longtalker
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2011
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
- Location
- UK
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Hello everyone,
I want to buy a camera that has the following features, which my 6 year old Canon A610 does not have:
- very large optical zoom (at least 20x)
- high res video (at least 720p, ideally 1080p)
- exposure bracketing
- articulated LCD (the A610 does have that one)
After a long comparison of bridge ("dSLR-like" compacts) and dSLR cameras, I eliminated the latter category because adding a long zoom lens to the price of a dSLR is something I cannot afford. After comparing the available bridge cameras, I decided that either the Canon SX1 or the SX30 meet my requirements the best.
However, before proceeding to decide between these two (essentially, a choice between the SX1's 1080p filming and higher fps in burst mode and the SX3's better optical zoom and higher pixel count), I could not get over how disappointing the image quality in both of these two cameras is. The samples that I've seen from both of them seem to almost always have a soft/watercolour aspect to them, regardless of the focal length used, and even at the lowest ISO and in bright sunlight. These samples are noisier, and the details at 100% crop are much less clear/crisp than those produced by my old Canon A610! It seems just silly to think that I would take pictures with my old camera when I want quality images and that I'd use the new one when I need lots of optical zoom and/or HD videos.
Could this difference in IQ be attributed just to sensor size? Surprisingly, the A610 has a larger sensor (1/1.8") than the SX1 or SX30 (1/2.3"), even though it has a much smaller resolution (5 MP).
I also expected there to be a large difference in IQ between the SX1 and the SX30 because the former has a CMOS sensor while the latter has a CCD one (I expected the CCD to be better, but either way, I expected *one* to be better than the *other*) - but the images are just as disappointing for both of them.
I'd be willing to sacrifice the articulated LCD for a mega-zoom camera that has an image quality the same as my old A610, but after reading reviews and comparing samples, it seems the SX1/SX30 are really as good as it gets in their category.
My question is, therefore: I know that megazooms don't do well with poor lighting, but are they really unable to produce a good IQ even with enough light? Should I just look for sensor size? Would I have to get a dSLR if I wanted good IQ (if "good" is the standard set by a 6 year old point&shoot!!) and only gain the exposure bracketing and HD filming from my wish list of new features? Could people please recommend what cameras I should consider given all my criteria above?
Many thanks in advance for any help!
I want to buy a camera that has the following features, which my 6 year old Canon A610 does not have:
- very large optical zoom (at least 20x)
- high res video (at least 720p, ideally 1080p)
- exposure bracketing
- articulated LCD (the A610 does have that one)
After a long comparison of bridge ("dSLR-like" compacts) and dSLR cameras, I eliminated the latter category because adding a long zoom lens to the price of a dSLR is something I cannot afford. After comparing the available bridge cameras, I decided that either the Canon SX1 or the SX30 meet my requirements the best.
However, before proceeding to decide between these two (essentially, a choice between the SX1's 1080p filming and higher fps in burst mode and the SX3's better optical zoom and higher pixel count), I could not get over how disappointing the image quality in both of these two cameras is. The samples that I've seen from both of them seem to almost always have a soft/watercolour aspect to them, regardless of the focal length used, and even at the lowest ISO and in bright sunlight. These samples are noisier, and the details at 100% crop are much less clear/crisp than those produced by my old Canon A610! It seems just silly to think that I would take pictures with my old camera when I want quality images and that I'd use the new one when I need lots of optical zoom and/or HD videos.
Could this difference in IQ be attributed just to sensor size? Surprisingly, the A610 has a larger sensor (1/1.8") than the SX1 or SX30 (1/2.3"), even though it has a much smaller resolution (5 MP).
I also expected there to be a large difference in IQ between the SX1 and the SX30 because the former has a CMOS sensor while the latter has a CCD one (I expected the CCD to be better, but either way, I expected *one* to be better than the *other*) - but the images are just as disappointing for both of them.
I'd be willing to sacrifice the articulated LCD for a mega-zoom camera that has an image quality the same as my old A610, but after reading reviews and comparing samples, it seems the SX1/SX30 are really as good as it gets in their category.
My question is, therefore: I know that megazooms don't do well with poor lighting, but are they really unable to produce a good IQ even with enough light? Should I just look for sensor size? Would I have to get a dSLR if I wanted good IQ (if "good" is the standard set by a 6 year old point&shoot!!) and only gain the exposure bracketing and HD filming from my wish list of new features? Could people please recommend what cameras I should consider given all my criteria above?
Many thanks in advance for any help!
Last edited:
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/30/30994-49c5521f7b5b417f49dcd43891cbec27.jpg?1619734557)
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/32/32636-5a159481dcab8aaf87f2d7b501496db1.jpg?1619735554)