Canon A620 or Fuji F11?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Blair, Feb 8, 2006.

  1. Blair

    Blair Guest

    I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no longer
    held so I have to ask again
    I am interested in views
    Blair
    Blair, Feb 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Blair

    Guest

    Canon A620 of course.
    , Feb 8, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Blair

    Blair Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Canon A620 of course.


    I should have explained that I have a Fuji 4900Z which I use frequently but
    wanted a small pocket camera which I could carry on more occasions than my
    4900 and was particularly impressed with the F11 low light capability
    Blair
    Blair, Feb 8, 2006
    #3
  4. Blair

    salgud Guest

    Blair wrote:
    > I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no longer
    > held so I have to ask again
    > I am interested in views
    > Blair


    If overall image quality is important to you, you can compare images
    between cameras at http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM.
    Hope this helps in your world.
    salgud, Feb 8, 2006
    #4
  5. Blair

    Sel Guest

    Sel, Feb 8, 2006
    #5
  6. Blair

    SMS Guest

    Blair wrote:
    > I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no longer
    > held so I have to ask again
    > I am interested in views
    > Blair


    I'd definitely avoid the F11 due to the lack of an optical viewfinder.
    That's a no-compromise requirement.

    Other drawbacks of the F11 versus the A620 are the shorter zoom, the
    poorer macro mode, the lack of ability to use add-on lenses, the lack of
    an orientation sensor, and the type of storage (xD). The only advantage
    I can see is the Li-Ion battery on the F11, and the larger LCD (but the
    LCD is fixed, unlike the A620).
    SMS, Feb 8, 2006
    #6
  7. Blair

    Ben Thomas Guest

    SMS wrote:

    > Blair wrote:
    >
    >> I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no longer
    >> held so I have to ask again
    >> I am interested in views
    >> Blair

    >
    >
    > I'd definitely avoid the F11 due to the lack of an optical viewfinder.
    > That's a no-compromise requirement.
    >
    > Other drawbacks of the F11 versus the A620 are the shorter zoom, the
    > poorer macro mode, the lack of ability to use add-on lenses, the lack of
    > an orientation sensor, and the type of storage (xD). The only advantage
    > I can see is the Li-Ion battery on the F11, and the larger LCD (but the
    > LCD is fixed, unlike the A620).


    If the F11 is anything like hte F10 it will be significantly superior in terms
    of image quality. Nothing is more importatnt IMHO.

    --
    Ben Thomas, Melbourne, Australia

    "Red Bull tastes like canned carbonated concentrated evil."
    Ben Thomas, Feb 8, 2006
    #7
  8. Blair

    Sel Guest

    Ben Thomas wrote:

    > SMS wrote:
    >
    >> Blair wrote:
    >>
    >>> I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no
    >>> longer
    >>> held so I have to ask again
    >>> I am interested in views
    >>> Blair

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I'd definitely avoid the F11 due to the lack of an optical viewfinder.
    >> That's a no-compromise requirement.
    >>
    >> Other drawbacks of the F11 versus the A620 are the shorter zoom, the
    >> poorer macro mode, the lack of ability to use add-on lenses, the lack
    >> of an orientation sensor, and the type of storage (xD). The only
    >> advantage I can see is the Li-Ion battery on the F11, and the larger
    >> LCD (but the LCD is fixed, unlike the A620).

    >
    >
    > If the F11 is anything like hte F10 it will be significantly superior in
    > terms of image quality. Nothing is more importatnt IMHO.
    >


    Yes and Blair should also look at the fuji E900.

    Sel ........ :)

    http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~selorme/photos.html
    Sel, Feb 9, 2006
    #8
  9. Blair

    SMS Guest

    Ben Thomas wrote:
    > SMS wrote:
    >
    >> Blair wrote:
    >>
    >>> I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no
    >>> longer
    >>> held so I have to ask again
    >>> I am interested in views
    >>> Blair

    >>
    >>
    >> I'd definitely avoid the F11 due to the lack of an optical viewfinder.
    >> That's a no-compromise requirement.
    >>
    >> Other drawbacks of the F11 versus the A620 are the shorter zoom, the
    >> poorer macro mode, the lack of ability to use add-on lenses, the lack
    >> of an orientation sensor, and the type of storage (xD). The only
    >> advantage I can see is the Li-Ion battery on the F11, and the larger
    >> LCD (but the LCD is fixed, unlike the A620).

    >
    > If the F11 is anything like hte F10 it will be significantly superior in
    > terms of image quality. Nothing is more importatnt IMHO.


    The F10 is not superior in image quality to the A620, except at higher
    ISO speeds.

