PowerShot A75 not as good as I thought?

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Jeffrey Stetz, Nov 14, 2004.

  1. Well, it was $150, it had manual controls, and most common-folk raved about
    the Canon A75. I haven't had many complaints in the week that I've used it,
    mostly indoors, but I did think the images were a little soft. I am no
    professional, but even set on a tripod with good lighting, I felt they were
    not sharp enough. So, then I found a post in this group about the whole
    Canon A line being junk and Canon's "undersharpening" and I have no problem
    returning the camera if I decide to while it's still within the return

    Only problem is what do I buy instead? I would go up to $200 (street prices,
    found on pricegrabber.com or such, not store prices), but I want manual
    controls, and that's why I bought the A75. I've heard that the A80 is better
    in picture quality. The Nikon 3100/3200 have no manual controls, so even if
    people say those take better pics, I really really don't want it to be fully
    automatic, so that's why I originally chose the A75.

    Can you advise me, please?

    BTW, here's a shot I took with the A75 of my cat: http://tinyurl.com/55krd
    Jeffrey Stetz, Nov 14, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. I don't think you're going to do better, given your budget.
    Psych-O-Delic Voodoo Thunder Pig, Nov 14, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. OK. What's the next realistic level? $250? $350? I can buy a digital Rebel
    for $350 with a little bit of work and selling my film Rebel, so that's why
    I wanted to stick to lower bracket until I "grew up" into a DSLR.
    Jeffrey Stetz, Nov 14, 2004
  4. Jeffrey Stetz

    dylan Guest

    Looking at the image it's what I would expect from a $150 / 3.1MP camera, I
    don't believe it's that bad. What was the compresson/quality setting ?. If
    it's your first digital camera you'll probably find most pictures soft
    straight from the camera compared to what you expect. I'd ensure you have
    the highest quality settings and practice with sharpening.

    But if you want something better try something with more pixels, eg A80,85,
    95, G6 etc but as you say it will cost a bit more. For best quality find
    something with RAW format.
    dylan, Nov 14, 2004
  5. Here's the original: http://tinyurl.com/64u6o

    The one in the first link was compressed in Photoshop already

    I am using max size, and Superfine quality compression. I was confused at
    first, thinking that Superfine compression would mean most aggressive
    compression, but I realized it's just the opposite. heh
    Jeffrey Stetz, Nov 14, 2004
  6. Jeffrey Stetz

    Mark B. Guest

    You won't like a DSLR any better, particularly a Canon. Canon takes a very
    conservative approach to in-camera processing, leaving most of it up to the
    user. They will 'look' soft when in fact images out of a Canon DSLR respond
    very favorably to an unsharp mask.

    Mark B., Nov 14, 2004
  7. Are you suggesting I could improve the images I have now by an unsharp mask?
    I will try to play with it in photoshop... What would you suggest as good
    resources for this information? Thanks
    Jeffrey Stetz, Nov 14, 2004
  8. Jeffrey Stetz

    Ronald Hands Guest

    It's my understanding that *all* digital pictures can be improved by
    unsharp mask.
    I know it's true with my A75 and also with its predecessor, an A40.
    I use Photoshop Elements 2.0. Delighted with results on both cameras.
    Just got back nine 8 x 10s from the processor, taken on a recent trip to
    Paris, which my wife will be putting in albums, along with many 4 x 6s.
    I'm prejudiced, of course, but I think the 8 x 10s are dazzling.
    Even though I have a good 17 inch monitor, I don't think any monitor can
    give you a true representation of what can be achieved in a print.

    -- Ron
    Ronald Hands, Nov 14, 2004
  9. Jeffrey Stetz

    Eatmorepies Guest

    That's a very tidy picture from a cheap digital camera. The A80 would do a
    better job but at more cost.

    With such a close up you can expect the depth of field to be limited, where
    the picture is sharp it is sharp enough to compliment Canon on their economy

    Sorry - I don't think you have anything to complain about. If you want
    better snaps, pay a lot more money.

    Eatmorepies, Nov 15, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.