Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Smallest digital camera that uses AA batteries and compact..

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 10:00:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Q1: Are the prices DIFFERENT when we go through dpreview.com?
Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the Canon PowerShot A95?

I see from prior messages that a good digital camera is the Canon S1
IS, but that camera is too large for my in-pocket needs. What do you
think about the Powershot A95 for my needs?

I don't need the 10x zoom lens of the Canon SI IS yet I very much
desire the aa batteries and compact flash card features of the
PowerShot A95.

Searching www.dpreview.com, I find dpreview does NOT provide a
buying-guide button to find all cameras which use aa batteries. Drat.
You'd think for such an important choice that can't be changed later,
they'd have a selection for it. Oh well, dpreview does have a button
for everything else -
a. pocket size (nothing bigger than a coolpix 2100 for example)
b. compact flash (they don't have to supply the CF card with the
camera)
c. aa batteries (they don't have to supply the aa batteries with the
camera)

Having hit those buttons, I have a question to ask before I go ahead
and buy.

Q1: I seem to get DIFFERENT prices & in-stock availability when I go to
directly to the seller's web page than when I get there through
dpreveiew. How can that be?

Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the A95 that takes aa
batteries and compact flash (other than the similar Canon PowerShot
A85)?
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 10:26:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"R. Zammataro" <zerr0coke@yahoo.com> writes:
> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the A95 that takes aa
> batteries and compact flash (other than the similar Canon PowerShot
> A85)?

I went through this exercise and have pretty much decided to give up
on the CF requirement and get a Canon A510, which uses SD. A 256MB SD
card is only about 20 bucks these days, and holds 200+ frames at fine
compression. Right now I use a 128MB card in my S100 (2MP) and have
never come anywhere near filling it before I get around to uploading
the shots to a computer.
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 10:49:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin wrote:
> I went through this exercise and have pretty much decided to give up
> on the CF requirement and get a Canon A510, which uses SD.

I just compared the A510 with the A95 for the featues I care about and
the comparison is reasonably favorable.

The Canon A510 seems to be about 100 dollars cheaper than the A95!
The Canon A510 is about a half-inch shorter & a whopping 4 oz lighter!'

The A510 uses only two aa batteries instead of the 4 batteries in the
A95 so that's probably part of the weight reduction. Even with the
lighter two aa batteries, the A510 still manages 300 shots per charge
which is favorable compared with the 650 shots per charge of the A95
with 4 aa batteries.

The only bad thing is that the Canon A510 uses the wrong storage media.

I guess I could just add an extra 90 dollars for the 1GB SD card (I
have four or five 1 GB compact flash cards on hand - and one 2 GB cf
card on order).

I do like smaller/cheaper aspect of the A510 over the A95.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 12:33:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"R. Zammataro" <zerr0coke@yahoo.com> writes:
> I guess I could just add an extra 90 dollars for the 1GB SD card (I
> have four or five 1 GB compact flash cards on hand - and one 2 GB cf
> card on order).

Here's one for $70:

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?Product...

I think I'd just get by with a smaller card.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 5:24:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Rubin wrote:
> "R. Zammataro" <zerr0coke@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>>Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the A95 that takes aa
>>batteries and compact flash (other than the similar Canon PowerShot
>>A85)?
>
>
> I went through this exercise and have pretty much decided to give up
> on the CF requirement and get a Canon A510, which uses SD. A 256MB SD
> card is only about 20 bucks these days, and holds 200+ frames at fine
> compression. Right now I use a 128MB card in my S100 (2MP) and have
> never come anywhere near filling it before I get around to uploading
> the shots to a computer.

I filled a 256meg SD and a 128meg SD on an Alaskan Cruise. I believe my
great niece and her husband have filled more than that on their vacation
to Banff. I guess it depends on where you go. Last vacation was to
Shreveport, La. Took 13 pictures.... Sigh.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 5:26:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

R. Zammataro wrote:
>
> Paul Rubin wrote:
>
>>I went through this exercise and have pretty much decided to give up
>>on the CF requirement and get a Canon A510, which uses SD.
>
>
> I just compared the A510 with the A95 for the featues I care about and
> the comparison is reasonably favorable.
>
> The Canon A510 seems to be about 100 dollars cheaper than the A95!
> The Canon A510 is about a half-inch shorter & a whopping 4 oz lighter!'
>
> The A510 uses only two aa batteries instead of the 4 batteries in the
> A95 so that's probably part of the weight reduction. Even with the
> lighter two aa batteries, the A510 still manages 300 shots per charge
> which is favorable compared with the 650 shots per charge of the A95
> with 4 aa batteries.
>
> The only bad thing is that the Canon A510 uses the wrong storage media.
>
> I guess I could just add an extra 90 dollars for the 1GB SD card (I
> have four or five 1 GB compact flash cards on hand - and one 2 GB cf
> card on order).
>
> I do like smaller/cheaper aspect of the A510 over the A95.
>

I believe you can probably find a 1GB SD card for in the $50-$60 range...
They are about 1/4 the cost they were when I bought them for my vacation
only 1 year ago!


