Canon A620's 400 compared to A80's?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by rboy505@yahoo.com, May 18, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I've been looking around at candidates for upgrading from my A80, and
    the A620 is looking ideal since it shares much of what I like (well,
    and a few things I dislike, but..) about the A80. I keep hearing
    about the iffy quality of the A620's 400 ISO in reviews, but is it
    noticeably worse than the A80's? 400 isn't any great shakes on the
    A80, but, given how I'm grasping for reasons to spend the money, if
    it's the same I would bite. If worse I'd sit tight for a few more
    months.


    Has anyone here compared them at higher ISOs?

    Thanks very much!


    RB
    , May 18, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ASAAR Guest

    On 17 May 2006 20:38:10 -0700, wrote:

    > I've been looking around at candidates for upgrading from my A80, and
    > the A620 is looking ideal since it shares much of what I like (well,
    > and a few things I dislike, but..) about the A80. I keep hearing
    > about the iffy quality of the A620's 400 ISO in reviews, but is it
    > noticeably worse than the A80's? 400 isn't any great shakes on the
    > A80, but, given how I'm grasping for reasons to spend the money, if
    > it's the same I would bite. If worse I'd sit tight for a few more
    > months.


    Compared to the A80, the A620 should be far superior at ISO 400.
    According to reviews at dpreview.com, the A95 replaced the A80 in
    2004 and had many improvements, including a larger LCD having
    roughly twice the number of pixels. There was no A80 review so I
    can't say how the A80 performed at different ISOs, but the 5mp A95
    was said to be quite noisy at ISO 200 and ISO 400, and the A95 also
    suffered from "Noticeable purple fringing" . . . "in all shots
    containing very bright (especially overexposed) areas".

    The A620 review noted "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)." Also
    mentioned was that the A620's CCD "seems to have very well
    controlled noise - certainly compared to the 5MP version that
    preceded it." and "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."

    In a comparison with a comparable Casio camera, the review noted
    "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."


    Lastly, even though you didn't mention performance, you might want
    to get the A610 or A620 for this reason alone. The review had this
    to say about it: "Perhaps the biggest complaint about the A95 (and
    the A510 / A520 for that matter) was that some aspects of
    performance are pedestrian to say the least. Compared to most of
    Canon's current range these cameras feel - and are measurably -
    sluggish in some very important areas, such as focusing, image
    playback and shot-to-shot times. The reason is simple - these models
    use the original DIGIC processor (introduced back in 2002 - in
    digital camera terms, just around the time cavemen first started
    using sticks to fight the woolly mammoth), which though very
    capable, doesn't really cut the mustard in late 2005. The good news
    is that the A620 sports the newer - and much faster - DIGIC II
    processor. The even better news is that the difference this makes is
    immense, with virtually every aspect of the A620's performance not
    just beating its predecessor, but in most cases doing so by a very
    wide margin. In fact, for a budget model, the A620 is remarkably
    fast and feels very responsive indeed, and certainly it is now on a
    par with the best cameras in this class."

    You might want to get the A610 instead, the main difference being
    that it has slightly less resolution than the A620, but it still has
    far more than the A80, and all of the speed of the A620.
    ASAAR, May 18, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. DHB Guest

    On Thu, 18 May 2006 02:14:51 -0400, ASAAR <> wrote:

    >On 17 May 2006 20:38:10 -0700, wrote:
    >
    >> I've been looking around at candidates for upgrading from my A80, and
    >> the A620 is looking ideal since it shares much of what I like (well,
    >> and a few things I dislike, but..) about the A80. I keep hearing
    >> about the iffy quality of the A620's 400 ISO in reviews, but is it
    >> noticeably worse than the A80's? 400 isn't any great shakes on the
    >> A80, but, given how I'm grasping for reasons to spend the money, if
    >> it's the same I would bite. If worse I'd sit tight for a few more
    >> months.

