replacement for coked camera?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by bugbear, Jun 30, 2006.

  1. bugbear

    bugbear Guest

    Assuming the helpful advice on rinsing my Canon A510
    comes to naught...

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona510/

    I would welcome advice on a replacement.

    The camera was originally bought purely to
    take more or less fancy still life shots
    to document my tool hobby:

    http://www.wdynamic.com/galoots/4images/details.php?image_id=2732
    http://www.wdynamic.com/galoots/4images/details.php?image_id=2731

    However, as time has gone on, I've used it more and
    more, for all sorts of things; general photography,
    parties, pubs, nature...

    I *adore* being able to lots of photographs
    and then cull out the bad 'uns. It's wonderfully
    liberating. Image processing (Gimp on Linux)
    is also fun.

    I hate flash, and will use available light
    where possible; for stationary targets
    (therefore) the tripod is my friend.

    I have found the feeble 3 Mega Pixels of
    the A510 enough - certainly my 4x6 prints
    look perfectly crisp and presentable.

    So; I would like to AT LEAST retain the still life
    capabilities (manual controls and image quality)
    of the A510, and would like a more "rounded" camera.

    The moving of the manfacturers battleground
    from megapixels to ISO is very appealing to
    this flasho-phobe.

    I do not mind body size/weight too much; I certainly
    don't want to pay the premium for Ixus size models.

    I would like to spend as little as possible,
    commensurate with getting the performance I want.

    So - (for anyone still with me) - anyone
    care to recommend a digital camera?

    BugBear
     
    bugbear, Jun 30, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. bugbear

    bluezfolk Guest

    bugbear wrote:
    > Assuming the helpful advice on rinsing my Canon A510
    > comes to naught...
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona510/
    >
    > I would welcome advice on a replacement.
    >
    > The camera was originally bought purely to
    > take more or less fancy still life shots
    > to document my tool hobby:
    >
    > http://www.wdynamic.com/galoots/4images/details.php?image_id=2732
    > http://www.wdynamic.com/galoots/4images/details.php?image_id=2731
    >
    > However, as time has gone on, I've used it more and
    > more, for all sorts of things; general photography,
    > parties, pubs, nature...
    >
    > I *adore* being able to lots of photographs
    > and then cull out the bad 'uns. It's wonderfully
    > liberating. Image processing (Gimp on Linux)
    > is also fun.
    >
    > I hate flash, and will use available light
    > where possible; for stationary targets
    > (therefore) the tripod is my friend.
    >
    > I have found the feeble 3 Mega Pixels of
    > the A510 enough - certainly my 4x6 prints
    > look perfectly crisp and presentable.
    >
    > So; I would like to AT LEAST retain the still life
    > capabilities (manual controls and image quality)
    > of the A510, and would like a more "rounded" camera.
    >
    > The moving of the manfacturers battleground
    > from megapixels to ISO is very appealing to
    > this flasho-phobe.
    >
    > I do not mind body size/weight too much; I certainly
    > don't want to pay the premium for Ixus size models.
    >
    > I would like to spend as little as possible,
    > commensurate with getting the performance I want.
    >
    > So - (for anyone still with me) - anyone
    > care to recommend a digital camera?
    >
    > BugBear



    Might as well stick with the Canons, if you liked the A510 you'll
    probably like their current offerings.


    Eric
     
    bluezfolk, Jun 30, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:41:19 +0100, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
    > Assuming the helpful advice on rinsing my Canon A510
    > comes to naught...
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona510/
    >
    > I would welcome advice on a replacement.


    Since you were happy with your 510, a reasonable place to start would be
    the current Canon models in the 500 series, the A530 and A540.

    -dms
     
    Daniel Silevitch, Jun 30, 2006
    #3
  4. bugbear

    Dave Cohen Guest

    Daniel Silevitch wrote:
    > On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:41:19 +0100, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
    >> Assuming the helpful advice on rinsing my Canon A510
    >> comes to naught...
    >>
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona510/
    >>
    >> I would welcome advice on a replacement.