    And BTW, there are things more important than image quality, or we'd all
    be buying Canon 1Ds Mark II SLRs.

    Personally, I wouldn't buy the A620 because of the AA batteries, they
    are such a pain in the butt that Li-Ion is a no compromise requirement
    for me. But the A620 is cheap, like most cameras that use AA batteries.
    SMS, Feb 9, 2006
    #9
  10. Blair

    bugbear Guest

    bugbear, Feb 9, 2006
    #10
  11. Blair

    Blair Guest

    "Blair" <> wrote in message
    news:dsbvfs$40s$...
    > I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no longer
    > held so I have to ask again
    > I am interested in views
    > Blair
    >

    Thanks to all who replied which helped me make up my mind.
    I bid on e bay and won the F11 this afternoon. Only 20 minutes to go
    Blair
    Blair, Feb 9, 2006
    #11
  12. Blair

    salgud Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > Ben Thomas wrote:
    > > SMS wrote:
    > >
    > >> Blair wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no
    > >>> longer
    > >>> held so I have to ask again
    > >>> I am interested in views
    > >>> Blair
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> I'd definitely avoid the F11 due to the lack of an optical viewfinder.
    > >> That's a no-compromise requirement.
    > >>
    > >> Other drawbacks of the F11 versus the A620 are the shorter zoom, the
    > >> poorer macro mode, the lack of ability to use add-on lenses, the lack
    > >> of an orientation sensor, and the type of storage (xD). The only
    > >> advantage I can see is the Li-Ion battery on the F11, and the larger
    > >> LCD (but the LCD is fixed, unlike the A620).

    > >
    > > If the F11 is anything like hte F10 it will be significantly superior in
    > > terms of image quality. Nothing is more importatnt IMHO.

    >
    > The F10 is not superior in image quality to the A620, except at higher
    > ISO speeds.
    >
    > And BTW, there are things more important than image quality, or we'd all
    > be buying Canon 1Ds Mark II SLRs.
    >
    > Personally, I wouldn't buy the A620 because of the AA batteries, they
    > are such a pain in the butt that Li-Ion is a no compromise requirement
    > for me. But the A620 is cheap, like most cameras that use AA batteries.


    I guess I should find out how AA batteries are a pain in the butt,
    since my A520 uses them and I haven't noticed the pain.
    salgud, Feb 9, 2006
    #12
  13. Blair

    SMS Guest

    Blair wrote:
    > "Blair" <> wrote in message
    > news:dsbvfs$40s$...
    >> I looked up this subject on this newsgroup but the messages are no longer
    >> held so I have to ask again
    >> I am interested in views
    >> Blair
    >>

    > Thanks to all who replied which helped me make up my mind.
    > I bid on e bay and won the F11 this afternoon. Only 20 minutes to go
    > Blair


    It's strange that Fuji isn't marketing these cameras in the U.S.. There
    are some New York Dealers that sell the F11, but it drives the price up
    when it's an import like that, i.e. $337 from Broadway Photo (which has
    a very poor rating).

    How much was it on eBay?
    SMS, Feb 9, 2006
    #13
  14. Blair

    SMS Guest

    salgud wrote:

    > I guess I should find out how AA batteries are a pain in the butt,
    > since my A520 uses them and I haven't noticed the pain.


    Read "http://batterydata.com", it goes into great detail on the
    trade-offs between Li-Ion and rechargeable NiMH AA.

    But the short answer is:

    -Self Discharge Rate
    -Cold Temperature Performance
    -Number of charge/discharge cycles
    -Size
    -Weight
    -Energy density
    -Convenience

    The advantage of AA's is that you can use alkaline AA's in a pinch.
    SMS, Feb 9, 2006
    #14
  15. Blair

    salgud Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > salgud wrote:
    >
    > > I guess I should find out how AA batteries are a pain in the butt,
    > > since my A520 uses them and I haven't noticed the pain.

    >
    > Read "http://batterydata.com", it goes into great detail on the
    > trade-offs between Li-Ion and rechargeable NiMH AA.
    >
    > But the short answer is:
    >
    > -Self Discharge Rate
    > -Cold Temperature Performance
    > -Number of charge/discharge cycles
    > -Size
    > -Weight
    > -Energy density
    > -Convenience
    >
    > The advantage of AA's is that you can use alkaline AA's in a pinch.


