Digital Camera opinions
- Thread starter pgp
- Start date
SayNoToPistons
New member
Ditch in a little more for the Canon A540 6.0 megapixel (its a great deal for the price). The A530 would be the best out of the three you posted though.
Steves Digicams - Canon Powershot A540 - User Review
I have a A520 myeslf. 4.0 megapixels. Simple basic camera with great picture quality for the price with lots of manual settings to play with (aperture, exposure, manual focus, flash, etc).
Steves Digicams - Canon Powershot A540 - User Review
I have a A520 myeslf. 4.0 megapixels. Simple basic camera with great picture quality for the price with lots of manual settings to play with (aperture, exposure, manual focus, flash, etc).
Wasatch
New member
I'm really liking the Canon's right now.
It looks like you are looking for something under $150, but if you can stretch it to $275 and want a great camera with an awesome zoom lens check out the Panasonic DMC-FZ7. I just got one, and haven't had a chance to take many pics yet, but from all my research it is one of the best point and shoots for outdoor pictures.
By the way, Steve's Digicams - Main Menu , Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ and Digital Camera Reviews from the Digital Camera Resource Page are great sites for reviews and forums on the different cameras.
pgp said:
From the cameras you are considering, I would take the Canon hands down. The other two will not have the sharp picture quality and flexibility of the A series Canon. BTW, the A series are some of the best values in cameras out there for their picture quality, price point, and features. Gotta love the swivel flip-out panels too!
I own a A95 (older 5MP cam) and love it! I want the new A640 though (10MP)!
Regards,
Mike
I would go with the Canon. I have has Sony, HP, and Canon. The Sony was decent but ate batteries. The HP ate batteries like water. The Canon I know have has an excellent battery life. I can not believe how much use I can get out of the 4 rechargable batteries before needing to recharge. The picture quality is great and the camera has a lot of features/functions that are easy to use along with a good auto function.
tom p.
Active member
I would get a very good camera that has been phased out or in the process of being phased out. You'll get the best value that way - - perhaps more than you've bargained for.
I've had several Canons (pro-sumer versions), an early Kodak, an Oly, and my most recent acquisition: a cheap SONY that get great pictures.
Avoid: cheap cameras fitted with crappy, tiny lenses.
Happy hunting!
I've had several Canons (pro-sumer versions), an early Kodak, an Oly, and my most recent acquisition: a cheap SONY that get great pictures.
Avoid: cheap cameras fitted with crappy, tiny lenses.
Happy hunting!
imported_Yal
New member
Here's an article from the NY times to help you also.....
The Truth About Digital Cameras by David Pogue Technical Writer for the NYTIMES
As loyal Pogue’s Posts readers are no doubt aware, I’ve spent the last seven weeks in TV land, filming a first batch of six episodes of my new Discovery-network series, “It’s All Geek to Me.� It was an exhilarating, exhausting, enlightening journey. Someday when we’re all together, I’ll tell you about it.
Actually, I’ll tell you about one thing right now. We did an episode on digital cameras. Part of the fun involved visiting a couple of big electronics stores, posing as somebody who didn’t know much about cameras, and, later, commenting on what they told me.
The clerks at one store recognized me. The guy at the other store had no clue that I’m a tech writer. Both of them were surprisingly frank, pointing out, for example, that five megapixels is plenty for prints up to smallish poster size.
Now, every time I write that, I hear from furious or baffled readers. “I don’t get it,� wrote one. “A ten-megapixel camera produces photos about 3640 pixels wide-enough to make a 12-inch print at 300 dpi (dots per inch) on a good printer. Sure, you can go lower, but quality is sacrificed; you can’t make an 11×14 print, let alone anything bigger.�
I have to say, the math sounds right. But I also have to say that he’s wrong.
On the show, we did a test. We blew up a photograph to 16 x 24 inches at a professional photo lab. One print had 13-megapixel resolution; one had 8; the third had 5. Same exact photo, down-rezzed twice, all three printed at the same poster size. I wanted to hang them all on a wall in Times Square and challenge passersby to see if they could tell the difference.
Even the technician at the photo lab told me that I was crazy, that there’d be a huge difference between 5 megapixels and 13.