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 1:43:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter wrote:
> I filled a 256meg SD and a 128meg SD on an Alaskan Cruise. I believe my
> great niece and her husband have filled more than that on their vacation
> to Banff. I guess it depends on where you go. Last vacation was to
> Shreveport, La. Took 13 pictures.... Sigh.

At an average of 15 to 30 MB per video clip and a MB or so per
snapshot, I'd fill up my ancient 128 & 256Mb CF cards in a few minutes.
On a vacation, without my heavy laptop, I take a handful of 1Mb compact
flash cards and I fill them up so much I have to erase some shots and
clips before the end of a two-week trip.

So, I buy a lot of CF cards.

Seems to me CF is MUCH BETTER than SD for a variety of reasons, not the
least of which is I own nearly $1000 initial cost (not today's dollars
though) in the things.

I wouldn't even look at a camera that didn't have compact flash storage
media.
And, I wouldn't even look at a CF card that wasn't a gigabyte or more.

YMMV
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 3:24:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"R. Zammataro" <zerr0coke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118970048.745945.129830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Q1: Are the prices DIFFERENT when we go through dpreview.com?
> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the Canon PowerShot A95?
>
> I see from prior messages that a good digital camera is the Canon S1
> IS, but that camera is too large for my in-pocket needs. What do you
> think about the Powershot A95 for my needs?

I have a PowerShot A95 and really like it a lot, even though I am not
particularly a Canon fan. At the price, I don't think the A95 can be beat,
especially with your requirements for AA batteries and CompactFlash. There
are few cameras smaller than the A95 that take those batteries and media,
and those few are way behind the A95 in terms of features. The swing-out LCD
monitor alone puts it head and shoulders above everything else in its price
range.

It is *not* the most pocketable camera out there, that's for sure. It does
slip easily into a pants pocket, but it's a bit heavy. Mine weighs 12.3
ounces loaded, on my postal scale. A much better solution is to carry it in
a lightweight case with a belt loop. I bought one in Wal-Mart for 94 cents
that happens to fit the A95 perfectly.

>
> I don't need the 10x zoom lens of the Canon SI IS yet I very much
> desire the aa batteries and compact flash card features of the
> PowerShot A95.
>
> Searching www.dpreview.com, I find dpreview does NOT provide a
> buying-guide button to find all cameras which use aa batteries. Drat.
> You'd think for such an important choice that can't be changed later,
> they'd have a selection for it. Oh well, dpreview does have a button
> for everything else -
> a. pocket size (nothing bigger than a coolpix 2100 for example)
> b. compact flash (they don't have to supply the CF card with the
> camera)
> c. aa batteries (they don't have to supply the aa batteries with the
> camera)
>
> Having hit those buttons, I have a question to ask before I go ahead
> and buy.
>
> Q1: I seem to get DIFFERENT prices & in-stock availability when I go to
> directly to the seller's web page than when I get there through
> dpreveiew. How can that be?

Online prices often change from day to day, either up or down. DPReview for
some reason does not seem to be as up to date as some others, but *any* site
may give you not-quite-current prices. Also, the seller with the best price
today may not be the one with the best price tomorrow.

When I bought my A95 from Buy.com a few weeks ago, it was $259.99 with free
shipping. That was the best price available from any reputable seller on
that day. I see they still have it at the same price, but many other
aggressive online sellers change prices constantly. Check www.bizrate.com
for prices, but even they are not always up-to-the-minute.


>
> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the A95 that takes aa
> batteries and compact flash (other than the similar Canon PowerShot
> A85)?

I doubt it. There are lots of fine smaller cameras, some taking AA batteries
too, but that CF requirement really makes it tough.

N.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 3:53:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"R. Zammataro" <zerr0coke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118972952.929228.22080@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Paul Rubin wrote:
>> I went through this exercise and have pretty much decided to give up
>> on the CF requirement and get a Canon A510, which uses SD.
>
> I just compared the A510 with the A95 for the featues I care about and
> the comparison is reasonably favorable.
>
> The Canon A510 seems to be about 100 dollars cheaper than the A95!
> The Canon A510 is about a half-inch shorter & a whopping 4 oz lighter!'
>
> The A510 uses only two aa batteries instead of the 4 batteries in the
> A95 so that's probably part of the weight reduction. Even with the
> lighter two aa batteries, the A510 still manages 300 shots per charge
> which is favorable compared with the 650 shots per charge of the A95
> with 4 aa batteries.
>
> The only bad thing is that the Canon A510 uses the wrong storage media.
>
> I guess I could just add an extra 90 dollars for the 1GB SD card (I
> have four or five 1 GB compact flash cards on hand - and one 2 GB cf
> card on order).
>
> I do like smaller/cheaper aspect of the A510 over the A95.

It's smaller and more pocketable, all right. A quick check of prices shows
the A510 is selling for about $90 less than the A95, but with the number of
memory cards that you evidently buy you'll soon use up that difference.

