Steve'sDigicams

bernie_mak · May 10, 2006, 7:05 AM

I'd ordered what I thought was an awesome deal on a Casio S600 from a mate of mine only to recieve a Casio Z600!!! :shock:

He's given me the option to return it and get the S600 but I just wanted to get some opinions abotu whether I should stick with the Z600.

Only major differences i could find was that the Z600 was slightly larger and had a larger LCD screen with more pixels. S600 was obviously smaller, weighed less, had slightlybetter video and more shooting modes??

Any help would be greatly appreciated :-)

slipe · May 10, 2006, 12:22 PM

The S600 uses MPEG4. There is more than a slight difference there IMO. I shoot mostly in past movie mode, which I really like. Only Casio cameras with MPEG4 have that mode. I don't know of any other current cameras that have such a mode. Of course the movies take only a quarter the space on the card as well with MPEG4.

If movies aren't important and the size is OK I like the features better on the Z600. The LCD is much nicer, which I think is a factor in a camera without any other viewfinder. Things like 3 flash shots in a second and flash assist are useful. I haven't seen any reviews but I would assume if it can take three full resolution flash shots in a second it has a decent burst mode – something missing from previous Casio cameras and I think missing from the S600.

There are already too many scene modes to scroll through IMO. Only a few are really useful and the more you have the longer it takes to find the useful ones.

My personal preference would be the Z600 although I would really miss the great past movie mode. Both have internal memory you can store a permanent photo album on, but you could show your pictures off a lot better with the nice screen. I'm guessing the Z has a stronger flash but I don't know for sure. The flash assist takes you out to 25 feet even with a weaker flash, and I don't think the S has that. It increases the noise some, but not enough to notice on small prints.

Diggs · May 15, 2006, 11:07 PM

Just to clarify, reports I have read about the z-600 indicate that the shots are NOT full resolution in that 3 shot flash mode, although they do take up the full image size.

See Kenrockwell.com

ennacac · May 16, 2006, 12:54 AM

I have the Z600 and it is a great camera with a large LCD that is easily seen in daylight, a flash that is actually useable and great battery life. I have a video camera for video, so the video function of the S600 is of no value to me although the Z600 does do video, but not of the qulaity of the S600.

Tom

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

May 10, 2006, 7:05 AM	#1
bernie_mak Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 5	I'd ordered what I thought was an awesome deal on a Casio S600 from a mate of mine only to recieve a Casio Z600!!! :shock: He's given me the option to return it and get the S600 but I just wanted to get some opinions abotu whether I should stick with the Z600. Only major differences i could find was that the Z600 was slightly larger and had a larger LCD screen with more pixels. S600 was obviously smaller, weighed less, had slightlybetter video and more shooting modes?? Any help would be greatly appreciated :-)

May 10, 2006, 12:22 PM	#2
slipe Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL Posts: 4,036	The S600 uses MPEG4. There is more than a slight difference there IMO. I shoot mostly in past movie mode, which I really like. Only Casio cameras with MPEG4 have that mode. I don't know of any other current cameras that have such a mode. Of course the movies take only a quarter the space on the card as well with MPEG4. If movies aren't important and the size is OK I like the features better on the Z600. The LCD is much nicer, which I think is a factor in a camera without any other viewfinder. Things like 3 flash shots in a second and flash assist are useful. I haven't seen any reviews but I would assume if it can take three full resolution flash shots in a second it has a decent burst mode – something missing from previous Casio cameras and I think missing from the S600. There are already too many scene modes to scroll through IMO. Only a few are really useful and the more you have the longer it takes to find the useful ones. My personal preference would be the Z600 although I would really miss the great past movie mode. Both have internal memory you can store a permanent photo album on, but you could show your pictures off a lot better with the nice screen. I'm guessing the Z has a stronger flash but I don't know for sure. The flash assist takes you out to 25 feet even with a weaker flash, and I don't think the S has that. It increases the noise some, but not enough to notice on small prints.

May 15, 2006, 11:07 PM	#3
Diggs Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 16	Just to clarify, reports I have read about the z-600 indicate that the shots are NOT full resolution in that 3 shot flash mode, although they do take up the full image size. See Kenrockwell.com

May 16, 2006, 12:54 AM	#4
ennacac Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 4,198	I have the Z600 and it is a great camera with a large LCD that is easily seen in daylight, a flash that is actually useable and great battery life. I have a video camera for video, so the video function of the S600 is of no value to me although the Z600 does do video, but not of the qulaity of the S600. Tom