I’m prepared to give away the punch line of this segment, because hey-the show doesn’t air till February, and you’ll have forgotten all about what you read here today, right?
Anyway, we ran the test for about 45 minutes. Dozens of people stopped to take the test; a little crowd gathered. About 95 percent of the volunteers gave up, announcing that there was no possible way to tell the difference, even when mashing their faces right up against the prints. A handful of them attempted guesses-but were wrong. Only one person correctly ranked the prints in megapixel order, although (a) she was a photography professor, and (b) I believe she just got lucky.
I’m telling you, there was NO DIFFERENCE.
This post is going to get a lot of people riled up, I know, because in THEORY, you should be able to see a difference. But you can’t.
And I’m hoping this little test can save you some bucks the next time you’re shopping for a camera.
The Truth About Digital Cameras by David Pogue Technical Writer for the NYTIMES
As loyal Pogue’s Posts readers are no doubt aware, I’ve spent the last seven weeks in TV land, filming a first batch of six episodes of my new Discovery-network series, “It’s All Geek to Me.� It was an exhilarating, exhausting, enlightening journey. Someday when we’re all together, I’ll tell you about it.
Actually, I’ll tell you about one thing right now. We did an episode on digital cameras. Part of the fun involved visiting a couple of big electronics stores, posing as somebody who didn’t know much about cameras, and, later, commenting on what they told me.
The clerks at one store recognized me. The guy at the other store had no clue that I’m a tech writer. Both of them were surprisingly frank, pointing out, for example, that five megapixels is plenty for prints up to smallish poster size.
Now, every time I write that, I hear from furious or baffled readers. “I don’t get it,� wrote one. “A ten-megapixel camera produces photos about 3640 pixels wide-enough to make a 12-inch print at 300 dpi (dots per inch) on a good printer. Sure, you can go lower, but quality is sacrificed; you can’t make an 11×14 print, let alone anything bigger.�
I have to say, the math sounds right. But I also have to say that he’s wrong.
On the show, we did a test. We blew up a photograph to 16 x 24 inches at a professional photo lab. One print had 13-megapixel resolution; one had 8; the third had 5. Same exact photo, down-rezzed twice, all three printed at the same poster size. I wanted to hang them all on a wall in Times Square and challenge passersby to see if they could tell the difference.
Even the technician at the photo lab told me that I was crazy, that there’d be a huge difference between 5 megapixels and 13.
I’m prepared to give away the punch line of this segment, because hey-the show doesn’t air till February, and you’ll have forgotten all about what you read here today, right?
Anyway, we ran the test for about 45 minutes. Dozens of people stopped to take the test; a little crowd gathered. About 95 percent of the volunteers gave up, announcing that there was no possible way to tell the difference, even when mashing their faces right up against the prints. A handful of them attempted guesses-but were wrong. Only one person correctly ranked the prints in megapixel order, although (a) she was a photography professor, and (b) I believe she just got lucky.
I’m telling you, there was NO DIFFERENCE.
This post is going to get a lot of people riled up, I know, because in THEORY, you should be able to see a difference. But you can’t.
And I’m hoping this little test can save you some bucks the next time you’re shopping for a camera.
Very cool article. At any rate, if I were pgp, I would get whatever I could afford in a good zoom camera. My first is a Canon A20, and while it takes good pics for what it is, the 3X zoom is a bummer. I have had many times where I wish I had more zoom. I would try to look for one of the 6X optical zoom cameras. And don't pay any attention to digital zoom as it can ruin a good picture.
cwcad
New Normal
This is a discontinued camera
but it still can be purchased. Have been using mine for six months. IT takes great pictures and you can add a lense to the camera for that up close or far away shot. I believe that I paid under 185 dollars for this one. Now all I have to do is find the money to put that nice big lense on the camera.
go check out norm koren's web site and his links to other web sites for way too much technical detail! :wow:
Norman Koren photography: images and tutorials
Norman Koren photography: images and tutorials
SayNoToPistons
New member
pgp said:
The A540 is 4x optical zoom btw. Its enough for me... Theres also iirc 16x digital zoom for you if the 4x optical isn't enough (though you loose clarity with zoom especially digital zoom).