    I guess I'll just have to wait for the pain. Already read the article.
    I prefer Li-ion's to AA's, in general, but wasn't willing to sacrifice
    a host of other features I got with the Canon. So far, I haven't found
    any problems with the AA's. To some, having to carry extras is a big
    deal, I guess, but I'd already planned to carry and extra if I got a
    Li-ion camera anyway. The rest of the stuff is just nit-picking. I get
    over a hundred shots per set of AA's with my A520, without even
    thinking about battery conservation. I bought 8 batteries and a good
    recharger. Next week I'm leaving for a week in Costa Rica, won't even
    take the charger. Will take 4 sets of batteries, enough for at least
    500 exposures, far more than I'll take. And if for some reason I go
    through batteries quicker than planned, I'll go buy some AA's. Somehow,
    I'm not feeling any pain yet. YMMV.
    salgud, Feb 9, 2006
    #15
  16. Blair

    ASAAR Guest

    On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:55:50 -0800, SMS wrote:

    > But the short answer is:


    Biased and misleading.

    > -Self Discharge Rate


    AA batteries consist of more than NiMH. For photographers that
    take very large numbers of shots, NiMH's greater self discharge rate
    is irrelevant, since they won't go a month or more between charges.
    For photographers that take a small number of shots, alkaline and
    non-rechargeable lithium batteries have far better self discharge
    rates than any rechargeable lithium batteries. In fact,
    manufacturers of Li-Ion batteries recommend periodic recharging
    (every 3 or 6 months) even if the batteries aren't used. Otherwise
    they may fail completely and no longer be able to take a charge.
    Alkalines and lithiums can be stored far longer and remain useful,
    on the order of 8 and 15 years, respectively. Rechargeble lithium
    batteries are probably most useful when their use would represent a
    middle ground, such as being used every couple of months, but not
    being left unused for much longer periods, such as 4 to 8 months.

    > -Cold Temperature Performance


    Lithium AA cells are far superior to Li-Ion rechargeables. But
    you know that.


    > -Number of charge/discharge cycles


    Will only be of value to pros or others that take an
    extraordinarily large number of pictures. Not many people take
    thousands of pictures per year. If a Li-Ion battery is good for 500
    shots per charge, only 4 yearly charges would be needed for a couple
    of thousand shots. Li-Ion batteries deteriorate with time, and the
    general rule is that they need to be replaced after about 3 years
    even if they aren't heavily used. For the above example, that
    amounts to only 12 charge cycles. It's far worse for people that
    buy one or two spare batteries, since over the same three years
    (totaling 6000 shots) each battery pack would only undergo either 6
    or 4 charge cycles. To be cost effective, Li-Ion batteries really
    *need* to be heavily used. My camera uses AA batteries, and I take
    about 1500 shots per year. I use NiMH batteries in it, but only
    because I bought them about the same time I got the camera. Had I
    known how efficient modern cameras are I would have been satisfied
    using alkalines almost exclusively, at a cost of $3 or $4 per year,
    and with the added advantage of not having to deal with recharging.


    > -Size
    > -Weight


    Many of the cameras using 2 and 4 AA cells are very small and
    light in weight. If you want the smallest and lightest possible
    cameras, then Li-Ion is probably the way to go, although there are
    some very small cameras that use AAA cells. But many people find
    that such cameras are so small that they are unable to be held
    steadily, and while the image quality and performance can be decent,
    it's generally inferior to the slightly larger compact cameras.


    > -Energy density


    Very important for astronauts needing to minimize payload. But
    then they could also use lithium AA cells too.


    > -Convenience


    Batteries that provide power for 6 to 12 months or more and then
    only need to be replaced are far more convenient that ones that
    require chargers and periodic charging, don't you think?


    > The advantage of AA's is that you can use alkaline AA's in a pinch.


    Only one of many. But as you often repeat this as if it was the
    only advantage, one has to wonder if you have a serious short term
    memory loss problem? Each of the three common types (Li-Ion, NiMH
    and disposable primary cells) have their advantages, but somehow you
    only seem to consider Li-Ion's advantages. Your bias is too obvious.
    ASAAR, Feb 9, 2006
    #16
  17. Blair

    Guest

    I personally am very happy that my A620 takes AAs. I will use my
    rechargeable NiMHs as soon as the disposable alkalines go dead, which I
    thought would happen within 24 hours of playing with my new camera, but
    it's been over a week and they are still going!! I love that I can buy
    a spare set for $14 instead of $40 or more for a spare proprietary
    Lithium Ion. And with the A620 at least, disposable alkalines seem to
    really be an option in a pinch while travelling.

    I bought a cheap broken Canon S230 on eBay and fixed it, but now will
    have to shell out big bucks for the Canon battery and charger. I didn't
    really think of that when I bought it, and it is making me appreciate
    the AAs in the A620 even more.

    Cathy
    , Feb 9, 2006
    #17
  18. Blair

    Ben Thomas Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > The F10 is not superior in image quality to the A620, except at higher
    > ISO speeds.


    I disagree.

