Canon A95 or ?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Ken Sternberg, Sep 14, 2004.

  1. I was seriously considering getting a Canon A95, but I've read a few
    negative comments concerning the viewability of the LCD view screen
    and some other things. Are there A95 owners here that can relate their
    experiences with this camera? Foremost, I want excellent image quality
    in terms of true skin tones and other colors, accurate white balance
    and no (or minimal) lens distortion.

    If not the A95, what other 5mp cameras are good in these areas?

    Thanks very much.
    Ken Sternberg, Sep 14, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ken Sternberg

    Nick Ha Guest

    I have the A 80 which has a slightly smaller screen but have had no
    problems seeing the images. I was worried because you are unable to
    adjust screen settings but it has not been a problem.

    Hope this helps.

    The Tadge
    Nick Ha, Sep 14, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Ken Sternberg

    Era Guest

    Any price quotes? I am thinking of getting one as well. $560 was the
    Era, Sep 15, 2004
  4. I can't speak for Australia there, but in the U.S. the camera sells in
    the U.S. $300 range.
    Ken Sternberg, Sep 15, 2004
  5. Ken Sternberg

    Chuck Norris Guest

    Yes, the Chuck Norris.

    As for the LCD, same as the A80, which is what I currently have. Have
    been reasonably happy with the camera, little barrel distortion
    (although I have a plug-in for Photoshop that removes all of it), LCD
    is just fine, although you may have a little trouble with manual
    focus, but I usually set it to infinity anyway to cut down on
    autofocus time.

    One thing that worries me about this camera is the CCD size itself.
    It's the same size as the A80, which is already a pretty noisy camera
    (i.e. purple fringing on high contrast objects, very very noisy at ISO
    200 and above, soft focus, etc...) and yet it packs another megapixel
    into the same size CCD. Seen it before on the sony, and it didn't work
    very well, in fact the lower megapixel camera took much better photos,
    simply because the photos were sharper and had less noise in them.

    On the other hand, my A80 has been really nice. I enjoyed the fact
    that the camera was relativly inexpensive, and still had most of your
    manual settings (f/stop, shutter speed, ISO, white balance, etc...)
    and does take decent photos in good light. Horrible in low light, I
    should mention, except for black and white. White balance is good, and
    the manual white balance I find particularly useful; simply carry
    around a white or grey piece of posterboard in your camera bag if you
    are unable to get a true white color (the auto white can be fooled
    from time to time).

    I guess I would be able to say go for it or not based on how much you
    were planning on spending. If you want a camera for $300 or under,
    then this would probably be on my top 5 list assuming CCD noise is not
    to bad. But if your looking for something in this size/megapixel range
    only, and not necessarily in this price range, I would perhaps look
    for something with a physically larger CCD, a bit more zoom, and a
    larger LCD. The Canon G5 comes to mind, but it cost almost twice as

    I dunno if this helped, I think I talked myself out of buying one at
    least until I see a more detailed comparison between the A80 and the
    A95, specifically on image quality and noise.

    Cheers. Buy my total gym. Or i'll make you shave my back.
    Chuck Norris, Sep 17, 2004
  6. I knew Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris was a friend of mine. And you, sir,
    are no Chuck Norris.
    Ken Sternberg, Sep 17, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.