Re: Opinions on Canon A610
- From: ASAAR <caught@xxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 12:26:08 -0500
On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 05:13:18 -0800, SMS wrote:
The only real negative is that it uses AA batteries instead of a
longer-lasting, rechargeable Li-Ion, but most lower cost cameras will
have that issue. It isn't a deal-breaker, just something to be aware of.
Your ridiculous mantra wore thin months ago. Many old cameras,
designed years ago could deplete their AA batteries in minutes, some
not even being able to take a dozen shots. That's no longer the
case, *especially* with the Canon A610 and A620. They're able to
take far more than most cameras that use rechargeable Li-Ion
batteries. Dpreview stated that their battery life is "superb",
confirming Canon's claim of up to 1,500 shots. That this is using
the CIPA procedure requiring 1/2 of the shots to use the flash
really is amazing. You know this. You've heard it before.
Just the other day someone posted a message stating that he has
taken hundreds of shots since last November, and the original
alkaline AA batteries are still going strong. Do you have a memory
problem or is there some other reason to explain your irrational
bias?
I'd avoid the A620, as the pixel density is too high, so the higher ISO
levels are very noisy.
More of your unfounded nonsense. Dpreview's review of the A620
made no note of excessive noise. Selected quotes from the review:
Specific Image Quality Issues
No real complaints here - the A620 produces clean, detailed results in a wide variety of shooting situations.
The good news is that the purple fringing that plagued the A95 has
been all but eliminated, and focus accuracy is significantly better
(only one or two shots out of 500 had missed focus).
We found very little evidence of purple fringing in any of our real-world
shots - where there is some it is only in overexposed areas, and is so soft
as to be unnoticeable at normal print sizes. This is a real improvement
over the A95 (and many of the SD/IXUS models too).
as noted in previous reviews this particular CCD seems to have
very well controlled noise - certainly compared to the 5MP version
that preceded it.
As noted before, this 7MP CCD has relatively low noise at ISO 400
(certainly compared to the 5MP sensor used in the A95), and -
unless light levels drop very low - the results are perfectly usable.
at ISO 400 the difference between Canon's fairly subtle and Casio's
sledgehammer approach to noise reduction has widened the gap
significantly. There's more detail in the A620 image, yet despite the
Z750's heavier noise reduction it still looks noisy - with nasty blotches
in all areas of solid color. Few small sensor compacts perform that well
at ISO 400, but the A620 is amongst the better.
Conclusion - Pros
* Good edge-to-edge sharpness
* Very little purple fringing
* Excellent battery life from 4x NiMH batteries
* Good balance of noise reduction and detail retention at ISO 400
Overall conclusion
The PowerShot A95 was one of the most successful 5MP compacts
due to its compelling combination of features, image quality and
value for money. But it was not a camera without problems - mainly
performance and speed issues, most of which we - and all the people
who bought it - put down to the inevitable compromise involved in
getting so many features at such a keen price. The PowerShot A620,
though externally pretty similar, is a very different kettle of fish.
Not only does it boast a much better sensor, but the use of the latest
DIGIC II processor means it's a lot, lot faster in operation too.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Opinions on Canon A610
- From: SMS
- Re: Opinions on Canon A610
- References:
- Opinions on Canon A610
- From: Mirsky
- Re: Opinions on Canon A610
- From: SMS
- Opinions on Canon A610
- Prev by Date: Re: Sony Cybershot DSC-H1
- Next by Date: Re: Problem with d/loading to PC running Windows ME
- Previous by thread: Re: Opinions on Canon A610
- Next by thread: Re: Opinions on Canon A610
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
