Canon PS A520 (A530) vs. Kodak Z700

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Lisa, Mar 2, 2006.

  1. Lisa

    Lisa Guest

    Hello wise photography persons. I'm back after a bit of
    research and have comparison questions. In the midst of
    extensive research (still haven't committed to a camera
    yet), I went to my local retailer tonight and saw what they
    have to offer.

    At first I was going to purchase the Canon PS 620 but they
    didn't carry it. The closest I could get was the PS 610 and
    I didn't like the price.

    I settled on the Canon PS A530, and when I got it home I
    found it too new to have any decent customer reviews or
    sample photos to judge by. It's sitting in my bedroom as I
    write this, still in the box. Like I said, I'm still
    uncommitted.

    What they did have, and what I found a lot of good customer
    feedback for, were the Canon PS A520 and the Kodak Z700. I
    reasoned the A520 will give a close representation of what
    I'm getting in the A530. It's also a given I expect the
    A530 photos to be better quality.

    I visited imaging-resource.com which offers good thorough
    reviews with test pictures, and viewed my two test brands
    side-by-side. I found the results very surprising.

    It seems the Kodak Z700 takes a better picture than the
    Canon A520. You can really see the difference in the
    resolution shots:

    Kodak Z700:
    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/Z700/FULLRES/Z700RES2304.HTM

    Canon A520:
    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A520/FULLRES/A52RES2272F.HTM

    I thought this might be a fluke, so I compared another Kodak
    model, the Z740, to the Z700 and found the same thing. The
    Z700 resolution was better and to my untrained eye the
    images looked better all around. Customer reviews also
    report this model takes good shots in low light.

    What I'd like to know is how can this be, given that the
    Canon PS A520 is supposed to be the best you can get in the
    price range, and the Z740 even has higher resolution? (5 as
    opposed to 4 MP)

    Should I take the A530 back and exchange? I was excited
    about my purchase and now I'm not so sure. I wanted a
    higher resolution camera, but don't want a good brand name
    and more expensive price in a camera that doesn't perform as
    well as a cheaper brand. I paid 230,-€ for the A530, while
    the Z700 is only 149,-€. That's a pretty hefty difference
    for my limited budget. Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
     
    Lisa, Mar 2, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ? "Lisa" <> ???a?e st? µ???µa
    news:du7n5j$fq6$...
    > Hello wise photography persons. I'm back after a bit of
    > research and have comparison questions. In the midst of
    > extensive research (still haven't committed to a camera
    > yet), I went to my local retailer tonight and saw what they
    > have to offer.
    >
    > At first I was going to purchase the Canon PS 620 but they
    > didn't carry it. The closest I could get was the PS 610 and
    > I didn't like the price.
    >
    > I settled on the Canon PS A530, and when I got it home I
    > found it too new to have any decent customer reviews or
    > sample photos to judge by. It's sitting in my bedroom as I
    > write this, still in the box. Like I said, I'm still
    > uncommitted.
    >
    > What they did have, and what I found a lot of good customer
    > feedback for, were the Canon PS A520 and the Kodak Z700. I
    > reasoned the A520 will give a close representation of what
    > I'm getting in the A530. It's also a given I expect the
    > A530 photos to be better quality.
    >
    > I visited imaging-resource.com which offers good thorough
    > reviews with test pictures, and viewed my two test brands
    > side-by-side. I found the results very surprising.
    >
    > It seems the Kodak Z700 takes a better picture than the
    > Canon A520. You can really see the difference in the
    > resolution shots:
    >
    > Kodak Z700:
    > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/Z700/FULLRES/Z700RES2304.HTM
    >
    > Canon A520:
    > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A520/FULLRES/A52RES2272F.HTM
    >
    > I thought this might be a fluke, so I compared another Kodak
    > model, the Z740, to the Z700 and found the same thing. The
    > Z700 resolution was better and to my untrained eye the
    > images looked better all around. Customer reviews also
    > report this model takes good shots in low light.
    >
    > What I'd like to know is how can this be, given that the
    > Canon PS A520 is supposed to be the best you can get in the
    > price range, and the Z740 even has higher resolution? (5 as
    > opposed to 4 MP)
    >
    > Should I take the A530 back and exchange? I was excited
    > about my purchase and now I'm not so sure. I wanted a
    > higher resolution camera, but don't want a good brand name
    > and more expensive price in a camera that doesn't perform as
    > well as a cheaper brand. I paid 230,-€ for the A530, while
    > the Z700 is only 149,-€. That's a pretty hefty difference
    > for my limited budget. Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.