Note also that the A510 is not nearly the camera that the A95 is. It's a
3-megapixel camera where the A95 has 5 megapixels, and it doesn't have the
very useful swing-out LCD monitor that the A95 has. On the other hand, these
differences may not be important to you, and the A510 does have a 4x zoom
lens as opposed to the A95's 3x zoom. If pocketability is all-important to
you then the A510 may be better for that reason alone, but then there are
other cameras much more pocketable than the A510, such as the Pentax Optio S
and Minolta X series cameras, albeit at higher prices--but those higher
prices usually include Li ion rechargeable battery and charger. "You pays
yer penny and you takes yer choice."

N.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 6:03:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

R. Zammataro wrote:
> Q1: Are the prices DIFFERENT when we go through dpreview.com?
> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the Canon PowerShot A95?
>
> I see from prior messages that a good digital camera is the Canon S1
> IS, but that camera is too large for my in-pocket needs. What do you
> think about the Powershot A95 for my needs?
>
> I don't need the 10x zoom lens of the Canon SI IS yet I very much
> desire the aa batteries and compact flash card features of the
> PowerShot A95.
>
> Searching www.dpreview.com, I find dpreview does NOT provide a
> buying-guide button to find all cameras which use aa batteries. Drat.
> You'd think for such an important choice that can't be changed later,
> they'd have a selection for it. Oh well, dpreview does have a button
> for everything else -
> a. pocket size (nothing bigger than a coolpix 2100 for example)
> b. compact flash (they don't have to supply the CF card with the
> camera)
> c. aa batteries (they don't have to supply the aa batteries with the
> camera)
>
> Having hit those buttons, I have a question to ask before I go ahead
> and buy.
>
> Q1: I seem to get DIFFERENT prices & in-stock availability when I go to
> directly to the seller's web page than when I get there through
> dpreveiew. How can that be?
>
> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the A95 that takes aa
> batteries and compact flash (other than the similar Canon PowerShot
> A85)?
>


I own the A95 and im telling you you wont be disapointed.

I dont know wether the A510 has the fold out screen like the A95, this
is a very handy feature
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 7:01:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> R. Zammataro wrote:


Dear R. Zammataro,

I have a suggestion for you, out of my experience with many cameras.

Forget about size, batteries and memory media. Never base a camera
choice on these.

Choose a camera, first and foremost, based on image quality; that is,
in the case of a digital, essentially a good lens, a good sensor, and
RAW capability.

Then, choose one that'll give you manual controls.

Then, get a bag with a strap and worry *not* about size. As for
batteries and media, ebay is your friend, and they're both too cheap
now that you don't need to base a camera choice on them.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 7:43:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

R. Zammataro wrote:
> Q1: Are the prices DIFFERENT when we go through dpreview.com?
> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the Canon PowerShot A95?
>
> I see from prior messages that a good digital camera is the Canon S1
> IS, but that camera is too large for my in-pocket needs. What do you
> think about the Powershot A95 for my needs?
>
> I don't need the 10x zoom lens of the Canon SI IS yet I very much
> desire the aa batteries and compact flash card features of the
> PowerShot A95.
>
> Searching www.dpreview.com, I find dpreview does NOT provide a
> buying-guide button to find all cameras which use aa batteries. Drat.
> You'd think for such an important choice that can't be changed later,
> they'd have a selection for it. Oh well, dpreview does have a button
> for everything else -

Use http://dcresource.com/reviews/cameraList.php which has a much better
search engine, including battery type and AF assist.

There are only a few cameras that show up with CF, AA, and AFI, under
$400 and of those, the A95 is the best choice.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 8:19:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

R. Zammataro wrote:
> Q1: Are the prices DIFFERENT when we go through dpreview.com?

The best price, including shipping and handling, is through Amazon, see
"http://tinylink.com/?JCvCz6Ba65" Note that Amazon isn't a participant
in PriceGrabber, so they don't show up there, but they are often the
least expensive because of their free shipping.

> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the Canon PowerShot A95?

No, the A95 is the best if you want AA batteries. The S500 is CF, but
uses Li-Ion batteries. The A95's advantage is that you can use add-on
lenses.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 8:21:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

R. Zammataro wrote:

> The only bad thing is that the Canon A510 uses the wrong storage media.

This is true. It isn't just the price either, it's the reliability.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 9:39:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:24:03 -0400, "Nostrobino" <not@home.today>
wrote:

>
>"R. Zammataro" <zerr0coke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1118970048.745945.129830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Q1: Are the prices DIFFERENT when we go through dpreview.com?
>> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the Canon PowerShot A95?
>>
>> I see from prior messages that a good digital camera is the Canon S1
>> IS, but that camera is too large for my in-pocket needs. What do you
>> think about the Powershot A95 for my needs?
>
>I have a PowerShot A95 and really like it a lot, even though I am not
>particularly a Canon fan. At the price, I don't think the A95 can be beat,
>especially with your requirements for AA batteries and CompactFlash. There
>are few cameras smaller than the A95 that take those batteries and media,
>and those few are way behind the A95 in terms of features. The swing-out LCD
>monitor alone puts it head and shoulders above everything else in its price
>range.

