Support NeoGAF

[bionic77]

I know we make one of these threads every week, but there seems to be an expert in everything at the OT.

I am looking for a new digital camera for myself, somewhere in the $300-400 dollar price range. I want something that can take pictures very quickly and of course has great image quality. I am leaning towards Canon myself as I am very impressed with my friends (his pics seem to destroy the pics I get on my 2 year old Sony).

Any suggestions? And how big of a difference does the type of memory make for a camera? I really want this sucker to be as close to the speed and quality of a regular camera.


P.S. Any advice on a Digital camcorder as well? I was in Sam's Club the other day and it seemed like there were a bunch of of them for under 300, granted they all seemed like junk but is that the going rate on camcorders these days? Don't need something too fancy, but I don't want something that is trash either. Has to be able to connect to my PC as well so I can burn the movies to DVD.

 

[VPhys]

For that price the best Canon is the SD500.

The CanonS410/S500 (previous generation) are not NEARLY as fast, but the image quality is better. That said, for a casual user you probably won't even be able to tell the difference, and you are more likely to appreciate the increased speed, larger LCD, and the SD memory cards of the SD500.

 

[bionic77]

That camera is a little expensive for my tastes. I am leaning towards those older generation Canons unless you can give me a reason why I shouldn't?

How much of a difference is there in speed btw?

 

[ArcadeStickMonk]

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/

I'm ordering a Canon A95 from Zip Zoom Fly next week. You can't beat that quality for $288.

 

[bionic77]

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/

I'm ordering a Canon A95 from Zip Zoom Fly next week. You can't beat that quality for $288.

That A95 looks nice, but it says USB1.1 on the webpage and CF cards again. Do they make faster CF cards that can compete with the faster SD cards and could the camera take advantage of it?

What is the difference between the A95 and the S500 btw? Which one comes out on top in terms of features? They seem to be the same price.

 

[ArcadeStickMonk]

I really don't know. Judging by the way the rest of the ELPH's stack up on DP Review, I'd expect the A95 to take cleaner pictures, but beyond that...

S500 Test
A95 Test

S500 Resolution Test
A95 Resolution Test

For me, no contest.

A95 rulez #1

 

[bionic77]

I really don't know. Judging by the way the rest of the ELPH's stack up on DP Review, I'd expect the A95 to take cleaner pictures, but beyond that...

S500 Test
A95 Test

S500 Resolution Test
A95 Resolution Test

For me, no contest.

A95 rulez #1

More confused...

 

[ArcadeStickMonk]

Not sure why. I only care about picture quality and price.

All the samples I look at show the A95 taking a much sharper picture than anything else of a comparible price. Look how soft the edges of the S500 resolution test are!

Minute detail is going to come in to play big time when I'm taking pictures of cramped project boxes filled with wire and custom circuits and other bric-a-brac.

I'd love a camera with the form factor of the S500, but if it's shots are going to be fuzzier than something else in the same price range, then I'm going to buy what takes better pictures.

 

[achilles]

That A95 looks nice, but it says USB1.1 on the webpage and CF cards again. Do they make faster CF cards that can compete with the faster SD cards and could the camera take advantage of it?

Heh, sorry to sneak into your topic, but I also had a question about CF cards. I recently purchased a Canon Digital Rebel,and a SanDisk Ultra II CF card. Browsing through the Apple store, I was wondering how much better the Lexar 40x card is. The Rebel + my Ultra II card is already blazing fast, does the 40x really make a difference? Because the price difference of the two is rediculous...
Lexar 2GB 40x
SanDisk 2GB Ultra II

And oh, relating to the topic, I've been a Canon Digital Elph user for a while, and I just really love their line. The SD400, which is 5.0 MP should be good enough, no need to go for the 7.0. It's nice and compact, a lot lighter than the S500, big lcd and of course great quality. Plus it's around $400 or less.

 

[ArcadeStickMonk]

SD500 is 7.1

S500 is 5.0

 

[bionic77]

Not sure why. I only care about picture quality and price.

All the samples I look at show the A95 taking a much sharper picture than anything else of a comparible price. Look how soft the edges of the S500 resolution test are!

Minute detail is going to come in to play big time when I'm taking pictures of cramped project boxes filled with wire and custom circuits and other bric-a-brac.

I'd love a camera with the form factor of the S500, but if it's shots are going to be fuzzier than something else in the same price range, then I'm going to buy what takes better pictures.

I think you have convinced me to get the A95.

I just have a few questions. Does it transfer at USB 2.0 speeds? Not the biggest deal for me to be honest even if it is at USB 1.1, because I won't be filling up the 512MB card I plan to buy on a daily basis.

More important, as Nas asked, does the speed of the CF card make a difference? How much of a speed difference can you expect?

 

[ArcadeStickMonk]

I don't fucking know. I'm totally just weighing my own values against the data I'm getting from digital camera review sites. I know shit about the various flash formats.

The A95 is only USB 1 however. I'll buy some faster card reader at some point; going to need to support the PSP as well.

 

[achilles]

SD500 is 7.1

S500 is 5.0

Yeah, I had the S500 (recently broke it... if you're into photography, you know how devastating that is =/).

I meant he didn't need to go all the way up to a 7.0 megapixel, he could just stick with the SD400 which in comparison to the S500(the old 5.0 that I had), is much more convenient with size, weight, bigger lcd etc etc.

 

[Pochacco]

Memory card type is pretty much a non-factor, at least for your purposes.
CF and SD are the cheapest, and most common.
Sony MS are pricey, but useful if you have other Sony electronics (e.g. PSP).

I don't think you have to worry about speed too much. It's more of a factor if you're buying a pro/prosumer camera, that outputs the huge-megapixel images to RAW format. Still, if it concerns you, spend a bit more when you buy memory and opt for the high-speed versions (e.g. Sandisk's Ultra line). For a entry-level camera, the speed of the memory card will probably only be noticable when you go into rapid fire mode..

If the transfer speed of the camera (usb 1.1 vs 2.0) concerns you, just get a card reader.

 

[VPhys]

That camera is a little expensive for my tastes. I am leaning towards those older generation Canons unless you can give me a reason why I shouldn't?

How much of a difference is there in speed btw?

There is also the SD400, same camera just less resolution.

That A95 looks nice, but it says USB1.1 on the webpage and CF cards again. Do they make faster CF cards that can compete with the faster SD cards

For the cameras you are looking at, the type of memory card won't matter as the camera itself will be the weakest link when it comes to speed.

In fact, memory card speed is rarely EVER a factor. The 2nd fastest camera in the world (Canon 1D or Nikon D2Hs whichever you prefer) uses Compact Flash. Compact Flash is slowest of all the current formats, yet there are cameras that use SD/XD/MS and they are all slower than those 2 CF cameras I just mentioned. The camera is the main factor in speed, the memory type is irrelevant unless the camera has 2 seperate memory slots and allows you to choose which one you want to use.

So why does memory matter?... mainly cost and capacity. Compact Flash and SD are both non-propeitary, the cheapest formats, and availalbe in the highest capaciites.

 

[bionic77]

I think I am going for the A95. Thanks for all the advice guys.

 

[AirBrian]

This might be helpful too:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona95/

The A95 is definitely a good choice.