    >
    > Since you were happy with your 510, a reasonable place to start would be
    > the current Canon models in the 500 series, the A530 and A540.
    >
    > -dms


    Somebody mentioned A700 in another post. Never having heard of it I took
    a look at canon site. It looks like a very nice model and doesn't seem
    to cost that much.
    Dave Cohen
     
    Dave Cohen, Jun 30, 2006
    #4
  5. bugbear

    bugbear Guest

    Daniel Silevitch wrote:
    > On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 14:41:19 +0100, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
    >
    >>Assuming the helpful advice on rinsing my Canon A510
    >>comes to naught...
    >>
    >>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona510/
    >>
    >>I would welcome advice on a replacement.

    >
    >
    > Since you were happy with your 510, a reasonable place to start would be
    > the current Canon models in the 500 series, the A530 and A540.


    Ohh. Nasty. Historically, Canon models that differ
    in the model number by ten ONLY differed in the MegaPixel

    e.g. the A60/A70 and A510/A520.

    But the A540 has a 2.5" LCD compared
    to the 530's 1.8".

    Faster movie mode too.

    The A540 looks more like the A700, except
    with a shorter zoom.

    (as a side issue, if I could get a A510 or A520
    at a *really* good end-of-line price,
    I probably would)

    BugBear
     
    bugbear, Jun 30, 2006
    #5
  6. bugbear

    Ron Hunter Guest

    bugbear wrote:
    > Assuming the helpful advice on rinsing my Canon A510
    > comes to naught...
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona510/
    >
    > I would welcome advice on a replacement.
    >
    > The camera was originally bought purely to
    > take more or less fancy still life shots
    > to document my tool hobby:
    >
    > http://www.wdynamic.com/galoots/4images/details.php?image_id=2732
    > http://www.wdynamic.com/galoots/4images/details.php?image_id=2731
    >
    > However, as time has gone on, I've used it more and
    > more, for all sorts of things; general photography,
    > parties, pubs, nature...
    >
    > I *adore* being able to lots of photographs
    > and then cull out the bad 'uns. It's wonderfully
    > liberating. Image processing (Gimp on Linux)
    > is also fun.
    >
    > I hate flash, and will use available light
    > where possible; for stationary targets
    > (therefore) the tripod is my friend.
    >
    > I have found the feeble 3 Mega Pixels of
    > the A510 enough - certainly my 4x6 prints
    > look perfectly crisp and presentable.
    >
    > So; I would like to AT LEAST retain the still life
    > capabilities (manual controls and image quality)
    > of the A510, and would like a more "rounded" camera.
    >
    > The moving of the manfacturers battleground
    > from megapixels to ISO is very appealing to
    > this flasho-phobe.
    >
    > I do not mind body size/weight too much; I certainly
    > don't want to pay the premium for Ixus size models.
    >
    > I would like to spend as little as possible,
    > commensurate with getting the performance I want.
    >
    > So - (for anyone still with me) - anyone
    > care to recommend a digital camera?
    >
    > BugBear


    Well, since you say you liked the a510, you might also like the A610.
    More pixels, good features.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jun 30, 2006
    #6
  7. bugbear

    ASAAR Guest

    On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:25:25 +0100, bugbear wrote:

    > (as a side issue, if I could get a A510 or A520
    > at a *really* good end-of-line price,
    > I probably would)


    And you'd probably be happy. But if the A510 and A520 don't have
    the Digic II processor used in the A530 and A540, you may regret the
    decision if you ever try one. Digic II (and sorry if the A510/A520
    use it too) should make the camera much quicker and more responsive.
    Probably focus faster and more accurately too, especially in low
    light. One step up to the slightly larger A610/A620 will get you
    even better performance as well as a more useful LCD display.
     
    ASAAR, Jul 1, 2006
    #7
    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. DBF

    Looking for a replacement camera recommendation

    DBF, Sep 4, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    323
  2. gbnews

    Ultra compact camera replacement

    gbnews, Sep 7, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    308
    gbnews
    Sep 7, 2004
  3. SS

    Which replacement digital camera?

    SS, Oct 3, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    310
    Lin Chung
    Oct 4, 2005
  4. JC Dill

    replacement parts for canon digital camera battery

    JC Dill, Feb 10, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    322
    JC Dill
    Feb 10, 2006
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,540
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page