I have researched all the kid ones, like the Fischer Price and Polaroid Pixel. I like the Vtech Kidizoom the best, because of its great reviews. Im confused though cause all 3 only have 1.3 megapixels.. Wouldnt the picture quality be the same... but if so, why do you people give great reviews on the Vtech Kidizoom and not the others when it comes to picture quality. Also, I see other cameras for kids, like Disney ones that have 3.1 megapixels and get absolutely horrible reviews. But with the larger megapixel, wouldnt that produce better quality pictures? Macworld Digital Photography Superguide, Third Edition::
as science: someone who tends to take awful pictures can do it just as easily on a $1,000 digital. SLR as they did on an old 35-millimeter film camera.
http://files.macworld.com/files/downloads/digitalphoto-sg-preview.pdfHOME |
here you can get an explanation of megapixels:
http://www.digicamhelp.com/camera-featur...
personally...i think if a child is ready for a camera... he/she should be groomed with a REAL camera. what you are looking at are TOY cameras. if you are worrying about pic quality...then you shouldnt even be looking at them. they main objective is to interest children with a toy-look and to simply take a picture... Quality has nothing to do with it.
if i was in your position i would spend just $30 more on a REAL camera with adequate megapixels and a REAL zoom....such as: $90 Samsung S860:
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-8-1MP-Digi...
explaining to your child that this is a delicate "toy" and agree to keep it in your possession when he/she is not taking pictures should give you some good usage out of it and give your child a good head start on using a camera. I have nieces and nephews that age who have cameras just like this and we have instructed them that they need to be careful when using it and its returned to an adult for safekeeping when not in use. Actually its one of their fave toys... because of its "exclusive" use. the cheapest entry level camera, when handled with adequate care, will offer great service and pic quality/features over any toy camera.
Forums - Apple Discussion, Macworld Chat - Macworld UK::
Join the Macworld UK forums to discuss the latest industry rumour, news item, or simply while away an hour with like-minded peers.
http://www.macworld.co.uk/forums/msgs.cfm?SR=1&forum=4&msg=14679HOME |
other cheap alternatives:
canon powershot a470 $93 (could pull double duty...as this camera takes excellent pics and make a good adult camera too)
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-A4...
kodak c713 $89
http://www.amazon.com/Kodak-EasyShare-C7...
good luck in which way you go
edit: well if you agree with me swangirl...then you should give me a "thumbs up" below! lol :-)
I think you're right in not getting a "real" digital camera for your child. It's all too easy to break one, and the truth is that an 8-year-old is more concerned with the fun of taking the pictures than the way they actually turn out. Besides, digital cameras go obsolete so fast that there isn't really a point in "investing" in a good camera because by the time your daughter can appreciate it it'll be obsolete.
As fore megapixels, they don't necessarily dictate the picture quality. 1.3mp is pretty low, but it's what people used for the longest time when digital cameras came out. I had a 2mp camera and I took some great photos with it. Where megapixels really come into play is when you go to print photos. If you want to print anything at all larger than 4x6 you'll need more megapixels.
Image quality is dictated by a number of factors. The main factor is usually the lens. Many cell phone cameras have 2mp but take way worse photos than my 2mp digicam ever did. One reason for this is that the lens is tiny and made out of plastic. Another reason is that the sensor that captures the image is physically tiny in a cell phone. Another thing that affects image quality is the processor in the camera and whether or not it's optical zoom (good) or digital zoom (bad).
The point is, there are lots of complicated factors to consider if you're trying to calculate the image quality. Rather than getting hung up on the causes of image quality, I'd just go with the end product review. Who cares *why* the image looks good? It really just matters that it does.
I agree with Damon. Go with a real camera---your child will get better quality pictures an if he wants to print them out, he'll need higher megapixels than 1.3.
 Where was the last debate on wednesday with Mccain and Obama?
 INSTANCE / WAITING FOR SPRING
|
Can some explain megapixels to me? Looking for a decent digital camera for my 8-year-old.?