|
It's size was perfect for my travel needs. This camera accompanied me on many an adventure. Unfortunately, it met a premature demise on a trout stream in Argentina. Although advances in megapixel range have been made in recent years since its release, this little camera rendered excellent images with vibrant color and definition. I loved the wide angle and image stablization features. Although it faithfully captured the image of the fish I caught, it has since had major problems keeping it's battery charge, rendering it unusable. Purchase of a new battery didn't solve the problem.
Sharp wide-angle lens, compact design, typical Canon build quality.I bought this for my wife, who was frustrated with her Casio because of image blurring. The firmware, called "CHDK," allows for many additional features that rival big, expensive SLR performance. With this camera, the optical image stabilization works wonders for her.What makes Canons an even better buy is the open-source firmware that you can install. Don't worry, it doesn't break the camera and in fact can be removed or bypassed at any time. One feature I enabled with CHDK is a thermometer-style battery capacity gauge at the top of the screen. Now my wife can see exactly how full the battery is, rather than guessing and running out of battery at an inopportune moment.Great camera.
It's just a no question that Canon is a leading camera company. (wow, time flies). I also recently bought an old Canon A-1 35mm film camera (made in the 1970's) and the build quality and technology on it still impressed me. It was an upgrade from my Canon SD300 4MP (my first digital camera, bought around in 2004. Even though the video capability on this camera is a bit outdated now, I still find use for shooting with this camera. I've taken it on many trips and it has taken a lot of beating). Many cameras these days shoot in HD (1080 or 720) now.
Ironically, this SD800 camera, that was an upgrade for me, was less than half the cost. But it was a good investment since I'm still using it, and it's still working the same -- close to 5 years later. Was it worth the upgrade for me. You really shouldn't be paying $500 for this point and shoot camera now.
I bought this camera in December of 2007. However, I was surprised to find out the video quality on this camera (max resolution at 640x480) still beats the low-end HD cameras, with poor sensor, that just interpolate to higher resolutions (it looks so awful - I'm talking about you, Mr. Sanyo TH-1). Even after all these years, I still love both my point and shoot cameras. The larger screen, wider lens, SDHC support (SD300's now outdated technology was limited to 2GB), image stabilizer (it was a lot harder to hold still with the SD300, especially when asking people to take pictures for me without using flash; to get around that, it's best to shoot in snapshots and hope that one of them comes out sharp) and the added mega pixels for larger prints/cropping was definitely worth it. Design, functions, results - they usually don't disappoint. Paid $500 for it. Canon has my trust in cameras.
Yes. However, I don't find the SD300 obsolete because it's still much smaller and still shoots great photos. Period. For that kind of money these days, you should be getting a DSLR with more features.
Not much to add from other reviews. HOWEVER, I bought it for $300 in 2007, but I see it is currently listed at over $500. I read about it on Ken Rockwell's site, sounded great, bought it. Love the wider angle lense than other point and shoots. Don't buy it for that price. At $500, it should be made of gold.
There is minimal lag after pressing the shutter. I'm partial to Canon compact digitals, but I prefer Nikons for digital SLRs. This is the widest lens you can find in a compact Canon camera. This camera is great. Image stabilization works well. Check out Ken Rockwell's reviews and guides on his site. It's better to read his stuff and see his examples instead of trying to read some boring manual.
|
