|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 238
|
![]()
Which one is better overall camera in general? I am interested in good video ability, good low light ability and good sharp pictures out of the camera. I am buying this camera for my son. Also, are there any gotchas I need to be aware of in these cameras?
|
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 820
|
![]()
I haven't used either, but I have looked into both.
The A540 is a better camera features wise. However the SD600 is much smaller, so I'm buying it because I need a pocket camera. If the cameras physical size isn't an issue, then the A540 is better by a long shot. I should note, the A540 isn't huge by any means, it just won't fit well into jeans pockets. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 238
|
![]()
Morag2 wrote:
Quote:
Also, How is A620 compared to these two? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 953
|
![]()
Bought the SD600 last week for my wife-great little camera. My first Canon-a lot of nice features-bright LCD-minimal shutter lag-ISO 800. Bought the Canon case-fits like a glove. Attachment shot around 8:00 PM-at ISO 800.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 820
|
![]()
There are a whole bunch of advantages to the A540 over the SD600.
It has 4x zoom instead of 3x. It has a wider aperature range. It uses AA batteries (I consider this a good thing, it is easier to buy spares) It has a slightly faster shutter (can shoot at 1/2000ths of a second as opposed to 1/1500ths) They are both great cameras, but the A540 is better if size is not an object. As for the A620, I have no seen it, but I'd imagine it is just a slight upgrade over the A540. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|