I either got the wrong camera, or I need some help using this thing ;P (Fuji S2940)

*****EDIT******* MODS - I posted here since it is absolutely a science/tech question. However, I've realized that quite a few of the people I was hoping to hear from post in the photo threads of Second Opinion. I'd like it moved there, if you guys agree it'd be better served in that subby. Sorry for the messup, and if you think it'll fare just as well here, then no problem anyway!

Okay I got this camera the other day, it seemed like what I was aiming at - though I never really figured out the specs that'd denote that.. - anyways it looked good at the time, and then I awake and, yup, I have a new camera (fuckin memory pills....sweet, sedative memory pills )

I can still return if need be. (camera was $200 at walmart, I'd rather spend in the 150-250max range, doesn't matter where I get it - the walmart purchase was impulse lol, but it 'seemed' like what I wanted..perhaps it is?)

Anyways I'll 'breakdown' this post to help readability ;P
Please help, I'm dying to just start taking hundreds of pics, but would rather head out to swap this thing if it's not what I needed....

The Camera I got:
FujiFilm S2940 (it seems to be the model# for walmart - the S2950 seems to be their actual model for this)
Walmart's Generic Product Page
FujiFilm's page for the S2950 (I cannot find what, if any, changes were made to create their S2940, walmart-specific, offering)


Now, some things I'm very unclear about, and since I know that people here know their shit wrt photography.

The Pictures I'd like to take:
- real up-close pictures (I grow passion flower vines - taking real close/detailed pics of passion flowers is almost a must. This camera let's me get up to 2cm lens-to-subject, seems solid, right?)
- pics of a solid subject w/ a 'moving' background (this means focusing on, say, a person, so they come through focused but the people/landscape behind them seems to 'move', I believe "overexposing" would be the term. Unsure how to do that, if this thing even allows it)
- pics of a solid subject, very focused, with an incredibly blurry background.

Now, if there's other camera reco's in the 150-250 price range, please list them! (I should note I'm averse to ordering this kind of thing online, but I'm sure I could find a place to drive to!)

Also, and I'm sure (hoping?) that this is my own ignorance, but tbh, this thing simply seems like a bulkier, $50+ version of my old slim little 'Nikon Coolpix'. I guess either I'm missing a lot here, or I did just buy a bulkier, pricier camera. If so, I'd rather just go grab a pocket-sized coolpix....

(another thing - it doesn't even appear you can change lenses w/ this thing, am I just completely missing something???? the thing looks 'fixed' in all ways, but at the same time it doesn't seem to be any sort of 'universal' / 'all in one' lense... Not that I'm looking to spend more on lens atm, but if there's others that have lens that're more 'universal' I'm probably better off with one of those.....)


Thank you sooooooooooo much in advance for recommendations. This journey started some months back when I was considering just getting an old canon A1 or AE1, since I knew they could do what I wanted, but getting photos developed + having to learn the thing made it seem smarter to drop more $ to get a digital version to let me do these things, and this things doesn't seem to have these options/properties!!!!!!!!!!!!
<<perhaps that's a good question - what's the cheapest digital cam that would let me do what I could've done w/ film and an older canonA1/AE1?>>
<<and wtf is the whole mess:
""The other irony of ALL bridge cameras, despite their bulk approaching a small DSLR (thus bridging between P&S and DSLR), the sensor is the 1:2.3 size of 99% of all other P&S. Only about 4 P&S have a larger 1:1.7 sensor but they are costly, have limited zoom, and in all cases more compact. The quality and size of the sensor has the biggest impact on picture quality, and as they cram more pixels in the smallest sensor, picture quality deteriorates.""


ANY ANY ANY input is huge here, I just dunno wtf to get so I can start takin pics w/o constantly babying it so it can be returned! Also don't want to bother learning this thing tooo well if I'm learning the wrong camera!
Thnx again

There's so many cameras out there it's hard to give advice about specific models. The one you bought seems fine to me though, and should do what you want. You can't change lens, if you want to do that you'll have to spend considerably more, but it should be okay for what you want to do. Most decent compacts are capable of reasonable close up pictures.

With the "solid subject w/ a moving background", I think "panning" is what you're referring to (definitely not overexposing). To do this you need a fairly slow shutter speed, such as 1/20 sec, and be moving the camera as the subject moves to keep it perfectly within the frame. Takes quite a bit of practice and you need to set the shutter speed manually. Generally this is easier with an SLR but you could do it with that camera too, with patience.

Focussed subject with a blurry background (this is called "bokeh"), with that camera you'll need to get close to your subject and use the lens wide open (lowest aperture number). It will still not work that great, to do this properly you really need an SLR, and that's far more expensive.

Also, dpreview.com is an excellent photography review site, and a good place to learn about cameras in general if you're interested.

Basically, that camera is probably fine for what you want, given how much you want to spend, I wouldn't stress about rushing out and changing it.

This is something I should've figured out b4 purchasing lol, but why is this camera so much larger than the 'pocketsized' ones that're like same price, specs, etc? If their #'s are about the same, seems pointless to have such a bulky camera...

That's mainly because of the long zoom - this will create a bulkier camera. With the more compact models you won't get any where near as great a reach.

Looks like a pretty decent camera IMO for what you're doing. If you want the best of both worlds, get a decent used film SLR for like $40 off eBay for those shots that you want perfect control over (spend extra money on specialty lenses if you want). A digital SLR camera is pretty expensive still, but a good film one is not that much at all.

So I went and returned it, got a reaaaally slim one that had the same megapixels(14), and the thing completely SUCKS. It's only got 4 or 5X optical zoom, but trying to take pics at a foot, five feet, etc, is horrible, it's like the camera cannot focus. I'm unsure what specs are making this difference, I foresee a real annoying trial/error process here :/

^Image stabilization is pretty important (hands are not that stable generally). Your previous camera had it, appropriately, as it had a pretty decent amount of zoom. Placing a camera on a tripod is another way to tackle the problem, as is using a SLR camera with a fast shutter speed, but it sounds like you're going more for convenience. The first one you chose was pretty good for an all purpose, convenient camera IMO.

Yeah stabilization was practically absent from the 2nd cam I got, it was so bad I didn't bother putting it on the tripod to even test further, no way I was keeping that ;P
I'm pretty happy with the 3rd one I got, I think I'll be keeping this one
3rd/keeper cam
/edit- and the coolest bonus came with it, unsure if the associate meant to or not, but I got an 8g SD card with it w/ like hundreds of shots of best buy's displays from customers using the floor models of various cameras ;P