Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / Digital Photo / December 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Cannon A610 Camera

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
robert w fischer - 30 Dec 2005 04:25 GMT
Just went and brought a Cannon A610 camera based on many long hours of
trying to decide what digital camera to buy My choice was between a
Kodak DZ740 and a Cannon, true the Cannon is only a 4X zoom where as the
Kodak is a 10X but have read more good things about Cannon than with
Kodak  This is my first digital Camera, I hope that I made a good choice
any help or idea's would be most appreciated   Thank you
RWFISCHER@webtv.net    E Mail is always Ok
Dave Cohen - 30 Dec 2005 15:59 GMT
> Just went and brought a Cannon A610 camera based on many long hours of
> trying to decide what digital camera to buy My choice was between a
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> any help or idea's would be most appreciated   Thank you
> RWFISCHER@webtv.net    E Mail is always Ok

Hate to be picky, but your camera was made by canon. I have to believe
something has to give in going from 4x to 10x zoom, something I considered
when getting an A95 as opposed to the then current 1SIS.
Dave Cohen
David Dyer-Bennet - 30 Dec 2005 19:44 GMT
> > Just went and brought a Cannon A610 camera based on many long hours of
> > trying to decide what digital camera to buy My choice was between a
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> when getting an A95 as opposed to the then current 1SIS.
> Dave Cohen

Well, sometimes money.  The 10-100mm f1.8 zoom lens I used on a movie
project a while back was a *superb* lens.  Of course, I'm told it was
worth $25,000, and it was about a foot long and about 6 inches across
at the business end and weighed quite a bit.  So, *lots* of tradeoffs,
but great optical performance.  (It covered 16mm, which is bigger than
nearly all consumer digicam sensors).
Signature

David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>

David Dyer-Bennet - 30 Dec 2005 19:42 GMT
> Just went and brought a Cannon A610 camera based on many long hours of
> trying to decide what digital camera to buy My choice was between a
> Kodak DZ740 and a Cannon, true the Cannon is only a 4X zoom where as the
> Kodak is a 10X but have read more good things about Cannon than with
> Kodak  This is my first digital Camera, I hope that I made a good choice
> any help or idea's would be most appreciated   Thank you

Well, *I* think you made a good choice.  I gave my mother-in-law one
for Christmas, and another friend bought himself one shortly before.

I'd *like* a longer zoom range, and especially I'd like a wider wide
end, but that simply doesn't happen in cameras that size and price for
whatever reasons.  For some kinds of subjecs, panorama stitching can
get you around the wideangle limitations.

I almost bought myself one, but finally settled on a Fuji F11, mostly
for the better low-light performance.  (UPS tracking says it's reached
Minneapolis and is scheduled for delivery today; pardon my excitement
:-)).
Signature

David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>

ASAAR - 30 Dec 2005 23:35 GMT
> I almost bought myself one, but finally settled on a Fuji F11, mostly
> for the better low-light performance.  (UPS tracking says it's reached
> Minneapolis and is scheduled for delivery today; pardon my excitement
> :-)).

 Really, where did you buy it?  I thought that only the F10 was
available in the USA.  You'll have to let us know how well it works,
as there are some that deny that it really has better low-light
performance, saying that it would violate the laws of physics and
that Fuji must simply have used more in-camera noise reduction.  I
think that a better sensor is part of what they've done, and might
have bought an F10 if only it had a viewfinder and used standard
batteries.
David Dyer-Bennet - 31 Dec 2005 03:53 GMT
> > I almost bought myself one, but finally settled on a Fuji F11, mostly
> > for the better low-light performance.  (UPS tracking says it's reached
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>   Really, where did you buy it?  I thought that only the F10 was
> available in the USA.

The F11 isn't officially released in the US, hence it's hard to find,
especially at first-rate dealers.  I ended up buying from Broadway
Camera, which is not something I'd do under ordinary circumstances.
They looked like the *most* ethical place offering the F11 in the US
that I found -- for example, their website not only says they include
all standard accessories, but they list what those are for each camera
(and the list for the F11 matched overseas sites).  There was one
place that seemed to specialize in importing Japanese gadgets that had
it, but they wanted $379 (Broadway had it for $286).

