A Camera For Distant Photography

[Uzoma]

I'm looking for a camera that will allow me to take photos from a distance. That way, I can take pictures in conferences that will allow me to get clear images of the speakers without having to get too close to the stage. I'm assuming that this will have something to do with the zoom but I'd appreciate any guidelines with respect to this.
Thanks in advance.

[anaxcrosswords]

Zoom isn't as important as it once was. Even small digicams now have a resolution of 14 megapixels or better, so you can take photos without zooming in then use any imaging software to crop down to the area of image you want, and you'll still have good image quality.

[gsr600]

normally when zooming you will get the shakes, it would help to stabilize the camera either with a tripod or monopod, if you cany use a nearby rest/table.

[gsr600]

*can't* not cany

[Old_Geezer]

All cameras allow you to take pictures at a distance :-)

But yes, if you wish to zoom in as if you were close then the camera should have a zoom lens.

Both points above are worth bearing in mind. Without a support it's difficult to prevent shake as you try to take the picture, but you can always get an extending tripod or something. And some cameras try to detect and 'compute out' the shaking anyway. And yes resolution is better than it used to be. Maybe you need to borrow a few from friends or whatever and see what suits ?

[Buenchico]

The lenses used by professional sports photographers (who need to get great telephoto shots) have focal lengths of 500mm to 1000mm, or even greater. (A standard 'point & shoot' camera will have a lens which has a focal length of around 40mm to 50mm). The closest you'll get with a camera that doesn't cost megabucks is something like this, which has a zoom lens going up to 720mm:
http://www.tesco.com/direct/fuji-finepix-s4500s4900-digital-camera-black/413-7120.prd?pageLevel=&skuId=413-7120

If you'd prefer something that you can easily slip into a pocket or purse, the Olympus SZ-14 (which has a maximum focal length of 600mm and dual image stabilisation to reduce camera shake) could well fit the bill:
http://www.olympus.co.uk/site/en/c/cameras/digital_cameras/traveller/sz_14/index.html
(It's a little over £100 from most outlets. Tesco change their price on it almost daily, varying from £99 to £139 but with £109 being the most commonly charged price).

Given that conference halls aren't usually particularly well-lit, and that flash units are useless over any great distance, image-stabilisation (to avoid the camera shake that often occurs when using long lenses) should be high on your list of priorities.

Chris

PS: I've got an Olympus SZ-14 and I can highly recommend it.

[Uzoma]

Thanks everyone for your answers - it's given me a lot of insight (and explains why a *lot* of my pictures look so shaky. At least I know it's not that I was as nervous as I first thought!

[Zacs-Master]

What is your budget?

[jomifl]

As most conferences areheld indoors te light levels are fairly low. To use a telephoto or zoom lens under these conditions might not be practical as the shutter speed would have to be too slow to avoid the 'shakes'. Go for a camera with as many megaixels as you can afford along with an adjustable ASA setting. This will allow you to use a modest zoom and a faster shutter speed. A high megapixel sensor (above 15) will enable you to blow up the picture with software without losing too much resolution. Flash might help too if you are not too far from the subject. It all come down to budget.

[gen2]

In my opinion, Jomifl is incorrect. The shutter speed would have to be equally slow regardless of the focal length of the lens. It is the low lighting level that forces the slow shutter.
Any blur in an image will appear just the same regardless of whether you take the picture
a) on wide angle and blow it up afterwards on a computer,
or b) whether you use a long zoom to blow it up optically before capture.

(a) will give you a lower definition image (fewer megapixels) whereas (b) will give you a higher definition (more megapixels) equally blurred image.

In my experience, image stabilisation works well for shutter speeds faster than 1/60th. The downside of using a high ISO/ASA setting to get a faster shutter, is that you get more digital noise which is seen as increased graininess in the image.

[jomifl]

Gen2, thank you for that. You are wrong, A longer focal length requires a faster shutter speed, a basic principle of photography, it is not a matter of opinion.

[jomifl]

The same optical principles apply whatever camera you are using, if you double the focal length of the lens you get an image twice the linear size and 4X the area thus need 4 x as much light so must the increase the amount of time the shutter is open by a factor of 4 assuming the aperture remains the same. Alternatively keep the shutter speed the same and increase the aperture by 2 stops(if you can)