    If you look at the images and tables in the comparison section of dpreview.com
    for the Fuji F10 and the Canon A620 I think you will find that the Fuji - which
    is only a 6 MP camera - can resolve more detail than the 7MP A620, and is less
    noisy even at the lowest ISO settings.

    > And BTW, there are things more important than image quality, or we'd all
    > be buying Canon 1Ds Mark II SLRs.


    Surely you jest? We'd all be buying top of the range Nikon cameras. :)

    >
    > Personally, I wouldn't buy the A620 because of the AA batteries, they
    > are such a pain in the butt that Li-Ion is a no compromise requirement
    > for me. But the A620 is cheap, like most cameras that use AA batteries.


    Personally I would put up with less than perfect size and shape for better image
    quality. I would never place my preference for battery type nor appealing size
    and shape above image quality. I care about the finished result and image
    quality is the only thing that determines that, IMHO.


    --
    Ben Thomas, Melbourne, Australia

    "Red Bull tastes like canned carbonated concentrated evil."
    Ben Thomas, Feb 9, 2006
    #18
  19. Blair

    ASAAR Guest

    On 9 Feb 2006 12:43:48 -0800, wrote:

    > I personally am very happy that my A620 takes AAs. I will use my
    > rechargeable NiMHs as soon as the disposable alkalines go dead, which I
    > thought would happen within 24 hours of playing with my new camera, but
    > it's been over a week and they are still going!! I love that I can buy
    > a spare set for $14 instead of $40 or more for a spare proprietary
    > Lithium Ion. And with the A620 at least, disposable alkalines seem to
    > really be an option in a pinch while travelling.


    I think you're going to be very pleasantly surprised with the
    A620. It goes even longer on a set of alkalines than my Fuji. As
    Canon now uses the accurate and consistent CIPA standard for
    evaluating battery performance, you can trust what the manual
    suggests you can get, and this assumes that 1/2 the shots require
    the use of the flash. If the LCD is used while shooting, the
    batteries will last for 350 or 500 images (alkaline/NiMH), but if
    the viewfinder is used instead, the batteries should last far
    longer, 1200 images (alkaline) or 1500 (NiMH). If you don't use the
    flash you should expect the batteries to last for a much greater
    number of shots. With this kind of battery life, many people will
    be more than satisfied using alkalines exclusively. It may be quite
    a while before you need to start using your NiMH batteries. It's a
    far cry from the days when some digital cameras got fewer than a
    dozen or two shots per set of batteries or per charge.


    > I bought a cheap broken Canon S230 on eBay and fixed it, but now will
    > have to shell out big bucks for the Canon battery and charger. I didn't
    > really think of that when I bought it, and it is making me appreciate
    > the AAs in the A620 even more.


    The "genuine" charger and batteries for my Canon S20 were quite
    expensive, well over $100. You can probably get a good, reliable
    substitute for the S230 at a much lower price from many sources. I
    checked the price of a Li-Ion charger for a different camera several
    weeks ago, and B&H had one for $22. Figure no more than that,
    probably a bit less for a battery. I got a Maxell replacement
    battery for the S20 last year at J&R for $20, and it has performed
    just as well as the original one that had the Canon label on it.
    There's no need to pay Canon's inflated prices.
    ASAAR, Feb 9, 2006
    #19
  20. Blair

    SMS Guest

    wrote:
    > I personally am very happy that my A620 takes AAs. I will use my
    > rechargeable NiMHs as soon as the disposable alkalines go dead, which I
    > thought would happen within 24 hours of playing with my new camera, but
    > it's been over a week and they are still going!! I love that I can buy
    > a spare set for $14 instead of $40 or more for a spare proprietary
    > Lithium Ion.


    There's the problem, you think that a spare proprietary Li-Ion battery
    costs $40! I buy very good quality BP511 batteries for $11.50 each. If I
    wanted to get crappy quality ones, I could get them for even less!

    A set of high quality NiMH AA cells costs about $10, not $14.
    SMS, Feb 9, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. SS

    Fuji F10 and F11

    SS, Nov 15, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    287
    timeOday
    Nov 17, 2005
  2. SS

    Canon Powershot A620 or Fuji F11?

    SS, Nov 22, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    725
    ASAAR
    Dec 19, 2005
  3. Matti Vuori

    Lens adapter for Fuji F11/F10

    Matti Vuori, Dec 13, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    302
    John Bean
    Dec 13, 2005
  4. qwert2b2
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    670
    Bart van der Wolf
    Dec 15, 2005
  5. Blair

    Fuji f10,f11-lack of viewfinder.

    Blair, Jan 28, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    299
    Blair
    Jan 30, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page