For Christmas I bought my nephew a digital camera. Well technically I didn't buy it I just chose it and paid for it, but that's a long story.
Well he's only 10 and never had a camera before so I bought him basically the cheapest that he could play around with and ultimately, in all likelihood, break.
When it arrived today I played with it so I know how to use it when he inevitably asks me to show it to him. Conclusion: I like it. I mean I really like it, it's a great camera!
It does everything most people want it to, as easily and simply as you would hope for, but also has a very good selection of advanced settings that are hidden away from usual view - but not too hidden away to find easily when you want them. It's looks good, it's small and compact, doesn't fanny around with proprietary memory cards or batteries (Sony, I hate you) and it's just generally really good. It's not a shitty unheard-of brand either by the way, it's from Kodak who I think have been in the camera business a little while now.
So if this is what you get for a camera that costs £45, what more could you really expect from the many, many, vastly more expensive cameras on the market?
So if you want consumer advice from a geek who dabbles in photography - cheaper cameras are no worse than considerably more expensive ones. If you want good pictures you have to find them and take them, you don't need an expensive camera and don't ever let any DSLR wielding slaphead tell you otherwise.
No comments:
Post a Comment