Any thoughts/comparisons on Canon SX1 and SX10
Nick
Don't want and can't justify the purchase of a DSLR, also don't want a p&s
but I do require something that is easily portable.
A good zoom range would be useful, good macro facilities a neccessity.
The 2 Canons above seem to fit my requirements.
The SX1 has the 'advantage' of a CMOS sensor.
I have read a lot on this ng and also many reviews but still don't know what
camera to go for.
Any thoughts on these or suggestions for alternatives would be much
appreciated.
You blokes know your stuff and generally fair advice is given on this ng.
Usage will be mainly work related stuff for archives and family snaps.
The ability to take short videos a bonus. Storage media doesn't matter too
much.
I have not bought a camera in 10 years so am not really up to speed with new
developments.
Many thanks
ASAAR
> Don't want and can't justify the purchase of a DSLR, also don't want
> a p&s but I do require something that is easily portable.
> . . .
> Usage will be mainly work related stuff for archives and family snaps.
> The ability to take short videos a bonus. Storage media doesn't matter
> too much.
Both do videos better than most other cameras and record stereo
sound. For the purposes stated, both should be fine, with each
model having a minor advantage or two that the other doesn't match,
but the differences are slight. Check them in a store though, as
they've grown a bit in size and weight compared with their previous
siblings, the S3 IS, S5 IS, etc. Some may find that they're easily
portable but others may find them borderline bulky. As for weights,
they are 14.5, 15.9 and 19.8 oz. for the S3 IS, S5 IS and SX10.
Dave Cohen
> I want to buy a new camera.
> Don't want and can't justify the purchase of a DSLR, also don't want a p&s
> but I do require something that is easily portable.
> A good zoom range would be useful, good macro facilities a neccessity.
> The 2 Canons above seem to fit my requirements.
> The SX1 has the 'advantage' of a CMOS sensor.
> I have read a lot on this ng and also many reviews but still don't know what
> camera to go for.
> Any thoughts on these or suggestions for alternatives would be much
> appreciated.
> You blokes know your stuff and generally fair advice is given on this ng.
Well, some blokes perhaps. If you can stand the price differential the
newer SX1 sounds good, particularly if you're interested in movie mode.
Personally, I never use it. The flash bracket on either is a plus. I've
had good luck with canon although my model is quite a bit earlier.
Dave Cohen
David J Taylor
[]
> If you can stand the price differential the
> newer SX1 sounds good, particularly if you're interested in movie
> mode. Personally, I never use it.
Dave Cohen
You should try it sometime - a short movie burst with sound can sometimes
capture the atmosphere of an event in a way which still photos do not.
The two are complementary, and you may be pleased with the result.
Cheers,
David
mianileng
as a full-fledged substitute for a dedicated video camera that
they get disappointed.
Stephen Henning
SX1 IS takes hi-def movies, and has low-light/low-noise capability.
Those are the only advantages of the CMOS sensor. The slightly higher
pixel count is because it can take either 16x9 or 4x3. The effective
pixel count is the same.
I seldom take movies, so hi-def movie capability wasn't an attractive
feature at all. The low-light (low noise) feature is attractive, but I
haven't had a problem with noise in any photos I have taken with the
SX10 IS. Besides having the camera I prefer, I saved nearly $200.
The other features I demand, super long zoom, hot shoe, AA batteries,
viewfinder, and macro focusing seem to be the same on these cameras.
Since cameras become obsolete rather quickly, I can apply the $200 I
saved to my next camera a few years down the road. It is hard to
imagine cameras better than these though. These are fantastic.
"Nick" <nic...@fume.co.uk> wrote:
> I want to buy a new camera.
> Don't want and can't justify the purchase of a DSLR, also don't want a p&s
> but I do require something that is easily portable.
> A good zoom range would be useful, good macro facilities a neccessity.
> The 2 Canons above seem to fit my requirements.
> The SX1 has the 'advantage' of a CMOS sensor.
> I have read a lot on this ng and also many reviews but still don't know what
> camera to go for.
> Any thoughts on these or suggestions for alternatives would be much
> appreciated.
> You blokes know your stuff and generally fair advice is given on this ng.
> Usage will be mainly work related stuff for archives and family snaps.
> The ability to take short videos a bonus. Storage media doesn't matter too
> much.
--
Pardon my spam deterrent; send email to rhod...@earthlink.net
Cheers, Steve Henning in Reading, PA USA - http://rhodyman.net
83LowRider
"Nick" wrote
<snip>
I've been very pleased with my SX10, tho I'm new to
digital cameras... I read reviews for many days before
opting for this particular camera. The only real critics
of the camera were those complaining about low
light shots. Wide angle, great zoom, and finally, the
video capabilities were the final selling point for me.
While not high def, the video is h264 format, making
for great video at considerably smaller size. Also, in
regards to video, most all cameras cut off automatically
after 8-12 minutes. The SX10 shuts off after 4gb, or 1 hour.
After filming a recent concert, it reached 4gb in 52 minutes.
Simply pushing the RECORD button, cranked it right back
up again. I recorded the 90 minute show, and have since
taken about 200 pictures, and still using the same 4
alkaline batteries. The loudness of the concert overpowered
the stereo mics, giving it too much 'boom', but the results
were overall very good. Shot from the uppermost balcony,
you can check out the video here.. (the camera pulled in much
closer than we could actually see ourselves, from the nosebleed
section. If you watch, click the HIGH QUALITY link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J_qv_MK2h0&feature=channel_page