« Whatever Makes You Feel Like a Kid Again | Main | That Was Fast: 14 Amazon Reviews for the Eton Field Radio with RDS »
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Your Information
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 |
It's a shame it doesn't have a viewfinder. Composing a picture is much easier with a viewfinder than with a small screen. The image is much larger and far easier to see in bright light. Hopefully the next version of this camera will have an EVF.
Posted by: Gary | September 28, 2014 at 09:25 PM
It outscored the Sony RX100 III? That's the series Gizmodo is always crowning best point-and-shoot..
Posted by: StarHalo | September 28, 2014 at 10:12 PM
How about a recommendation for best digital camera under $200? Something that is significantly better than a smartphone, or do you have to go above $200 for that?
Posted by: jonnybardo | September 29, 2014 at 07:20 AM
Jonny, $390 is more like it for a Canon Powershot. http://www.amazon.com/Canon-PowerShot-Digital-Camera-2-8-Inch/dp/B009B0MZ1M/ref=sr_1_19?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1412033687&sr=1-19&keywords=canon+powershot
Posted by: herculodge | September 29, 2014 at 04:36 PM
Thanks, Jeff. Very tempting. Funny how I'm more hesitant to spend $390 on a camera than on a watch.
Posted by: jonnybardo | September 29, 2014 at 06:17 PM
My friend who works in advertising recommended a Canon at the 400 price point two years ago and it's been great. Those watches are idols, man. I'm one to talk.
Posted by: herculodge | September 29, 2014 at 06:40 PM