Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 25, 2005, 4:01 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3
Default

Hi I'm thinking about buying one of those cameras, but I dont know enough about digital cameras to decide myself whitch one to buy.Thank you for all of your help Regards Marcin
dyziowg is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 25, 2005, 4:31 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 17
Default

dyziowg wrote:
Quote:
Hi I'm thinking about buying one of those cameras, but I dont know enough about digital cameras to decide myself whitch one to buy.Thank you for all of your help Regards Marcin
All three cams will give you excellent results and are actually very fun touse.The A75 or A510 would be the best choicesof the three as the 520 is priced too high. The 520 is retailing for $100 more than the 510. This is what you get for an extra $100:

a) .8 megapixels more (3.2 for 510, 4.0 for 520)

b) slower continuous shooting: 510 @ 2.3 shots/sec; 520 @ 1.9 shots/sec

c) slightly higher digital zoom: 510 3.2x, 520 3.6x (this is not really a benefit since optical zoom is what to look for. Just listed it here because it is a difference between 510/520).

That is basically it. The .8 megapixels, slower continuous shooting, and a 3.6x digital zoom (digital zoom is a last resort, look for optical zoom)with the 520 is NOT worth an extra $100.

Do some research on imagin-resource, dpreview, and here.

Good luck
Mike682 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 25, 2005, 5:53 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 44
Default

I'm not too sure if the A510 should be considered "better" than the A75, although it has been named the A75's successor. Aside from the 4x optical zoom (which is nice), it's kind of a trade-off. The A510 is quite a bit smaller and lighter because it uses only two AA batteries instead of the A75's four, so it fits into a pocket nicely, but the fact that it takes only two batteries is probably part of thereason the flash takes so long to recharge.I guess it depends on the kind of shooting you plan to do. I like my A510 quite a bit, in fact I was thrilled whenCanon came out with it because I have always considered the A75 to be too heavy and bulky for everyday use, but I don't (that is, I can't) shoot rapid sequential shots using the flash. Lucky for me I am not a heavy flash user, because I didn't even know about that limitation whenI bought the A510. (How is the A75 in the flash department? Anybody know?)
Daniel T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2005, 6:19 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3
Default

By what I have read till now seems that A510 is better than A75 in some respects. But there are some things that seriously bother me.

1.Red eye reduction : looks like 510 has worse eye reduction than 75. Does it matter that much ??? i mean i see red eye in most of the cameras and its not even consistant for the same camera. so does it really matter ?

2. Low light resolution : Very poor. saw some sample pics. A75 was better than A510. Is it very particular to that camera and pic or is this generic.

3 . Flash : In the same post read that flash of 510 is poor and takes longer time to recharge. does this really affect the continious photo mood ?




kaustubh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2005, 8:30 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 440
Default

Daniel T wrote:
Quote:
(that is, I can't) shoot rapid sequential shots using the flash. Lucky for me I am not a heavy flash user, because I didn't even know about that limitation whenI bought the A510.
You can't shoot rapid sequential shots w/flash with any small camera. Recharging a flash takes time. It doesn't take much time, but it will take longer than the 0.25-1 seconds the camera uses for rapid shooting. You can't get around physics....

PhilR.
PhilR. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2005, 10:38 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 17
Default

kaustubh wrote:
Quote:
By what I have read till now seems that A510 is better than A75 in some respects. But there are some things that seriously bother me.

1.Red eye reduction : looks like 510 has worse eye reduction than 75. Does it matter that much ??? i mean i see red eye in most of the cameras and its not even consistant for the same camera. so does it really matter ?

2. Low light resolution : Very poor. saw some sample pics. A75 was better than A510. Is it very particular to that camera and pic or is this generic.

3 . Flash : In the same post read that flash of 510 is poor and takes longer time to recharge. does this really affect the continious photo mood ?




From Imaging-resource regarding low light scenarios:

"Night Shots: Excellent low-light performance. Good color and exposure, with low image noise, at the darkest light levels of this test. Pretty good low-light autofocus performance."

"Noise was fairly low in most shots, and even at ISO 400, image noise wasn't overly bright or distracting."

Read the full review:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A510/A51A.HTM
Mike682 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2005, 4:31 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 44
Default

We have a thread on the Canon forum discussing the A510 flash recharge times. They average about 8 seconds between shots:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=15

As far as redeye goes, I have not even tried it, because I'm not the kind of guy who likes to hit people with a direct flash in the eyes. It amazes me that so many people will line up like cattle and get repeatedly flashed in the face whenever the photographer(s) want them to.

This reminds me of another photographic experience. I anda bunch of friends went walking up a long winding road to a good viewpoint, then we all headed back down. As we neared the bottom everyone was quite tired out and was ready to be done with the walk, but at that point one of our group pulled out a camera, stood with her back to the sun, lined us all up facing the sun, and said "OK, everybody look at the sun so I can get a good shot!" What amazed me was how many of us actually did look directly at the sun. Straight into the sun, on a clear, cloudless day in Hawaii. Never underestimate the power of the photographer!

But OK, just for you guys I will go into the closet and flash myself a few times to see how the redeye turns out on the A510. Will report back soon.
Daniel T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2005, 4:48 PM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 44
Default

Well, I'm back. I just went into a dark closet and took 10 flash shots of my face. I tried looking directly into the lense, directly into the flash unit, and a little off to the side opposite the flash unit. I'm sorry to reportthat I could not get any redeye at all! There is certainly some reflection in the centers of my eyes from the flash unit, but it is white, not red. Does anybody have an explanation for why I could not see any redeye? (Aside from the fact that I am now half-blind from all the flashing).
Daniel T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2005, 12:07 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3
Default

There are lots of contrasting views..have a look at this article.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ca...ew/index.shtml


@Daniel : Thx a lot for taking so much pain to test the things. :-)
kaustubh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2005, 9:10 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 44
Default

I've been reading up on the red-eye phenomena, and I think I was too close to the camera. (I held it at arms length.) Guess I'll have to try again with it farther back.
Daniel T is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:02 PM.