|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 820
|
![]()
I need a nice pocket camera (my Kodak P850 is too small to carry around).
Here's what I need. -An Optical Viewfinder -3x Optical Zoom -at least 4MP... 5 would be nice, I could be talked into accepting 3, but only if it's a really nice camera at a great price. Besides that, I basically just want it to be really small and light (I want to carry it everywhere in my pocket) and $200 is about my max price. |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 260
|
![]()
depends on the pocket size, but I would say the the canon a530. Any ultracompact in that range <$200 usually have mediocre quality and poor performance in speed.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 260
|
![]()
Every camera we sell under $200 are very slow and have poor to mediocre picture quality. I agree with the last post of maybe buying an a530. It's a great camera for the price and is very small.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
![]()
The highly rated Canon A-620 is available on the internet for less than $300. From that price downward, you begin to compromise on both photo quality and features.
Yes, there are cameras that are cheaper, but the photo quality and the features available on the camera will be less. The Kodak Z-760 is in the under $200 range and it is OK but it will not be able to capture the photos in situations where the Canon A-620 can do it with ease. MT |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 930
|
![]()
Morag2, when you mention a budget of $200, you mean CAD and not USD, correct? I don't think you could get an A620 for $200CAD.
I'm assuming that when you say, "Kodak P850 is too small", your intent is to say it's too big? This past Christmas I got my mother an A520, and the picture quality seems pretty reasonable in the little time I played with it. The attached picture was tweaked slightly in Photopaint. No flash was used, it was rainy outside and the (white) blinds were drawn, most of the light was provided by some Christmas decorations and a table lamp that had a 60 watt bulb. IIRC, camera was set to Auto. I know its not a great pic, but I only have a couple. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 930
|
![]()
And here's another one, same time frame, this time with flash and everything else set to Auto.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
![]()
flipped-
Those are nice photos taken with the Canon A-520. That is a good alternative suggestion. MT |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
|
![]()
flippedgazelle wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 398
|
![]()
Tigerdirect.ca is selling Canon Powershot A430 for $198:
http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applicatio...&CatId=127 Vistek for $199.95, Henry's for $199.99 4 MP, 4X optical zoom (39 - 156 mm), use 2 X AA batteries, ISO 64 - 400, and your requirement optical viewfinder! It has the thickness of an AA battery and it is not as slim as an Exilim or Cybershot T9, but those card cams use proprietary Li batteries. Steve also gave this camera a thumbs-up! http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/a430.html |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|