    >
    > Compared to the A80, the A620 should be far superior at ISO 400.
    >According to reviews at dpreview.com, the A95 replaced the A80 in
    >2004 and had many improvements, including a larger LCD having
    >roughly twice the number of pixels. There was no A80 review so I
    >can't say how the A80 performed at different ISOs, but the 5mp A95
    >was said to be quite noisy at ISO 200 and ISO 400, and the A95 also
    >suffered from "Noticeable purple fringing" . . . "in all shots
    >containing very bright (especially overexposed) areas".


    <SNIP>

    > You might want to get the A610 instead, the main difference being
    >that it has slightly less resolution than the A620, but it still has
    >far more than the A80, and all of the speed of the A620.


    Sounds about right to me on all counts. I own & use both an
    A95 & the recently added the A610, though admittedly I have both set
    to ISO=50 & have not found the need to use a higher ISO for the type
    of pictures that I take with both of these P&S cameras. To catch
    indoor ambiance or outdoor pictures where both primary subject &
    camera are motionless, I set the cameras to manual mode, 2 second self
    timer & 1.3 seconds or longer exposures. This is the point where
    these cameras use dark frame subtraction noise reduction which works
    very well.

    For those times when the primary subject or camera motion is
    unavoidable, I use my Fuji F11 or a DSLR. I too am waiting to see if
    Fuji's new F30 with an advertised ISO of 3200 is worth an upgrade. If
    it's as good or better @ high ISO noise reduction as the F10/11, plus
    has a usable ISO of 3200, than Fuji will have another great camera on
    their hands well worth consideration for traveling light but still
    wanting or needing good low light performance.

    A last point: The A610 (5MP) does NOT support USB remote
    camera operation but the higher resolution twin, the A620 DOES. Why
    Canon omitted it from the A610 I don't know, maybe a marketing choice
    to motivate some to opt for the A620 over the A610?

    If you like the utility of 4 AA batteries, the 2" swivel LCD,
    a rich bevy of semi & full manual controls, very good picture quality,
    than you will likely be happy with either camera.

    Best wishes in your camera selection / choice.

    Respectfully, DHB


    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
    DHB, May 18, 2006
    #3
  4. Guest

    Thanks for the response. But I'm already past my eyeballs in reading
    the reviews and was more fishing for real world thoughts. Mostly
    because the reviews are split on the A620 higher ISO (For example, the
    DCR page implies possibly "unusable" 400, while dpreview compares it
    favorably to similar cameras (IIRC) )

    Also, the A610 is 5 mp compared to the A80's 4, so there's no advantage
    there, mostly only in camera response. Perhaps you were thinking of
    another model?



    Best,

    rb
    , May 19, 2006
    #4
  5. Guest

    Whoops, the second post hadn't shown up when I responded to the first.
    Should have quoted it. Thanks both for the replies.


    Unfortunately, I need to do non-flash indoor as well, so the higher
    ISOs are of some concern. Even though I can use longer shutter speeds
    and the ISO down, sometimes the subjects don't cooperate! : )

    The A80 will stay in the family, so it's pretty pointless to get an
    A610. I'm pretty much settled on the A620. I'm giving myself one
    more day to decide the S3 isn't small enough, and then I shall pull the
    trigger.


    Thanks,

    rb




    DHB wrote:

    > Sounds about right to me on all counts. I own & use both an
    > A95 & the recently added the A610, though admittedly I have both set
    > to ISO=50 & have not found the need to use a higher ISO for the type
    > of pictures that I take with both of these P&S cameras. To catch
    > indoor ambiance or outdoor pictures where both primary subject &
    > camera are motionless, I set the cameras to manual mode, 2 second self
    > timer & 1.3 seconds or longer exposures. This is the point where
    > these cameras use dark frame subtraction noise reduction which works
    > very well.
    >
    > For those times when the primary subject or camera motion is
    > unavoidable, I use my Fuji F11 or a DSLR. I too am waiting to see if
    > Fuji's new F30 with an advertised ISO of 3200 is worth an upgrade. If
    > it's as good or better @ high ISO noise reduction as the F10/11, plus
    > has a usable ISO of 3200, than Fuji will have another great camera on
    > their hands well worth consideration for traveling light but still
    > wanting or needing good low light performance.
    >
    > A last point: The A610 (5MP) does NOT support USB remote
    > camera operation but the higher resolution twin, the A620 DOES. Why
    > Canon omitted it from the A610 I don't know, maybe a marketing choice
    > to motivate some to opt for the A620 over the A610?
    >
    > If you like the utility of 4 AA batteries, the 2" swivel LCD,
    > a rich bevy of semi & full manual controls, very good picture quality,
    > than you will likely be happy with either camera.
    >
    > Best wishes in your camera selection / choice.
    >
    > Respectfully, DHB
    >
    >
    > "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    > or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    > is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    > to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
    , May 19, 2006
    #5
  6. ASAAR Guest

    On 19 May 2006 11:24:10 -0700, wrote:

    > Thanks for the response. But I'm already past my eyeballs in reading
    > the reviews and was more fishing for real world thoughts. Mostly
    > because the reviews are split on the A620 higher ISO (For example, the
    > DCR page implies possibly "unusable" 400, while dpreview compares it
    > favorably to similar cameras (IIRC) )
    >
    > Also, the A610 is 5 mp compared to the A80's 4, so there's no advantage
    > there, mostly only in camera response. Perhaps you were thinking of
    > another model?


    No. I mentioned the A610 because it's essentially a more
    inexpensive version of the A620. It does have "only" 5mp, but
    that's hardly a limitation unless you're in the habit of making very
    large prints. A couple of years ago, when the first 7mp cameras hit
    the streets, many reviews preferred similar cameras using 5mp
    sensors, since (assuming the sensors had the same dimensions) the
    sensors with the lower mp count tended to produce less noisy high
    ISO, low light pictures. That should also be true for the
    A610/A620, unless the A610's sensor is physically smaller than the
    one in the A620. But as the A620 apparently does very well in such
    situations (and I consider dpreview's reviews to be superior to
    DCR's), you'll probably be quite pleased with an A620 if you decide
    to get it. The S3 is a very good camera too, but being larger,
    wouldn't be used quite as often. I have an old Powershot S20 which
    is smaller than the A610, but I've left it behind many times simply
    because its bulk was greater than what I was willing to carry. What
    I'd really like would be a camera no larger than Fuji's A345/A350
    (and preferably a bit smaller), and retaining its optical viewfinder
    but having the F10/F11's 6mp sensor and perhaps the addition of some
    manual controls.
    ASAAR, May 19, 2006
    #6
  7. Guest

    ASAAR wrote:

    > No. I mentioned the A610 because it's essentially a more
    > inexpensive version of the A620. It does have "only" 5mp, but
    > that's hardly a limitation unless you're in the habit of making very
    > large prints. A couple of years ago, when the first 7mp cameras hit
    > the streets, many reviews preferred similar cameras using 5mp
    > sensors, since (assuming the sensors had the same dimensions) the
    > sensors with the lower mp count tended to produce less noisy high
    > ISO, low light pictures. That should also be true for the
    > A610/A620, unless the A610's sensor is physically smaller than the
    > one in the A620. But as the A620 apparently does very well in such
    > situations (and I consider dpreview's reviews to be superior to
    > DCR's), you'll probably be quite pleased with an A620 if you decide
    > to get it. The S3 is a very good camera too, but being larger,
    > wouldn't be used quite as often. I have an old Powershot S20 which
    > is smaller than the A610, but I've left it behind many times simply
    > because its bulk was greater than what I was willing to carry. What
    > I'd really like would be a camera no larger than Fuji's A345/A350
    > (and preferably a bit smaller), and retaining its optical viewfinder
    > but having the F10/F11's 6mp sensor and perhaps the addition of some
    > manual controls.