Could not agree more, it's a good P&S with a lot of user
selectable option & full manual "if" I wants to use them.

>It is *not* the most pocketable camera out there, that's for sure. It does
>slip easily into a pants pocket, but it's a bit heavy. Mine weighs 12.3
>ounces loaded, on my postal scale. A much better solution is to carry it in
>a lightweight case with a belt loop. I bought one in Wal-Mart for 94 cents
>that happens to fit the A95 perfectly.

Agreed, when holstered in a tightly fitted case attached to my
belt it's very convenient & I don't have to worry about sitting on it
or the dreaded pocket lint from finding it's way into the optics.
Also this keeps it quickly accessible, when quick accessibility is not
needed or I need other accessories, it can be carried in a fanny pack
or a small backpack.

>> I don't need the 10x zoom lens of the Canon SI IS yet I very much
>> desire the aa batteries and compact flash card features of the
>> PowerShot A95.
>>
>> Searching www.dpreview.com, I find dpreview does NOT provide a
>> buying-guide button to find all cameras which use aa batteries. Drat.
>> You'd think for such an important choice that can't be changed later,
>> they'd have a selection for it. Oh well, dpreview does have a button
>> for everything else -
>> a. pocket size (nothing bigger than a coolpix 2100 for example)
>> b. compact flash (they don't have to supply the CF card with the
>> camera)
>> c. aa batteries (they don't have to supply the aa batteries with the
>> camera)
>>
>> Having hit those buttons, I have a question to ask before I go ahead
>> and buy.
>>
>> Q1: I seem to get DIFFERENT prices & in-stock availability when I go to
>> directly to the seller's web page than when I get there through
>> dpreveiew. How can that be?
>
>Online prices often change from day to day, either up or down. DPReview for
>some reason does not seem to be as up to date as some others, but *any* site
>may give you not-quite-current prices. Also, the seller with the best price
>today may not be the one with the best price tomorrow.
>
>When I bought my A95 from Buy.com a few weeks ago, it was $259.99 with free
>shipping. That was the best price available from any reputable seller on
>that day. I see they still have it at the same price, but many other
>aggressive online sellers change prices constantly. Check www.bizrate.com
>for prices, but even they are not always up-to-the-minute.
>
>
>>
>> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the A95 that takes aa
>> batteries and compact flash (other than the similar Canon PowerShot
>> A85)?
>
>I doubt it. There are lots of fine smaller cameras, some taking AA batteries
>too, but that CF requirement really makes it tough.
>
>N.
>
Good points but I would like to add a couple more. The A95
may be the last of the Axx line & it's successor is likely to be the
A530 or 540 which certainly will use SD memory cards & 2 "AA"
batteries just like the A510 & A520 now do. Canon seems to be
switching over there entire line of P&S cameras over to SD memory &
not just the pocket sized 1's either. The new S2 IS switched over
from CF to SD memory & it still uses 4 "AA" batteries.

So if you want your cake & to eat it too, the A95 may be your
last choice that meets your requirements & @ about $260 USD it's a
very good value. 2 additional points worth mentioning/consideration:

1> It has a 1.8" swivel LCD which makes low & overhead properly framed
shots possible. Also a small beanbag works wonders as a pocket size
directional camera holder & this is where the swivel LCD shines
because it allows you to "see" the camera's view that would otherwise
be impossible.

2> The A95 like the A80, S60, S70 & S1 IS & some other digital cameras
has a "C", (Custom) mode on the dial which remembers settings that are
usually not remembered after the camera is powered down or the mode
has been switched. MF (Manual Focus) is 1 of them & by using a minor
variation of following information I have been able to program the "C"
mode on my A95 to take quick, properly focused & framed pictures in
almost any lighting conditions. Shutter lag is reduced from about 0.9
to 0.1 seconds, making action shots possible. Here is the info. link:

http://albert.achtung.com/cameras/A80/index7.html#SNAP

This information refers to the Canon A80 (4MP) but this
method also works for most any camera with MF mode but if it does not
have a mode that remembers the MF setting, it will need to be reset
each time the camera is powered down or the mode is changed.

Aside from that, it woks great & it's so simple that I wonder
why I did not think of doing this a long time ago. The only down side
is that you must be in live video display mode which means LCD on or
the MF function won't work. The LCD remaining on does drain the
batteries a little faster but not as much as I had expected, probably
because the lens focus motor never gets used except to set the MF for
the 1st shot. Since focus is the largest reason for shutter lag &
focus error in low contrasted scenes, shutter lag is greatly reduced
when the camera no longer has to focus the picture, hence very fast
shutter response times.

Rather makes me wonder why this method is not @ least
suggested on review sights that are reviewing a P&S camera like the
A95 that has a dial setting which can remember MF settings. Anyway I
hope this information proves helpful to you & or others, it certainly
has been so for me. Yes I own a DSLR, so when needed, I have a
quality camera that has very minimal shutter lag but using this method
I find that when I travel light & only take the A95, I am not as
limited with it as I was before I began using this method.

