Canon A540, A630, or A710??? This is my first digital camera purchase, but I enjoy photography and expect to use this camera quite a bit for a variety of purposes.I've looked at the a630, but it's a bit too bulky for me.I'm intrigued by the a710's IS function, and it's longer zoom, but is it worth the extra cost? Is image "shake" really an issue in the a540 w/o this function?Is low battery life a big issue?I've done tons of side-by-side comparisons, so I'm pretty familiar with the specs, but I'd really appreciate any suggestions/ opinions.Thanks! Canon A540, A630, or A710??? This is my first digital camera purchase, but I enjoy photography and expect to use this camera quite a bit for a variety of purposes.I've looked at the... » Read More Canon A540, A630, or A710??? This is my first digital camera purchase, but I enjoy photography and expect to use this camera quite a bit for a variety of purposes.I've looked at the a630, but it's a bit too bulky for me.I'm intrigued by the a710's IS function, and it's longer zoom, but is it worth the extra cost? Is image "shake" really an issue in the a540 w/o this function?Is low battery life a big issue?I've done tons of side-by-side comparisons, so I'm pretty familiar with the specs, but I'd really appreciate any suggestions/ opinions.Thanks! « Show Less
832949
I've had an A540 for 2 years now and I love it. Image shake was never a problem at all...I'd be walking along taking photos and rarely did I get blurred photos. I have dropped this camera lots of times and it was fine. I takes excellent photos and I use it all the time. The bad thing is the poor quality of night photos..very poor compared to other peoples photos I seen. The batteries are just now becoming a pain! All of a sudden I'm going through batteries like there's no tomorrow (disposable ones). This wasn't a problem until recently. I am now shopping for another canon but one that takes better photos in low light. I've had an A540 for 2 years now and I love it. Image shake was never a problem at all...I'd be walking along taking photos and rarely did I get blurred photos. I have dropped this camera lots of times and it was fine. I takes excellent photos and I use it all the time. The bad thing is the poor quality of night photos..very poor compared to other peoples photos I seen. The batteries are just now becoming a pain! All of a sudden I'm going through batteries like there's no tomorrow (disposable ones). This wasn't a problem until recently. I am now shopping for another canon but one that takes... » Read More I've had an A540 for 2 years now and I love it. Image shake was never a problem at all...I'd be walking along taking photos and rarely did I get blurred photos. I have dropped this camera lots of times and it was fine. I takes excellent photos and I use it all the time. The bad thing is the poor quality of night photos..very poor compared to other peoples photos I seen. The batteries are just now becoming a pain! All of a sudden I'm going through batteries like there's no tomorrow (disposable ones). This wasn't a problem until recently. I am now shopping for another canon but one that takes better photos in low light. « Show Less
2117138
R. Frey/others,Did you buy the 770?If yes, how did you like it?I have an unopened 1100 sitting here. I am concerned about getting everything from the 1100's menu vs. dialing scenes when shooting. The small price difference is not an issue. I need to decide ASAP. Problem . . few cameras in stores have a battery to enabling shooting and overall handling.Opinions on the Canon 770, 1100 or other models welcome.Sunbeltsue1
333274
I've used a Canon A80 for the last three years (just bought the 710 this weekend) and have had excellent luck with it as an underwater camera. True you have to wait about four seconds while the photo is being stored to the disk, but it gave me time to decide weather or not I wanted to keep it (and believe me, I junked plenty of shots, anenome fish are not cooperative subjects.) I took the 710 into my pool (with the housing, of course) and found the shutter lag to be almost un-noticeable. I almost always use flash u/w, so I find the time waiting for next shot delay was a non-problem (have to wait for the flash to build up again). I was particularly impressed with the macro photos. My little $400 setup took comparable macro photos to my buddies who were using housed SLR's with twin strobe setups. I'm not sure what happened with your memory card (unformatted) but I think you'll be happy with the 710.