    Here's the thing, though: even if I don't make large prints (or make
    prints at all, even) since a great deal of my pictures involve creative
    cropping beyond a little off the edges, pixels do matter. I'm not
    making a huge enlargement, but I often am taking a portion that's about
    1/3 the shot and making that the image. The one mp difference isn't
    enough enticement.

    I fiddled with an S3 and am kind of torn, for just the reason you say
    you mention. I take the A80 everywhere, in my vest pocket, and that's
    huge boon to spontaneous pictures getting taken. I also love how I can
    shoot nearly incognito with it. Subjects (informal as they may be)
    don't have to see a huge round glassy thing hovering nearby.

    Methinks the A620 is the ticket.

    Cheers!

    rb
    , May 20, 2006
    #7
  8. <> wrote:

    > Unfortunately, I need to do non-flash indoor as well, so the higher
    > ISOs are of some concern. Even though I can use longer shutter speeds
    > and the ISO down, sometimes the subjects don't cooperate! : )
    >
    > The A80 will stay in the family, so it's pretty pointless to get an
    > A610. I'm pretty much settled on the A620.


    You might want to read this thread first, before deciding:

    <http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1010&thread=154262
    18>

    That's what made me go for the A610 over the A620, since I prefer not to
    use flash indoors. The faster burst speed is a minor bonus.

    ________________________________________________________________________
    Louise Bremner (log at gol dot com)
    If you want a reply by e-mail, don't write to my Yahoo address!
    Louise Bremner, May 20, 2006
    #8
  9. Paul Rubin Guest

    writes:
    > I fiddled with an S3 and am kind of torn, for just the reason you say
    > you mention. I take the A80 everywhere, in my vest pocket, and that's
    > huge boon to spontaneous pictures getting taken. I also love how I can
    > shoot nearly incognito with it. Subjects (informal as they may be)
    > don't have to see a huge round glassy thing hovering nearby.
    >
    > Methinks the A620 is the ticket.


    I dunno about the A80 but having had the same dilemma I decided
    against the 610/620 because it's too large to drop in a pocket, while
    not having the longer reach and IS of the S3. I ended up ordering an
    A530 for an upcoming trip (it arrived today and I've had it about an
    hour). Immediate impression is that it handles well but the pixel
    noise is significant. And yet according to the Steve's Digicams
    review, the A620's noise is even worse (despite the larger but older
    CCD). I dunno if the A530 can really be improved on without either
    using a larger sensor (=> bigger camera) or fewer pixels (=> marketing
    kiss of death). The A530 feels just a tiny bit larger than my old
    S100, which I considered for a long time to be an absolute gem.
    Paul Rubin, May 20, 2006
    #9
  10. A620! You will love this camera.



    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > ASAAR wrote:
    >
    >> No. I mentioned the A610 because it's essentially a more
    >> inexpensive version of the A620. It does have "only" 5mp, but
    >> that's hardly a limitation unless you're in the habit of making very
    >> large prints. A couple of years ago, when the first 7mp cameras hit
    >> the streets, many reviews preferred similar cameras using 5mp
    >> sensors, since (assuming the sensors had the same dimensions) the
    >> sensors with the lower mp count tended to produce less noisy high
    >> ISO, low light pictures. That should also be true for the
    >> A610/A620, unless the A610's sensor is physically smaller than the
    >> one in the A620. But as the A620 apparently does very well in such
    >> situations (and I consider dpreview's reviews to be superior to
    >> DCR's), you'll probably be quite pleased with an A620 if you decide
    >> to get it. The S3 is a very good camera too, but being larger,
    >> wouldn't be used quite as often. I have an old Powershot S20 which
    >> is smaller than the A610, but I've left it behind many times simply
    >> because its bulk was greater than what I was willing to carry. What
    >> I'd really like would be a camera no larger than Fuji's A345/A350
    >> (and preferably a bit smaller), and retaining its optical viewfinder
    >> but having the F10/F11's 6mp sensor and perhaps the addition of some
    >> manual controls.