Respectfully, DHB


..
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 3:28:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Whacky Blacky wrote:
> Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>
>>Use http://dcresource.com/reviews/cameraList.php which has a much better
>>search engine, including battery type and AF assist.
>>
>>There are only a few cameras that show up with CF & AA
>
>
> Wow - you are fantastic!
>
> I've lurked here for a while without knowing about dcresource's search
> engine (which beats the otherwise excellent dpreview
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp search engine by a mile for
> the things a consumer cares about in a camera comparison flowchart.

I don't know why dpreview doesn't improve their search engine, it's one
of their big weaknesses. It seems as if it would be a simple task.

Batteries
Proprietary Rechargeable
AA
AA/R-CRV3

AF Assist Lamp
Yes
No
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 3:46:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Steven M. Scharf" <schart.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
news:JcCse.5839$NX4.2006@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
[ . . . ]
>
> Use http://dcresource.com/reviews/cameraList.php which has a much better
> search engine, including battery type and AF assist.

I'll second Whacky Blacky and thank you effusively for this, Steven. It's by
far the best page of its kind I've seen.

N.
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 12:27:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"DHB" <yoda2k@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:fvr5b11kk8lrggvudvva7sf48rnm3uqvps@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:24:03 -0400, "Nostrobino" <not@home.today>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"R. Zammataro" <zerr0coke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:1118970048.745945.129830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> Q1: Are the prices DIFFERENT when we go through dpreview.com?
>>> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the Canon PowerShot A95?
>>>
>>> I see from prior messages that a good digital camera is the Canon S1
>>> IS, but that camera is too large for my in-pocket needs. What do you
>>> think about the Powershot A95 for my needs?
>>
>>I have a PowerShot A95 and really like it a lot, even though I am not
>>particularly a Canon fan. At the price, I don't think the A95 can be beat,
>>especially with your requirements for AA batteries and CompactFlash. There
>>are few cameras smaller than the A95 that take those batteries and media,
>>and those few are way behind the A95 in terms of features. The swing-out
>>LCD
>>monitor alone puts it head and shoulders above everything else in its
>>price
>>range.
>
> Could not agree more, it's a good P&S with a lot of user
> selectable option & full manual "if" I wants to use them.
>
>>It is *not* the most pocketable camera out there, that's for sure. It does
>>slip easily into a pants pocket, but it's a bit heavy. Mine weighs 12.3
>>ounces loaded, on my postal scale. A much better solution is to carry it
>>in
>>a lightweight case with a belt loop. I bought one in Wal-Mart for 94 cents
>>that happens to fit the A95 perfectly.
>
> Agreed, when holstered in a tightly fitted case attached to my
> belt it's very convenient & I don't have to worry about sitting on it
> or the dreaded pocket lint from finding it's way into the optics.

Yes, that always is on my mind too. Sometimes I do carry a camera in a
pocket of my cargo shorts, and I go through a
turn-pocket-inside-out-and-brush drill beforehand, but I still like to have
it in a lined case in the pocket unless I'm sure I'm going to be using it
often and quickly.


> Also this keeps it quickly accessible, when quick accessibility is not
> needed or I need other accessories, it can be carried in a fanny pack
> or a small backpack.
>
>>> I don't need the 10x zoom lens of the Canon SI IS yet I very much
>>> desire the aa batteries and compact flash card features of the
>>> PowerShot A95.
>>>
>>> Searching www.dpreview.com, I find dpreview does NOT provide a
>>> buying-guide button to find all cameras which use aa batteries. Drat.
>>> You'd think for such an important choice that can't be changed later,
>>> they'd have a selection for it. Oh well, dpreview does have a button
>>> for everything else -
>>> a. pocket size (nothing bigger than a coolpix 2100 for example)
>>> b. compact flash (they don't have to supply the CF card with the
>>> camera)
>>> c. aa batteries (they don't have to supply the aa batteries with the
>>> camera)
>>>
>>> Having hit those buttons, I have a question to ask before I go ahead
>>> and buy.
>>>
>>> Q1: I seem to get DIFFERENT prices & in-stock availability when I go to
>>> directly to the seller's web page than when I get there through
>>> dpreveiew. How can that be?
>>
>>Online prices often change from day to day, either up or down. DPReview
>>for
>>some reason does not seem to be as up to date as some others, but *any*
>>site
>>may give you not-quite-current prices. Also, the seller with the best
>>price
>>today may not be the one with the best price tomorrow.
>>
>>When I bought my A95 from Buy.com a few weeks ago, it was $259.99 with
>>free
>>shipping. That was the best price available from any reputable seller on
>>that day. I see they still have it at the same price, but many other
>>aggressive online sellers change prices constantly. Check www.bizrate.com
>>for prices, but even they are not always up-to-the-minute.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the A95 that takes aa
>>> batteries and compact flash (other than the similar Canon PowerShot
>>> A85)?
>>
>>I doubt it. There are lots of fine smaller cameras, some taking AA
>>batteries
>>too, but that CF requirement really makes it tough.
>>
>>N.
>>
> Good points but I would like to add a couple more. The A95
> may be the last of the Axx line & it's successor is likely to be the
> A530 or 540 which certainly will use SD memory cards & 2 "AA"
> batteries just like the A510 & A520 now do. Canon seems to be
> switching over there entire line of P&S cameras over to SD memory &
> not just the pocket sized 1's either. The new S2 IS switched over
> from CF to SD memory & it still uses 4 "AA" batteries.

