Canon IXUS 80is?

[graceslick_23]

I have fallen in love with this camera, but I'm a bit nervous as to whether it's the right one for me.

I know next to nothing about digital cameras. This would be my first one ever. Right now I've got an old fashioned Canon SureShot camera that I'm fairly happy with, but really want a digital camera.

I'm not sure if this camera has the same name/number for all countries, but here's a link to it...

http://www.harveynorman.com.au/products/index.php/computers/digital-cameras/canon-ixus-80-digital-camera.html

I just want a good camera that'll give me clear, precise, not hazy photos of things like holiday snaps, close ups at the zoo of animals, family pictures, etc. Nothing too flashy.

My main issues are...

1. Is 3x optical zoom enough for it to be worth it when wanting to take close up photos from far away (at the zoo, for instance)?

2. Is 8 mega pixels enough to give really clear, non-hazy photos?

3. I keep reading about the fact it has no manual controls. What does this mean!? I'm used to simply turning on a camera, pointing it at something, and pressing down the button.

4. I note this camera comes with rechargeable batteries and a battery recharger, which I think is excellent. How many photos would it take before having to recharge the batteries I wonder...

Thank you so much for your help!

[AndyfromVA]

My main issues are...

1. Is 3x optical zoom enough for it to be worth it when wanting to take close up photos from far away (at the zoo, for instance)?
No. If you want to take pictures of animals from a distance, I don't think you'll be happy with the limited zoom of the Ixus 80.

2. Is 8 mega pixels enough to give really clear, non-hazy photos?
Definitely. 8 megapixels is more than enough unless you intend to crop your pictures and blow up your crops to 8 x 10 photos.

3. I keep reading about the fact it has no manual controls. What does this mean!? I'm used to simply turning on a camera, pointing it at something, and pressing down the button.
Manual exposure controls are important for people who want to learn advanced photographic techniques. If your primary interest is taking snapshots, it's not important for you.

4. I note this camera comes with rechargeable batteries and a battery recharger, which I think is excellent. How many photos would it take before having to recharge the batteries I wonder...
Probably 200-300

Since you probably need more optical zoom than 3x, you might want to consider the Panasonic TZ5, a very good camera with 10x optical zoom. It has a large LCD screen, uses a rechargeable battery and fits in a pocket (though it is larger than the Ixus 80).

[KCook]

The 3X optical zoom is the tough question here. That will be fine if the zoo critter is up against the front of the enclosure. Not nearly enough if the critter is at the back. Depends on what you want to do with your zoo shot. If you want an 8x10 print or a full screen image for a large display, then Andy is right, you will need more zoom. But if all you really need is a snapshot to E-mail or a 4x6 print, then you can use the camera's digital zoom. You will find post after post on the various forums telling you that digital zoom is horrible and you should never consider it. But here are real world examples (at a zoo no less!) -

http://fujif45fd.needsabeach.com/F45fd_digitalzoom/HTML_Index/index.html

Make up your own mind.

Kelly Cook

[graceslick_23]

Hmm, now I'm disturbed!

How come SO many of the standard cameras have 3x optical zoom only if it sucks?

Right now I've got a Canon SureShot non-digital camera...it's got a few zoom things. Does anyone know how this would compare to the Canon IXUS 80 in terms of zoom?

I can't afford the Panasonic one, sadly.

There are cameras around for between $100-$200...how can the Canon IXUS which is normally $300 be no good!?

[David Metsky]

How come SO many of the standard cameras have 3x optical zoom only if it sucks?
It doesn't suck, it's just not adequate for shooting animals. You need more zoom for that. Most cameras are fine with that because most people don't need to take close ups of animals. :) Bigger zooms take up more space, cost more, and make for darker photos.

Right now I've got a Canon SureShot non-digital camera...it's got a few zoom things. Does anyone know how this would compare to the Canon IXUS 80 in terms of zoom?
You'd have to tell us which camera you have; there are dozens of cameras in the film lineups. But more then likely they are similar, something in the 35-105mm range.

There are cameras around for between $100-$200...how can the Canon IXUS which is normally $300 be no good!?
As we've said, the camera is a great camera. It's just not good for your needs. Cameras are tools, some of better for certain jobs then others.

[KCook]

A zoom lens is not a free lunch. There are tradeoffs the camera maker has to balance. Cost to make, field width (wide angle), zoom factor, near focus, collapsed size, and image quality are all factors of lens design that influence each other, and in many cases are in conflict with each other. Your "standard" camera is actually an economy camera, the lens cannot be expensive to make. Also most shoppers want their "standard" camera to be slim, so the collapsed lens must be short to fit inside a thin case. With those two factors in mind you could still design a high power zoom lens. But it would be very small aperture (hopeless in low light) and have awful image quality. Which customers won't put up with for very long. So as a practical matter you end up with a 3X zoom. That said, camera makers are finding ways to make the costs of lens making less, so we are starting to see 5X zooms in standard compacts.

