You last visited: Today at 03:04 PM
|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|12-31-2012 01:15 AM|
|Allbuyu||Gold or red is pretty,but out of stock now.|
|12-23-2012 07:46 AM|
|HeadlessPonch||Ive messed with an a4000 and an a2300. They take good pics, but take forever to do it. If you have good light and turn the flash off you might get a pic as soon as you push the button. Otherwise you'll need to hold the button down for about a second before you get the shot. Unacceptable of you have kids.|
|12-21-2012 05:11 PM|
At least the 260 has only a 12 mp resolution so it will have much less noise than 16 mp with same size sensor -- although for some reason the A3400 is f 2.8 - f 6.9 whereas the 260 is f 3.5 to f 6.8 so theoretically the A3400 might be better in low light since the f stop usually determines how much light makes it to the sensor. f 2.8 lets more light in than f 3.5
|12-21-2012 11:40 AM|
|slippyfox||I'm pretty sure I'd rather avoid constantly having to plug in the USB to slowly charge the battery. Removable external charger is a touch better imo.|
|12-21-2012 10:30 AM|
|12-21-2012 07:41 AM|
Like I said, the average casual photographer is not going to care about this at this price. If I were to give this to my Dad, he wouldn't care. He's not technologically savvy like you and me, so it wouldn't matter.
|12-21-2012 07:34 AM|
|12-21-2012 07:32 AM|
I don't think the no built-in charge is a deal breaker.
With that battery life, you bet I would want an external charger so I can charge up my spare batteries, especially when I'm traveling.
For the casual photographer, this camera is acceptable at this price. You want something better, you're going to have to pay a bit more.
|12-21-2012 05:53 AM|
For anyone complaining about the quality of this camera.... it's $70, wtf do you expect for that price?
Good deal, this usually runs around $100. I used one of these a little while back until it broke (someone spilled stuff on it), and it took nice pictures. Replaced it with an A4000, which is slightly better than this.
|12-21-2012 05:38 AM|
|12-20-2012 10:01 PM|
|12-20-2012 09:21 PM|
I don't think I've plugged in a camera in over a decade, if ever.
|12-20-2012 05:21 PM|
Anyone recommend the P&S Canon that is great in Picture Quality and doesn't limit video time, please. I really want to buy P&S camera one more time, but the last experience made me scary.
|12-20-2012 04:32 PM|
|12-20-2012 03:53 PM|
Nice price for a decent, basic camera. We paid $80 + $5 shipping the beginning of Nov just before a trip to replace a similar basic Nikon P&S camera which my better half had lost. Bear in mind that there will be the usual shutter lag and a bit more lag to load the picture into the card due to the larger 16 MG capacity. The touch screen is a nice feature not usually found in this price range. About the only thing I might consider if I had to do it over again is pay a little more for one of the other P&S models with a longer telephoto len.
Oh the battery life is so-so. Have ordered a cheap, spare one from eBay for $3.70. Haven't gotten it yet, so can't report on its quality. But then again it is just a spare. Just do a search for NB-11L.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|