Interesting. My S60 uses CompactFlash which sort of surprised me, that being
obviously designed with pocketability in mind. I presume the S70 is the
same, but I suppose newer S models will be downsized and use SD. However, I
would be surprised if newer G series cameras went to SD. There just doesn't
seem to be any reason to make that kind of camera any smaller than the G6,
and therefore no obvious reason to go to the much smaller card. And no
reason to annoy existing G series owners thinking of upgrading, most of whom
probably have a good stock of CF cards on hand.


>
> So if you want your cake & to eat it too, the A95 may be your
> last choice that meets your requirements & @ about $260 USD it's a
> very good value. 2 additional points worth mentioning/consideration:
>
> 1> It has a 1.8" swivel LCD which makes low & overhead properly framed
> shots possible. Also a small beanbag works wonders as a pocket size
> directional camera holder & this is where the swivel LCD shines
> because it allows you to "see" the camera's view that would otherwise
> be impossible.
>
> 2> The A95 like the A80, S60, S70 & S1 IS & some other digital cameras
> has a "C", (Custom) mode on the dial which remembers settings that are
> usually not remembered after the camera is powered down or the mode
> has been switched. MF (Manual Focus) is 1 of them & by using a minor
> variation of following information I have been able to program the "C"
> mode on my A95 to take quick, properly focused & framed pictures in
> almost any lighting conditions. Shutter lag is reduced from about 0.9
> to 0.1 seconds, making action shots possible. Here is the info. link:
>
> http://albert.achtung.com/cameras/A80/index7.html#SNAP
>
> This information refers to the Canon A80 (4MP) but this
> method also works for most any camera with MF mode but if it does not
> have a mode that remembers the MF setting, it will need to be reset
> each time the camera is powered down or the mode is changed.

That's a good idea all right, but I am somewhat suspicious of the numbers
given on that site. It is just hard for me to believe that the hyperfocal
distance of an A80 lens at 7.8mm and wide open is only 3.59 meters. However,
since I have the same lens and CCD size on my A95 I'll be able to test it by
experiment. If that is really true, then distant objects will be just as
sharp with the lens at those settings and manually focused at 3.6 meters as
with it focused at infinity, assuming a reasonable degree of final
enlargement on a print (monitors being too low resolution to prove
anything). It will be interesting to do in any case.

In the example photo shown on that site, the subject happens to be fairly
close. The distance doesn't look so sharp, though admittedly it's hard to
tell with such a small photo on a computer monitor. Another thing that many
users seem to forget is that depth of field is also dependent on degree of
*final enlargement* and viewing distance; it's not something set in cement
for a camera at any given focal length, f-stop and distance as they
apparently believe, accepted formulas notwithstanding. The same principle
would apply for hyperfocal distance, of course.


>
> Aside from that, it woks great & it's so simple that I wonder
> why I did not think of doing this a long time ago. The only down side
> is that you must be in live video display mode which means LCD on or
> the MF function won't work. The LCD remaining on does drain the
> batteries a little faster but not as much as I had expected, probably
> because the lens focus motor never gets used except to set the MF for
> the 1st shot. Since focus is the largest reason for shutter lag &
> focus error in low contrasted scenes, shutter lag is greatly reduced
> when the camera no longer has to focus the picture, hence very fast
> shutter response times.

Also it would eliminate autofocus misses in cameras and low-light situations
that are inclined to have this problem. No autofocus, no autofocus miss.
;-)

But I'm still suspicious of those numbers.

N.


>
> Rather makes me wonder why this method is not @ least
> suggested on review sights that are reviewing a P&S camera like the
> A95 that has a dial setting which can remember MF settings. Anyway I
> hope this information proves helpful to you & or others, it certainly
> has been so for me. Yes I own a DSLR, so when needed, I have a
> quality camera that has very minimal shutter lag but using this method
> I find that when I travel light & only take the A95, I am not as
> limited with it as I was before I began using this method.
>
> Respectfully, DHB
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 9:48:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 20:27:01 -0400, "Nostrobino" <not@home.today>
wrote:

To save time, scroll down toward the end of this post.