    One camera that I really would like to have, is the Sony S-60, with
    Carl-Zeiss lens and 6.0 megapixels and for 199 euros.However, after 13 happy
    months with the Kodak CX 7300, I must admit it takes excellent shots for the
    99 euros it cost...


    --
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
    major in electrical engineering,freelance electrician
    FH von Iraklion-Kreta, freiberuflicher Elektriker
    dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr
     
    Tzortzakakis Dimitrios, Mar 3, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising


  3. > One camera that I really would like to have, is the Sony S-60, with
    > Carl-Zeiss lens and 6.0 megapixels and for 199 euros.However, after 13 happy
    > months with the Kodak CX 7300, I must admit it takes excellent shots for the
    > 99 euros it cost...



    After doing still *more* reading in user forums today I
    discovered there are lower end cameras put out by certain
    manufacturers (these were named with examples) that take
    pictures aimed at pleasing those who are untrained in
    photography and don't know what they're looking at. Photos
    that are oversaturated, for example, making them flashier
    and more colorful.

    So now my job of finding a worthy camera just got harder.
    Maybe the low-end Kodak line is also doing this?

    Aw, forgettit. I keep the Canon and learn on it. It's
    predecessors have very good reviews. I could probably
    choose a lot worse.

    Thanks for offering your opinion.
     
    LisatheSequel, Mar 3, 2006
    #3
  4. Lisa,

    Have you heard the term "buyers remorse"?

    You will get as many opinions here as there are camera models, which
    all basically boil down to "this is why I like *my* camera". In
    general, you get what you pay for, and once you get it home, forget the
    ones you didn't buy, and move forward.

    I'm in my fourth Canon camera: The A50 (1.2mp), the A40 (2.1mp), the
    A95 (5mp) and the S1 IS (5mp and 12x IS zoom). I haven't regretted
    buying any of them. In general, provided you select the model that has
    the features you want (zoom, pixels, controls, size), you can't go
    wrong with a canon.

    My .02c.

    /M
     
    Moro Grubb of Little Delving, Mar 3, 2006
    #4
  5. Moro Grubb of Little Delving wrote:
    > Lisa,
    >
    > Have you heard the term "buyers remorse"?
    >
    > You will get as many opinions here as there are camera models, which
    > all basically boil down to "this is why I like *my* camera". In
    > general, you get what you pay for, and once you get it home, forget the
    > ones you didn't buy, and move forward.
    >
    > I'm in my fourth Canon camera: The A50 (1.2mp), the A40 (2.1mp), the
    > A95 (5mp) and the S1 IS (5mp and 12x IS zoom). I haven't regretted
    > buying any of them. In general, provided you select the model that has
    > the features you want (zoom, pixels, controls, size), you can't go
    > wrong with a canon.
    >
    > My .02c.



    :D Seems I did good then. Thanks for your reply.

    I finally unpacked it tonight and took a look. I'm not
    dissatisfied at all. It's a lovely little beginner camera
    and I look forward to learning it.
     
    LisatheSequel, Mar 3, 2006
    #5
    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. threefeathers

    Kodak Easyshare Z700 w/Series 3 camera dock...

    threefeathers, Aug 20, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    471
    ASAAR
    Aug 22, 2005
  2. cop welfare
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,024
    cop welfare
    Nov 19, 2005
  3. deetee
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    454
  4. kukku

    Casio Exilim EX-Z700 OR EX-S770 ?

    kukku, Oct 4, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    287
  5. Steve

    Kodak Z700 - does it support sdhc cards?

    Steve, Aug 28, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    712
    Ron Baird
    Sep 4, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page