What makes this better than other cameras that cost a fraction of the price?
1754654
Disclaimer: its the only one I have and the only one I have ever had. I chose it because Garmin is a well respected company and I figured that support would be better and that they would stand behind it if there were any issues. I have used the Garmin updater to update the firmware without a problem, and it has been trouble free for the entire time I have owned it.
1754655
My guess would be reliability. I bought one of the cheap ones (from China) and its battery wouldn't hold a charge long enough to maintain the date. When I complained the manufacturer wanted me to send it back to China, which would have cost more than the camera did in the first place. I refused. They finally sent me a replacement, and its power supply was defective.
1754656
In a word, Garmin. I have purchased many of their products over the years and have always been very satisfied. They stand behind their products. With Garmin I know there will be firmware updates and support if I need it.
1754657
I have all Garmin electronics on my boat and it has been reliable for many years. If Garmin advertises that the device has a G force detector and a working GPS to not only time stamp the device but with a location than their device has it. I do not understand how other non branded devices can be trusted. I bought it for security reasons and so I wanted a reliable brand.
655889
The selling point was the 24.1 MP picture size. The D5100 had a few more features, but every review site that I went to said the pic quality between the two are virtually the same. It is an entry level camera that won't break the bank. So far I have been very pleased with the performance and picture quality.
59304
I'm also on the fence on deciding between with these 2 cameras. Any input would be appreciated, thanks.
2197897
This is a "bridge" digital camera - more than a pocket digital click or a camera phone but less than the real DSLRs. It fills the gap between the really expensive digital DSLRS as Canon and Nikon by providing high definition, and a very good built-in zoom lens. It feels like a DLSR but has portability, ease, and price. If you master this puppy and produce good pictures, you will eventually step up to the big buys. The GE (buy the newer with 24 mp) is good with starters and intermediate camera bugs.
1690185
I know this was forever ago, but... I'd answer with: much better than any point and shoot, not as good as other dslr cameras. it is noisy at higher iso and noisy at longer exposures compared to other dslr cameras.
2159590
I bit the bullet and went with the Sony. Mainly because Circuit City was offering it for $329. Also because it had a better fps and ISO capabilities, if I remember correctly. The 4 gigs of memory set me back $59 though and the case was another $20, so that put me at $415 after tax. I must say that this thing takes awesome pics. I got it mainly for my kids sports. The 2.2 fps and sports mode are nice. The image stabilization seems to do a good job to on other pics. I have not used the remote control yet, but plan on usnig it to try and get some close ups of birds or squirrels, etc on a day when I have nothing else to do.
1850517
Is this camera worth the bucks? Does it really do what it says that it does?
857983
They are all the same cameras but have different options. The price you paid is all over the place, shop around.
1531926
I received mine over the weekend from Amazon, but have done similar research as you did for over a week. I've noticed the same thing as you do on the price increase. IMO I chaulk it up to supply and demand. I shopped around and found the prices to be generally very close amongst online stores, and no more $435's available except at one reputable NY store selling it at $439 just the other day, and is back-ordered. The thing is that with Amazon there aren't even other vendors selling this camera at any price, so it's completely up to Amazon to charge what it thinks is appropriate. Even the used prices (which are mostly by Amazon in this case) have risen by a large margin. However, the camera is fantastic! So it's still a value proposition in my case. Since I sold my M43 gear, this $500 price tag is downright low. Look at it another way, there are no M43 or DSLRs (bodies only) that shoot at 5.5 FPS with autofocus or 12 without that come in at less than a grand. The lens range and aperture are in the same situation, there is nothing in the inter-changeable lens world that come close without costing multiples of this FZ150. Seriously, an Olympus 28-200'ish mm equivalent M43 lens runs at $450; a Nikon 18-200 VR for APS-C sensor is at approx $900; a Nikon 28-300 VR for full frame is about $1k (while non of these open to f 2.8). True, those cameras have larger sensors and the lenses are quality stuff and can do different things (we're not totally comparing apples to apples here), but if this camera is right for you for what you do as it does in my case for what I intend it to do, which is for travel (light) and take photos of my son at baseball games, the price is a steal. Frankly this camera out guns my DSLR by a large margin and does 1080P video with fast accurate auto focus at 60p :) I cannot do manual video focus of sports - at any price! On the other hand, other options may be to wait and see, or buy used. I checked out eBay, no luck there (but Amazon pricing staff already know that).