And I did in fact get it, a day and a weekend *earlier* than they'd
suggested on the phone, and for the price listed.  

> You'll have to let us know how well it works, as there are some that
> deny that it really has better low-light performance, saying that it
> would violate the laws of physics and that Fuji must simply have
> used more in-camera noise reduction.  I think that a better sensor
> is part of what they've done, and might have bought an F10 if only
> it had a viewfinder and used standard batteries.

I'm kind of pleased to not have the viefinder, just on general
principles.  I approve of LCD preview.  I'm sure in the occasional
bright situation I'll regret it, but I bought it for the low-light
capabilities after all.  And it lets the body be smaller, which I like
(at least down to this size; smaller can certainly be overdone).

To start with, it has a bigger sensor than most -- though only pretty
marginally (I see it listed as 1/1.7", with an awful lot of others
having gone form a 1/2.5" up to a 1/1.8" lately).  I wish they'd done
it as a 4MP camera, though -- entirely adequate for snapshooting, and
the same size sensor at 4MP should be considerably less noisy.  

I'm with you on the batteries.  If the Canon A610 had used CF instead
of SD, I probably would have bought that instead (completely
sacrificing available light performance; but gaining more zoom,
tilt/swivel LCD, and standard batteries).  But for me SD is nearly as
exotic as XD, all my previous digital cameras use CF.

I haven't looked at any of the photos critically on a big monitor yet,
and haven't shot it against anything else either, so no opinion yet on
the actual image quality.
Signature

David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>

ASAAR - 31 Dec 2005 09:42 GMT
>>   Really, where did you buy it?  I thought that only the F10 was
>> available in the USA.
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> place that seemed to specialize in importing Japanese gadgets that had
> it, but they wanted $379 (Broadway had it for $286).

 I'll have to keep them in mind for some other items not sold in
the USA.  I now recall seeing their full page ads nestled between
the larger ones from Adorama and B&H in some photo magazines.

> I'm kind of pleased to not have the viefinder, just on general
> principles.  I approve of LCD preview.  I'm sure in the occasional
> bright situation I'll regret it, but I bought it for the low-light
> capabilities after all.  And it lets the body be smaller, which I like
> (at least down to this size; smaller can certainly be overdone).

 I don't know that it necessarily lets the body be smaller.  More
likely it lets the LCD be bigger. :)   There are times when I've
used the LCD because the shot couldn't be taken using the
viewfinder, but I feel (whether I'm right or mistaken) that I can
hold the camera a bit more steadily using the viewfinder.  And with
the camera plastered in front of your face it confers the valuable
"cloak of invisibility", useful even if imaginary.<g>

> I haven't looked at any of the photos critically on a big monitor yet,
> and haven't shot it against anything else either, so no opinion yet on
> the actual image quality.

 Until I start getting large prints made, my 4mp Fuji provides far
more detail than is needed for most of my prints, which rarely are
larger than 4" x 6".  I compared prints made from the highest
resolution image files (1.9MB) to those whittled down to 1/4 the
number of pixels, and even smaller files made by using JPG
compression.  There was no visible difference, although I didn't use
my 6x magnifier or 20x loupe.  I did take one similar shot using VGA
resolution (640x480 pixels) and the print from that one had
differences that were easily spotted, but the quality wasn't bad at
all.  I guess 4" x 6" hides a multitude of sins that 8" x 10" would
easily expose. :)
Dogfart - 30 Dec 2005 21:16 GMT
> I hope that I made a good choice
> any help or idea's would be most appreciated

It would make more sense to ask before buying?

Generally good camera, but personally I would go for the 620 - more pixels.
Mark² - 30 Dec 2005 23:29 GMT
>> I hope that I made a good choice
>> any help or idea's would be most appreciated
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Generally good camera, but personally I would go for the 620 - more
> pixels.

I bought the 610 over the 620 simply because I figured if I was REALLY
interested in that many pixels...I'd reach for my DSLR rather than a dinky
little P&S...and that 7MP in a sensor that tiny just couldn't look all too
good.
:)
The 610 is a nice little camera despite the shortcomings that inevitably
come with P&S cameras (never owned anything but DSLR bodies before this...).
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.