot cameras. Myself, I still use and old Pentax K1000 semi automatic. That means I can change the settings and do strange stuff with the camera, or my wife can pick it up and focus it and snap a shot.
I have not as yet gone digital or checked into the various adjustments that can or cannot be made to them. They do sound intriguing in that the pictures can be played with on the computer screen prior to printing.
Which of course brings up another question of displaying the results other than on the screen. I, also, haven’t looked into professional printers for permanent hard copies.
I may well do that after we get back from Italy. But for now, I’ll stick with the Pentax.
Don

Yifeng,

Don has given you some good advice. I want to expound upon it a little, quibble over a couple of points, and attempt to answer your digital question.

With respect to depth of field, the f-stop, focal length, and distance to your subject are the determining factors. The length of time that the shutter is open doesn't matter at all as far as depth of field goes. (The shutter speed of most (all?) P&S cameras isn't fixed at all, although the user probably won't know what shutter speed the camera is using as it probably won't tell him.) The closer your subject is, the less depth of field for a given f-stop. At a further distance, the same f-stop will give more depth of field. Also, depth of field is less for longer focal lengths. The rule of thumb for depth of field is that whatever the depth of field is, 1/3 third of that depth will be in front of whatever is focused on and 2/3 will be behind. For example, assume your focused upon subject is 50 feet away and that the depth of field happens to be 30 feet. Anything from 40 feet (which is 10 feet in front of your subject) to 70 feet (20 feet behind) will be in focus. With a point & shoot (P&S) camera, you aren't going to have a clue what f-stop was selected. Probably the camera won't indicate how far away the subject is either. If you spend a good bit of money for a high-end P&S (e.g., Contax T3, 35mm f2.8 lens, about $700), you may have the ability to pick your aperture (f-stop), so you will have some control. Even then without knowing the distance to the subject and having a depth of field chart to consult, you won't know the depth of field. You will know that by picking a smaller f-stop (larger number), you'll have more depth of field (but the shutter will stay open longer, perhaps staying open so long that camera shake becomes a factor). If you want a lot of depth of field, your best bet with the typical P&S is to use a fast film (400 or maybe even 800) to force the use of a smaller f-stop. That, of course, would mean that if you want to deliberately blur the background by having it out of focus, you won't be able to (unless you get closer to your subject which will reduce depth of field). If all of this makes any sense and matters to you, you sound like a candidate for a single lens reflex (SLR) camera. With an SLR, you are actually looking through the lens. As far as I know, all (most?) manual focus SLR lenses will have depth of field info. For example, I'm looking at a manual focus 50mm lens right now. Examining the depth of field numbers, I can see that if I shoot at f-16, everything from roughly 10 feet to infinity will be in focus. At f-8 and focusing at around 20 feet, everything between about 12 feet and 35 or so feet would be in focus. (In case you can't tell, the depth of field info isn't all that detailed, but at least there is something there.) Also, most manual focus lenses/cameras have a depth of field preview button. By holding it in, the lens closes down to the f-stop selected and you see what will be in focus (but if using a small f-stop things sure get dim). I have heard that most autofocus SLR lenses/cameras don't have depth of field scales nor depth of field preview buttons. Like Don, I use manual focus SLRs (although Olympus rather than Pentax). I also have several P&S cameras now (unlike the last time I went to Europe). Digital is subject to the same optical laws, so depth of field won't be any better with one of them.

Here are some other comments to address points you made:

1. <Mainly, I like to take scenary pictures with people in them. What happened was either the person in the front or the background came out of focus.> If the person is out of focus, then the camera wasn't focused on the person. If the person is fine but the background is out of focus, then that's the depth of field issue we've been kicking around. Use a faster film or zoom less (as there is less depth of field at longer focal lengths).

2. <Also, my camera never does well in low light situations, even with a flash.> The built in flashes on cameras suck. If you use a faster film, the flash will be effective to a further distance. If I were going to be taking a lot of indoor pictures requiring flash, I wouldn't be using a P&S limited to the on-camera flash.

3. <Like the pictures we took after dark at the Eiffel tower or the Colosseum all came out poor.> Your flash won't help at all with something that big & far away in the dark. Get a camera with a "fast" lens, use faster film, and use a tripod because there is so little light that even with a bigger f-stop (smaller number, remember), the shutter speed will be too long to hand hold, most likely. You're trying to take pictures that a pro would have to carefully set up. Some people may call a P&S camera a PHD camera, but that doesn't mean the camera is really smart, its actually short for Push Here Dummy.

4. <Would like to buy a new point and shoot camera if these problems can be corrected.> No matter how much you spend on a P&S, that won't eliminate those problems. If you're going to spend a lot to try and make things better, you're probably better off spending that money on an SLR (although they won't be P&S size).

5. <Now I know that this problem of focusing has to do with "depth of field". So, even if I get a different point and shoot camera, I might still experience the same problem?>...not MIGHT but WILL actually.

6. <What about those fancy digital cameras? Does any one of them do better than the rest with "depth of field"?> Some may be better than others, but not because they are digital.

Hope some of this helps a little.

Mike

Don and Mike,

Thank you so much for taking the time to explain to me the questions I had.
I have to admit, this "depth of field" concept is still over my head. But what I can grasp right now is that :
1. Another P&S camera won't make any difference in what I'm concerned about.
2. A way to improve the depth of field problem is to use 400 speed films or higher.(In previous trips to Europe, I used solely 200 speed films.)
3. If the person is out of focus that's because I wasn't focusing on the person
4. Don't waste films shooting outdoors in the dark with a P&S camera.

I recently bought a digital camera from Sears. I read a lot of reviews on http://www.dpreview.com and decided to get the Sony DSC-F707 . After price-matching from an online store, I got this camera for $638 + tax. I know I probably won't be using a lot of the advanced features just yet, but I hope that my photography skill will improve as I experiment more with the camera.

Yifeng