1217147
Not everyone is interested in trying to use their point and shoot camera as a camcorder, and 2.5 vs 2.8 gimme a break. And I don't know if you've been paying attention to the economy but not everyone has the luxury of paying 600-700 dollars on a camera. Less capable eh? I guess that's one of the reason alot people who own rebels and some of the other slr's use s5 is and g9 as a backup. The camera is only as good as its user.
2002671
I am a fan of the Sony. Here is a site that I have found helpful with a stat comparison. The sensor in the Sony is also in the much more expensive Nikon d5000 and d7000 and the Pentax k5. Sony makes the sensors, I think this gives you just too much bang for your buck, this sensor is very good at low light, one of the major reasons I am upgrading from a superzoom myself. http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors
106720
At $399, the E-PL1 is one of the best buys around. I shoot Nikon full frame cameras and I carry an E-PL1 with me when I need to go light. I've never been disappointed with the quality from the Oly so long as I recognize its limitations. It isn't a DSLR and never will be, but it produces imagery far better than any of the Point and Shoots I've owned, including the coveted Panasonic LX-5 (Leica DeLux D-5)/
1673297
I just bought the A570IS a few days ago without seeing this alternative, so I hope I'm not wasting my money by not getting a better camera for pennies more! We shall see, I guess. Sometime next week I'll let u know if I was impressed with the A570IS.. (all of my friends have told me it's great, btw).
69009
both are great cameras your choice comes down to whether the difference in price is worth it for the video capability and the higher resolution lcd screen. Personally I think it is worth it. Video on DSLRS is entirely different from camcorders.
863492
I was going to buy this one too, but if the price stays over $400, I'll get the Olympus XZ-1. The main benefit of the S95 for me is price!
1398393
Not only is it equivalent, I think it might even be better than the Canon. Lightning fast focus. Plus you save around $1200.
2051966
They use the same image sensor with the ax100 recording capability of 4k. There is a $600 difference plus you are going to need bigger and faster memory cards and more hard drive space with longer rendering times and a 4k monitor to really see the difference. As a professional, I would buy the pro version of this camera (pxwx70) before I'd spend the extra on 4k. It's a personal decision but I wouldn't bother with 4k now unless you are viewing it in 4k. I think they're are other factors that affect image quality more than resolution at this point in the technology world. Like a OLED HD tv set has better quality image than a non OLED 4k tv. That's my 2 cents worth anyway. They use the same image sensor with the ax100 recording capability of 4k. There is a $600 difference plus you are going to need bigger and faster memory cards and more hard drive space with longer rendering times and a 4k monitor to really see the difference. As a professional, I would buy the pro version of this camera (pxwx70) before I'd spend the extra on 4k. It's a personal decision but I wouldn't bother with 4k now unless you are viewing it in 4k. I think they're are other factors that affect image quality more than resolution at this point in the technology world. Like a OLED HD tv... » Read More They use the same image sensor with the ax100 recording capability of 4k. There is a $600 difference plus you are going to need bigger and faster memory cards and more hard drive space with longer rendering times and a 4k monitor to really see the difference. As a professional, I would buy the pro version of this camera (pxwx70) before I'd spend the extra on 4k. It's a personal decision but I wouldn't bother with 4k now unless you are viewing it in 4k. I think they're are other factors that affect image quality more than resolution at this point in the technology world. Like a OLED HD tv set has better quality image than a non OLED 4k tv. That's my 2 cents worth anyway. « Show Less