>
>"DHB" <yoda2k@verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:fvr5b11kk8lrggvudvva7sf48rnm3uqvps@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:24:03 -0400, "Nostrobino" <not@home.today>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"R. Zammataro" <zerr0coke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1118970048.745945.129830@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Q1: Are the prices DIFFERENT when we go through dpreview.com?
>>>> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the Canon PowerShot A95?
>>>>
>>>> I see from prior messages that a good digital camera is the Canon S1
>>>> IS, but that camera is too large for my in-pocket needs. What do you
>>>> think about the Powershot A95 for my needs?
>>>
>>>I have a PowerShot A95 and really like it a lot, even though I am not
>>>particularly a Canon fan. At the price, I don't think the A95 can be beat,
>>>especially with your requirements for AA batteries and CompactFlash. There
>>>are few cameras smaller than the A95 that take those batteries and media,
>>>and those few are way behind the A95 in terms of features. The swing-out
>>>LCD
>>>monitor alone puts it head and shoulders above everything else in its
>>>price
>>>range.
>>
>> Could not agree more, it's a good P&S with a lot of user
>> selectable option & full manual "if" I wants to use them.
>>
>>>It is *not* the most pocketable camera out there, that's for sure. It does
>>>slip easily into a pants pocket, but it's a bit heavy. Mine weighs 12.3
>>>ounces loaded, on my postal scale. A much better solution is to carry it
>>>in
>>>a lightweight case with a belt loop. I bought one in Wal-Mart for 94 cents
>>>that happens to fit the A95 perfectly.
>>
>> Agreed, when holstered in a tightly fitted case attached to my
>> belt it's very convenient & I don't have to worry about sitting on it
>> or the dreaded pocket lint from finding it's way into the optics.
>
>Yes, that always is on my mind too. Sometimes I do carry a camera in a
>pocket of my cargo shorts, and I go through a
>turn-pocket-inside-out-and-brush drill beforehand, but I still like to have
>it in a lined case in the pocket unless I'm sure I'm going to be using it
>often and quickly.
>
>
>> Also this keeps it quickly accessible, when quick accessibility is not
>> needed or I need other accessories, it can be carried in a fanny pack
>> or a small backpack.
>>
>>>> I don't need the 10x zoom lens of the Canon SI IS yet I very much
>>>> desire the aa batteries and compact flash card features of the
>>>> PowerShot A95.
>>>>
>>>> Searching www.dpreview.com, I find dpreview does NOT provide a
>>>> buying-guide button to find all cameras which use aa batteries. Drat.
>>>> You'd think for such an important choice that can't be changed later,
>>>> they'd have a selection for it. Oh well, dpreview does have a button
>>>> for everything else -
>>>> a. pocket size (nothing bigger than a coolpix 2100 for example)
>>>> b. compact flash (they don't have to supply the CF card with the
>>>> camera)
>>>> c. aa batteries (they don't have to supply the aa batteries with the
>>>> camera)
>>>>
>>>> Having hit those buttons, I have a question to ask before I go ahead
>>>> and buy.
>>>>
>>>> Q1: I seem to get DIFFERENT prices & in-stock availability when I go to
>>>> directly to the seller's web page than when I get there through
>>>> dpreveiew. How can that be?
>>>
>>>Online prices often change from day to day, either up or down. DPReview
>>>for
>>>some reason does not seem to be as up to date as some others, but *any*
>>>site
>>>may give you not-quite-current prices. Also, the seller with the best
>>>price
>>>today may not be the one with the best price tomorrow.
>>>
>>>When I bought my A95 from Buy.com a few weeks ago, it was $259.99 with
>>>free
>>>shipping. That was the best price available from any reputable seller on
>>>that day. I see they still have it at the same price, but many other
>>>aggressive online sellers change prices constantly. Check www.bizrate.com
>>>for prices, but even they are not always up-to-the-minute.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Q2: Is there a better smaller camera than the A95 that takes aa
>>>> batteries and compact flash (other than the similar Canon PowerShot
>>>> A85)?
>>>
>>>I doubt it. There are lots of fine smaller cameras, some taking AA
>>>batteries
>>>too, but that CF requirement really makes it tough.
>>>
>>>N.
>>>
>> Good points but I would like to add a couple more. The A95
>> may be the last of the Axx line & it's successor is likely to be the
>> A530 or 540 which certainly will use SD memory cards & 2 "AA"
>> batteries just like the A510 & A520 now do. Canon seems to be
>> switching over there entire line of P&S cameras over to SD memory &
>> not just the pocket sized 1's either. The new S2 IS switched over
>> from CF to SD memory & it still uses 4 "AA" batteries.
>
>Interesting. My S60 uses CompactFlash which sort of surprised me, that being
>obviously designed with pocketability in mind. I presume the S70 is the
>same, but I suppose newer S models will be downsized and use SD. However, I
>would be surprised if newer G series cameras went to SD. There just doesn't
>seem to be any reason to make that kind of camera any smaller than the G6,
>and therefore no obvious reason to go to the much smaller card. And no
>reason to annoy existing G series owners thinking of upgrading, most of whom
>probably have a good stock of CF cards on hand.
>
>
>>
>> So if you want your cake & to eat it too, the A95 may be your
>> last choice that meets your requirements & @ about $260 USD it's a
>> very good value. 2 additional points worth mentioning/consideration:
>>
>> 1> It has a 1.8" swivel LCD which makes low & overhead properly framed
>> shots possible. Also a small beanbag works wonders as a pocket size
>> directional camera holder & this is where the swivel LCD shines
>> because it allows you to "see" the camera's view that would otherwise
>> be impossible.
>>
>> 2> The A95 like the A80, S60, S70 & S1 IS & some other digital cameras
>> has a "C", (Custom) mode on the dial which remembers settings that are
>> usually not remembered after the camera is powered down or the mode
>> has been switched. MF (Manual Focus) is 1 of them & by using a minor
>> variation of following information I have been able to program the "C"
>> mode on my A95 to take quick, properly focused & framed pictures in
>> almost any lighting conditions. Shutter lag is reduced from about 0.9
>> to 0.1 seconds, making action shots possible. Here is the info. link:
>>
>> http://albert.achtung.com/cameras/A80/index7.html#SNAP
>>
>> This information refers to the Canon A80 (4MP) but this
>> method also works for most any camera with MF mode but if it does not
>> have a mode that remembers the MF setting, it will need to be reset
>> each time the camera is powered down or the mode is changed.
>
>That's a good idea all right, but I am somewhat suspicious of the numbers
>given on that site. It is just hard for me to believe that the hyperfocal
>distance of an A80 lens at 7.8mm and wide open is only 3.59 meters. However,
>since I have the same lens and CCD size on my A95 I'll be able to test it by
>experiment. If that is really true, then distant objects will be just as
>sharp with the lens at those settings and manually focused at 3.6 meters as
>with it focused at infinity, assuming a reasonable degree of final
>enlargement on a print (monitors being too low resolution to prove
>anything). It will be interesting to do in any case.
>
>In the example photo shown on that site, the subject happens to be fairly
>close. The distance doesn't look so sharp, though admittedly it's hard to
>tell with such a small photo on a computer monitor. Another thing that many
>users seem to forget is that depth of field is also dependent on degree of
>*final enlargement* and viewing distance; it's not something set in cement
>for a camera at any given focal length, f-stop and distance as they
>apparently believe, accepted formulas notwithstanding. The same principle
>would apply for hyperfocal distance, of course.
>
>
>>
>> Aside from that, it woks great & it's so simple that I wonder
>> why I did not think of doing this a long time ago. The only down side
>> is that you must be in live video display mode which means LCD on or
>> the MF function won't work. The LCD remaining on does drain the
>> batteries a little faster but not as much as I had expected, probably
>> because the lens focus motor never gets used except to set the MF for
>> the 1st shot. Since focus is the largest reason for shutter lag &
>> focus error in low contrasted scenes, shutter lag is greatly reduced
>> when the camera no longer has to focus the picture, hence very fast
>> shutter response times.
>
>Also it would eliminate autofocus misses in cameras and low-light situations
>that are inclined to have this problem. No autofocus, no autofocus miss.
>;-)
>
>But I'm still suspicious of those numbers.
>
>N.