652337
I have an a6000 and now I just bought the RX10, used from Amazon Warehouse deals for under $800 and it's so much better image quality wise then say, an a6000 with kit lens or 16mm F2.8 pancake lens. I have both cameras now and love them both but if you needed to pick just one, here is my recommendations... If you are a VIDEO person, get the RX10. If still image quality with fast accurate AF is your deal breaker, an a6000 with the 18-105 F4 G lens is a killer combo. NEX-7 vs a6000??? I sold my a77 and didn't like the NEX-7 or a65 becuase of horrible low light, high ISO image results. The a6000 with same 24megapixels + new bionz-x processor = excellent low light camera, close to a99's low light performance in stills. No mic input (stay with NEX-7) if that's a deal breaker but overall the a6000 is better than the NEX-7 in almost every way, including the new alpha style menu structure.
825630
&gt;&gt;I didn't realize this camera was out there when I bought my FZ28! I notice that in the copy under the camera description, significantly more bought the FZ28K than the FZ50. Presumably the price is the reason, I suppose along with the 18x optical zoom.&lt;&lt; this one came out before the fz28, but at the time i only paid about $440 &gt;&gt;Many reviewers above said the FZ50 is "almost" a dslr - but many, many dslrs are considerably less expensive than the FZ50, which I think costs more now than when it came out....and I think I saw on the digital review site that the camera has been discontinued. &lt;&lt; i didn't know about it being discontinued so soon. it compares to a dslr in many ways. but the ISO settings are pretty noisy above ISO 400, whereas in good dslr's you can get good results up to ISO 3200. this is a very good review that gives all of its specs. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz50/ here it is compared to the canon rebel XT where you can see the ISO 1600 on both cameras. the canon is better. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz50/page17.asp &gt;&gt;The user photos for this camera are wonderful! I have a Canon Rebel XS, which cost quite a bit less than this camera, and an FZ28K....I'm now wondering if I should sell the FZ28 K, return the Canon, and get a used FZ50.&lt;&lt; yeah, i get better pictures than i ever have. &gt;&gt;What is it about this camera that makes it worth nearly a thousand dollars? &lt;&lt; i don't know. i don't understand. i haven't seen that happen with any other camera.
792519
I would go for the Canon. I have a Sony, and I'm not satisfied with the quality at all. My friend has a Canon (an older one), but it still takes better pictures. I'm thinking to get one too!
745283
I have both cameras, the A77 is definitely worth the price. It's bigger but it has better build quality. You'll get two control dials (this is extremely useful), really convenient LCD screen (you can tilt it to more direction than the A65), more accurate AF system, built-in AF fine-tune, IR light, and you'll also get a top LCD panel (somehow it makes you feel like a pro). By the way, they use same APS-C sized sensor, not a full frame one.
1790350
You want the A710 IS. There is just no comparison to the others.The other two are only 3x zoom and lack key features. You will hate yourself the next day. For the $40 difference, how many photos do you think you will take? A thousand, 5 thousand? So the cheapest one will save you a penny a shot?And the Canon cameras have so many features that typically are only found in big, expensive Digital SLRs.
559949
I have an A200 and used it for years. I found it to be a good general camera but you are asking it to do a high end cameras job. I currently use an A77 with a 4.6 Sigma 50 t0500 MM zoom lens. At 10 times the cost it is barely enough to do what you are asking. For personal snapshots you may try giving you ISO ( film speed priority and settle for a little graininess.rather than bluer.
585578
There are many a7000 rumors and I hope it happens as I really want the a6000 but with the touch-screen of the a5100 to help touch focus shots. Without the touch screen it feels incomplete. I don't want to go to the full frame size of the a7r as I already own a Canon 6D so need a good street walk around camera. The size and grip of the a6000 is perfect for me. The 5100 feels like a toy and doesn't have the great EVF.
