Q. Which should I buy? ...it is between the Canon A4000 IS or A2600?
Technical Benefit Differences of A4000 IS the A2600 lacks I see:
1. More zoom range (8x vs.5x)
2. Optical Image Stabilization/Intelligent Image Stabilization
3. Better Macro Capability (1 cm vs. 3 cm)
Technical Benefit Differences of A2600 the A4000 lacks I see:
1. Longer Battery Life (ECO Mode -- up to 30% more pictures per battery charge)
2. Wider Aperture (f/2.8 vs. f/3.0)
3. Lower Light Exposure Sensitivity in Low Light Mode only (ISO 6400 vs. ISO 1600)
4. Digital Image Stabilization -- Yes, an added feature the A4000 lacks; but greatly inferior to Optical Image Stabilization/Intelligent Image Stabilization
The physical size, dimensions, and weight differences, are very minor to me; both relatively small. Other than these differences above, they are technically the same compact camera. The A2600 is this years (2013) new Canon compact model release -- highest model of the newest of the A-series. The A4000 IS is last years (2012) Canon compact model release -- overall highest still for this years A-series lineup.
This is just an opinion question, but if you could justify your answers as to why YOU would pick one over the other with reason, that would be great! I am stumped. I am torn between these two. Thanks!
Let me add...
If you ask what kind of pictures I generally take, I take all kinds like landscapes, portraits, close-ups, night scenes, action, etc.. Yes, a general use camera.
Technical Benefit Differences of A4000 IS the A2600 lacks I see:
1. More zoom range (8x vs.5x)
2. Optical Image Stabilization/Intelligent Image Stabilization
3. Better Macro Capability (1 cm vs. 3 cm)
Technical Benefit Differences of A2600 the A4000 lacks I see:
1. Longer Battery Life (ECO Mode -- up to 30% more pictures per battery charge)
2. Wider Aperture (f/2.8 vs. f/3.0)
3. Lower Light Exposure Sensitivity in Low Light Mode only (ISO 6400 vs. ISO 1600)
4. Digital Image Stabilization -- Yes, an added feature the A4000 lacks; but greatly inferior to Optical Image Stabilization/Intelligent Image Stabilization
The physical size, dimensions, and weight differences, are very minor to me; both relatively small. Other than these differences above, they are technically the same compact camera. The A2600 is this years (2013) new Canon compact model release -- highest model of the newest of the A-series. The A4000 IS is last years (2012) Canon compact model release -- overall highest still for this years A-series lineup.
This is just an opinion question, but if you could justify your answers as to why YOU would pick one over the other with reason, that would be great! I am stumped. I am torn between these two. Thanks!
Let me add...
If you ask what kind of pictures I generally take, I take all kinds like landscapes, portraits, close-ups, night scenes, action, etc.. Yes, a general use camera.
A. No need to enumerate what you shoot. It is expected for all cameras to do them all anyway.
Judging from those spec differences, I'd go for the A2600. Battery life would be a huge issue and it would be nice to see Canon actually address the shortness of it once and for all. Wider apertures allow for longer shooting pleasure after the sun has gone down. It also helps blur backgrounds more easily for closeup portraits.
Although I personally avoid going higher than ISO 1600, it's good to know there's more in case I really need it. Image stabilization would be great though for making razor sharp shots but it's not really that important as I am confident my hands can still hold on steadily.
Judging from those spec differences, I'd go for the A2600. Battery life would be a huge issue and it would be nice to see Canon actually address the shortness of it once and for all. Wider apertures allow for longer shooting pleasure after the sun has gone down. It also helps blur backgrounds more easily for closeup portraits.
Although I personally avoid going higher than ISO 1600, it's good to know there's more in case I really need it. Image stabilization would be great though for making razor sharp shots but it's not really that important as I am confident my hands can still hold on steadily.
Why is the Leica M8 so good?
Q. Why is the Leica M8 good what makes it Unique from the Dslr's?
A. Well, in a lot of ways, in 2013, the Leica M8 is actually not so good by current standards. It's a crop sensor digital camera with, what is now considered, poor high ISO noise redux. The M9 is another story however.
The reason the M8 used to be considered a great digital camera and still is if you're on a budget, is that it is a rangefinder camera. That in itself makes it unique from DSLR's because it is simply not a Single Lens Reflex camera.
If you want to study up on the differences between rangefinders and SLR's, there are hundreds of in-depth discussions all over the internet. Essentially it boils down to rangefinders being smaller, quieter, better at manual focusing in low light and due to the lack of a flipping mirror, viewing is more of the moment as well as handheld slow shutter speeds more free of vibration. The problem is that there are limitations to composition and use of macro and longer telephoto lenses as well as zoom lenses with rangefinders. Also, some folks just don't like focusing through them.
Whats-more, Leica build quality far exceeds those of most popular manufacturers. They hand-assemble their camera and lenses with higher quality materials and more tightly fitting parts. This results in cameras and lenses that feel very enjoyable to use but also that last through extreme abuse and continue to work well for decades.
Leica is also world renowned for the high optical performance of their lenses. They are virtually devoid of optical abberations commonly found in Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus and other more popular lensmakers products.
Hope this is useful!
The reason the M8 used to be considered a great digital camera and still is if you're on a budget, is that it is a rangefinder camera. That in itself makes it unique from DSLR's because it is simply not a Single Lens Reflex camera.
If you want to study up on the differences between rangefinders and SLR's, there are hundreds of in-depth discussions all over the internet. Essentially it boils down to rangefinders being smaller, quieter, better at manual focusing in low light and due to the lack of a flipping mirror, viewing is more of the moment as well as handheld slow shutter speeds more free of vibration. The problem is that there are limitations to composition and use of macro and longer telephoto lenses as well as zoom lenses with rangefinders. Also, some folks just don't like focusing through them.
Whats-more, Leica build quality far exceeds those of most popular manufacturers. They hand-assemble their camera and lenses with higher quality materials and more tightly fitting parts. This results in cameras and lenses that feel very enjoyable to use but also that last through extreme abuse and continue to work well for decades.
Leica is also world renowned for the high optical performance of their lenses. They are virtually devoid of optical abberations commonly found in Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus and other more popular lensmakers products.
Hope this is useful!
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
