Bargain?

[rejectomorph]

If anybody is in the market for what appears to be a decent point-and-shoot digital camera at a remarkably low price, Google AdSense just sent me this link:

http://www.butterflyphoto.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=CP-5400

Wow. I'm not familiar with the merchant, but their reputation would probably be easy enough to track down. If I weren't saving all my pennies toward Sluggo's replacement, I'd be sorely tempted by this deal.

Comments

[waning-estrogen.livejournal.com]

not familiar with them either, but costco has that camera available online at $299, and you don't have to fiddle with the rebate. I think it's good through march 31 at that price. I saw it and recommended it to amy. other good thing, it still uses compact flash rather than the spendy SD cards. it takes pictures bigger than my monitor will show me in one swell foop.

[rejectomorph]

The prices have been dropping fast on digital cameras. Target advertised a 3.2 MP Polaroid with cheap non-zoom lens for $79 over the weekend. But I doubt that the Nikons will get much lower than this. It's getting to the point where the digital components are too small a percentage of the whole price. Higher quality camera bodies and good lenses aren't getting cheaper to make.

In the future, I'd expect the regular prices of higher quality cameras to stay about the same, but they will get more and more pixels at those prices. Then, each time there's a big increase in the number of pixels available on a camera, there will be a sale or rebate like this one on the old stock.

[waning-estrogen.livejournal.com]

yep. they were doing that this time last year, too. I got my little nikon 2.1mp for $110 last year and thought that was a steal (it was then).

I think for my purposes 3.2 would be the top end for me. I just don't need that much camera unless they can make the danged LCD bigger. my eyes are to the point I can't tell if I have a picture or not until I get it up on the monitor.

there are parts of this aging process I could do without.