Camera on a budget...

[Picaro]

My latest trip has convinced me that its past time to upgrade my Powershot A400.

I'm not a camera buff, but I'd like to be able to get better mementos of my trips for about $200.

I'm looking at the Canon SX 280HS, which I think will do the job. I'm just wanting to be able to get a reasonable representation of landscapes, plus a good zoom to go after wildlife etc. ,and a faster write speed than the old A400.

There are others like the SX500, and similar from other makers, but they appear quite bulky compared to the 280 in regard to backpacking.

So, am I on the right track, or is there something better you can point me toward ?

[wayno]

i like the canons and their panoramic mode, make them as wide as you like.

this review of the 280 recommends going for a lumix model instead
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon ... dict.shtml

he rates the 500 better
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon ... dict.shtml

[Picaro]

I don't think he really plays fair, putting the Lumix up as a comparison since its about 75% more expensive.

I did notice he points out that the 280 battery cant be recharged on usb but only mains. That may be a big issue since battery drain is a weak point on this one.

The 500 does look good, yet appears to be about twice the bulk of the compacts. Again, this may or may not be a big factor.

I only get to main shopping areas maybe once a month, so I'm trying to narrow the field before I check them "in the flesh".

[Picaro]

I've narrowed it down to either the SX510 or SX280 from Canon.

But I'm pretty much illiterate when it comes to camera spec. Could someone please tell me if the 510 has enough features to justify the bit of extra bulk. they both weigh the same and I can get either for $220.
Will I be able to learn more skills with the 510? or does the Digic 6 make the 280 that much better ?

[wayno]

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compar ... on_sx280hs

teh 280 has a better zoom, but 30 times zoom will need a tripod to be of real use,
20 times zoom is heaps unless you have a tripod or a high spec camera wanting to take wildlife photos

the 500 is a newer camera, it has better llow light sensitivity...
i cant see that much else in the specs of the 280 to make it worth buying over teh 500, the sensors are the same size so no advantage in image quality to be had there.

[wayno]

sorry my bad i reversed the no's the 280 has the better low light specs., my bad
i'd go for the 280 the red one, the 500 is teh one with the 30 times zoom,

[wayno]

oh, also depends on what you want for a macro camera. the larger one can focus down to 1cm the smaller camera 5cm... which is still reasonable unless you're particularly fussy about getting super close up shots

[Picaro]

Thanks Wayno, so unless someone can point out any extra features on the 510, I'll go for the 280….hopefully before my next adventure.

[wayno]

yeah especially given the size and weight difference the 280 has no major disadvantages to it against the 500 that i can see in the spec sheet given the type of camera you're looking for