1220928
I just went through the same battle, although I have different needs. I have to say either is a great choice but I went with the Canon due to the zoom being a little less, a compromise in hopes that it will have better low light response. I also had a Canon before, so the operating system was a more familiar. Can't tell you yet if that was a wise choice of not. I have had the camera for three days and have had little time to play with it. Here is a comparative review that I found helpful: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q110superzoomgroup/ I saw another review but can't find it again that really played up the Nikon as a much better choice. But it seemed to be written by people reading specifications rather than actually using the camera. I don't think you can wrong with either. The Canon is bulkier and uses 4 double AA batteries which add to the weight. The nice thing about the double AAs is that you have a far easier time getting batteries if you run out of power, but at the cost of weight. If you do get the Canon, get at least 8 Sanyo Eneloop rechargeable NIMH batteries Sanyo Eneloop 4 Pack AA NiMH Pre-Charged Rechargable Batteries w/ Charger. They hold their charge when not used much better than normal NIMH batteries. As the link indicates you can get them here at Amazon. With 8 Eneloops you should never run out of power (providing that you keep them charged of course). If you buy the Nikon, I would recommend looking into a spare battery and a charger. Good luck with your new camera, which ever one you choose!
1621195
I highly recommend the A710. I bought it for a recent trip to Tokyo as an upgrade from the A70 and it did exactly what I wanted it to do. I like to take a lot of pictures in low light without a flash and the IS worked out great. The longer zoom is digital so I don't bother using it. I can crop later and zoom if I want to in photoshop. The normal optical zoom is good enough for me at 6x. I did most of my shooting in auto mode which gave me control over flash and macro settings. Manual mode is easy enough however. There are a lot of extras that I haven't used much. The one thing that I didn't like was the fact that this camera uses SD unlike my A70 which uses CF. Since I have a bunch of CF cards it would have been nice to use them in the A710 but a 2G SD card is pretty cheap. One more thing that I like about the A710 is that they removed 2 batteries so it's a bit lighter. I like canon cameras so I haven't looked at other brands with similar features and price. It sounds like you've done your homework and I think you'll really like this camera. btw, if you would like to see some of the pictures that I have taken with this camera you can see some of them here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cjw333/sets/72157594390957283/
348784
I too am torn between the Canon SX10 and this Nikon. I was 90% sure I was going to go with the Canon as it gets nothing but stellar reviews, but I tried them out side by side today and I have to say - the Nikon seemed more intuitive to use! My kids started going off the deep end before I could make a final decision, but I'll be watching this post to see how others chime in :)
1949846
I also have the A630 - I hate this camera! Close up photos are good, but zoom feature is useless - every photo I take with zoom on is blurry. It's a real bummer - took this camera to Bengals pre-season game last night and 90% of my photos of the players on the field turned out very blurry despite looking okay on the screen from close seats. Others have commented on the battery/card slot compartment and I agree that it's sloppy. I also think the menu and features are difficult to get used to.
1790344
I am considering the same three cameras. I went to CNET.com and they have reviews for all three of these cameras. Just click on REveiws and then DIGTAL CAMERAS. CNET provides some inside information about digicams. It was very helpful in helping make a decision. The website also explains the difference between optical and digtial zoom. I am going to purchase the A710 because it has image stablization because I often take pictures free hand. There is a Canon A570 IS with the same thing at a less price.
227599
I have been looking at these two as well and it seems pretty much a toss up. I have read some decent reviews touting both. It seems that the lack of an internal motor for AF is an issue with the Nikon, but it is 100 cheaper than the Canon.
169376
This might be too late, but ... I love the A1300. It has a nice quick response and it is small enough to put in a pocket and take backpacking (nice and light). Great zoom and movie feature and the best part is that it still has a view finder so I don't have to use reading glasses when I am taking photos. This is my second camera - I destroyed the last one when I dropped it 10 feet (ALWAYS use the wrist-strap!) OK, so it isn't so great on impact, but everything else is A++++++.