N,
you don't need to use the same settings "those numbers", I did
not but I used the basic concept & tweaked the settings to best fit
"my" needs. On this web page is a reference for another sight that
has a DOF calculator that you can use to get the settings that best
meet "your" needs.

Here is the original web page for the concept & other useful
information:

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/onlinesharing/A80/review/

Here is the web page I used to calculate the settings that
best meet my needs:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

For my needs mostly outdoors, I selected f5.6 which works fine
on bright days & if the subject is not moving too fast. Using f2.8
outdoors on bright days can result in possible overexposure if the
camera can't select a fast enough shutter speed. So I have found f4
or f5.6 to be more realistic & it has the added benefit of increasing
the DOF & improving CA, purple fringing near highly contrasted areas.

Since the LCD needs to be on anyway & you will be using it to
frame your subject, 1/2 pressing the shutter button will show you the
settings the camera has chosen. If it's in "red" than it will be over
or under exposed. Also I did not set my A95 "C" mode for a hype focal
setting, but rather I set it to maximize DOF @ the average expected
distance that my subjects to be when I use this pre-focused mode.

So for me it's not like wanting or needing X distance to
infinity to be in focus, it's more like wanting x distance to be in
focus -3 meters & +9 meters. That's a lot of room for acceptable
focus & if the background is out of focus, I consider that a plus
because it helps isolate the subject(s).

Enjoy, the principle, it does work but like anything else it
works best if you tweak it to meet "your needs" & "your style" of
photography. Best of wishes & remember the advantage of digital
photography is that such experimentation is basically free, aside from
the investment in some time & effort.

Respectfully, DHB

>
>
>>
>> Rather makes me wonder why this method is not @ least
>> suggested on review sights that are reviewing a P&S camera like the
>> A95 that has a dial setting which can remember MF settings. Anyway I
>> hope this information proves helpful to you & or others, it certainly
>> has been so for me. Yes I own a DSLR, so when needed, I have a
>> quality camera that has very minimal shutter lag but using this method
>> I find that when I travel light & only take the A95, I am not as
>> limited with it as I was before I began using this method.
>>
>> Respectfully, DHB
>


..
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
!