    >
    >
    > Here's the thing, though: even if I don't make large prints (or make
    > prints at all, even) since a great deal of my pictures involve creative
    > cropping beyond a little off the edges, pixels do matter. I'm not
    > making a huge enlargement, but I often am taking a portion that's about
    > 1/3 the shot and making that the image. The one mp difference isn't
    > enough enticement.
    >
    > I fiddled with an S3 and am kind of torn, for just the reason you say
    > you mention. I take the A80 everywhere, in my vest pocket, and that's
    > huge boon to spontaneous pictures getting taken. I also love how I can
    > shoot nearly incognito with it. Subjects (informal as they may be)
    > don't have to see a huge round glassy thing hovering nearby.
    >
    > Methinks the A620 is the ticket.
    >
    > Cheers!
    >
    > rb
    >
    Polish Prince \(Szynka\), May 21, 2006
    #10
  11. A620! You will love this camera.



    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > ASAAR wrote:
    >
    >> No. I mentioned the A610 because it's essentially a more
    >> inexpensive version of the A620. It does have "only" 5mp, but
    >> that's hardly a limitation unless you're in the habit of making very
    >> large prints. A couple of years ago, when the first 7mp cameras hit
    >> the streets, many reviews preferred similar cameras using 5mp
    >> sensors, since (assuming the sensors had the same dimensions) the
    >> sensors with the lower mp count tended to produce less noisy high
    >> ISO, low light pictures. That should also be true for the
    >> A610/A620, unless the A610's sensor is physically smaller than the
    >> one in the A620. But as the A620 apparently does very well in such
    >> situations (and I consider dpreview's reviews to be superior to
    >> DCR's), you'll probably be quite pleased with an A620 if you decide
    >> to get it. The S3 is a very good camera too, but being larger,
    >> wouldn't be used quite as often. I have an old Powershot S20 which
    >> is smaller than the A610, but I've left it behind many times simply
    >> because its bulk was greater than what I was willing to carry. What
    >> I'd really like would be a camera no larger than Fuji's A345/A350
    >> (and preferably a bit smaller), and retaining its optical viewfinder
    >> but having the F10/F11's 6mp sensor and perhaps the addition of some
    >> manual controls.

    >
    >
    > Here's the thing, though: even if I don't make large prints (or make
    > prints at all, even) since a great deal of my pictures involve creative
    > cropping beyond a little off the edges, pixels do matter. I'm not
    > making a huge enlargement, but I often am taking a portion that's about
    > 1/3 the shot and making that the image. The one mp difference isn't
    > enough enticement.
    >
    > I fiddled with an S3 and am kind of torn, for just the reason you say
    > you mention. I take the A80 everywhere, in my vest pocket, and that's
    > huge boon to spontaneous pictures getting taken. I also love how I can
    > shoot nearly incognito with it. Subjects (informal as they may be)
    > don't have to see a huge round glassy thing hovering nearby.
    >
    > Methinks the A620 is the ticket.
    >
    > Cheers!
    >
    > rb
    >




    --
    ----------------------------------------
    I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
    It has removed 1601 spam emails to date.
    Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
    Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
    Polish Prince \(Szynka\), May 21, 2006
    #11
    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. Alien Clumps

    Canon Lense Recommendation: 400 5.6 (non-IS) -or- 100-400 IS

    Alien Clumps, Sep 20, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    426
    Bill Hilton
    Sep 20, 2004
  2. Mydnight

    Canon Powershot a80 as compared to the a95.

    Mydnight, Oct 25, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    369
    Mydnight
    Oct 26, 2004
  3. Teri
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    433
    GregS
    Dec 7, 2005
  4. Replies:
    9
    Views:
    653
  5. Canon A620 versus Canon S80

    , Feb 8, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    322
    Alan Meyer
    Feb 8, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page