Kelly

[graceslick_23]

Yes, that was actually my next question. lol

Today I was in Harvey Norman and The Good Guys, and saw several cameras, cheaper even than the Canon IXUS 80 (these I think were Fuji, Pentax and something else, possibly Sony), that had 4 or 5 x optical zooms and 8mp. They were each around about $200.

In your educated opinions, would these be rather poor in terms of image quality, despite the added zoom power? Or as you say, are the camera makers finding ways of getting around cost issues and the quality wouldn't be compromised? (although am I really off track by wondering if a camera with more zoom but the same amount of mega pixels might be not as good as one with more pixels to support that added zoom?)

I also noticed some more expensive cameras that had 20mp but still only 4 x zoom. And then I saw others that had only 8mp but 20 x zoom! What!?

[David Metsky]

No P&S camera has 20MP - what were you looking at? Ultrazooms tend to have smaller CCDs because you can't put a huge zoom lens on a small camera. To get 20x and greater zoom it has to focus on a small sensor or your lens will need to be physically much bigger.

You shouldn't worry about megapixels. To 99% of users anything over 8MP is more then enough. In general, cheaper cameras have poorer lenses, poorer image processing chips, poorer electronics, and fewer features. Their images will reflect this. For snapshots it's not a big deal. Bigger zoom is, in general, better, but it doesn't mean that it comes without a price.

You need to give us specific model names. There are dozens of cameras in the $200 range, some good some bad. And they all have their good points and bad points, it will depend on what you want to use them for. What additional features (LCD screen size/quality, optical view finder, movie modes, burst mode) are important to you?

[AndyfromVA]

Today I was in Harvey Norman and The Good Guys, and saw several cameras, cheaper even than the Canon IXUS 80 (these I think were Fuji, Pentax and something else, possibly Sony), that had 4 or 5 x optical zooms and 8mp. They were each around about $200.

The Canon Ixus 80 is an excellent small camera. There are many small cameras available for $200 or less and some may be better than the Canon in certain ways. But if you want a small point and shoot camera for less than $200 and don't mind that it has only a 3x optical zoom, you really can't do much better than the Ixus 80.

[Screenclutter]

I have fallen in love with this camera, but I'm a bit nervous as to whether it's the right one for me.


What is it about this camera that you have fallen in love with?

Have you considered factors other than telephoto such as better ISO performance, wide-angle lenses, manual controls (important if you want to learn more about digital photography) or how it even feels in your hand?

[graceslick_23]

Yeah, I don't need manual controls. I don't need that sort of thing (right now anyway). I don't even know what ISO means! Wide angle lenses...I know the term, but I'm not sure what exactly it means in this context.

I am totally ignorant with this stuff (clearly)!

I fell in love with the IXUS 80 IS because at that time I thought it had everything I could ever want from a digital camera, and it looked gorgeous *superficial*

What I ultimately wish is that this camera had a 4 x optical zoom. Then I'd be set.

In any case, the other models I'm looking at, but very unsure about, are...

1. Canon PowerShot A590 IS (8mp and 4 x optical zoom)
2. Canon PowerShot A2000 IS (10mp and 6 x optical zoom) (I know these 2 are older and use AA batteries. I've asked about this in another thread)
3. Pentax Optio M50 (8mp and 5 x optical zoom)
4. Olympus FE370 (8mp and 5 x optical zoom)

Out of these, I want to basically know about any battery issues (with the first 2 that only use AA batteries, I'd need to know how many pics they could take before needing to be recharged, or if they even CAN be recharged. I am not buying a camera that requires actually replacing the batteries frequently), the picture clarity (I don't want haziness or cloudiness, and I will be using it in low / indoor light, natural sunlight, and for moving images sometimes...mainly animals and landscapes and people), the speed between pics isn't overly important though I don't want it to take ages obviously...and the zoom and pixels I'm ok with.

Thank you so much for all your help and patience!

[cdifoto]

4x isn't much better than 3x.

To be blunt, you're not going to get wowzer tight zoom zoo shots out of a miniature camera. The more zoom, the bigger the lens (and therefore camera when talking about all-in-ones) has to be. The term "megapixel" ONLY defines the width x height dimensions of a digital photo. It is a QUANTITY, not a QUALITY. A megapixel (or 8, 10, 12, 15, etc of them) can be good or bad, hazy or clear. Megapixels also have nothing to do with zoom.

Oh and don't use digital zoom. It sucks. It's not real zoom by any means. You're better off taking the normal maximum optical zoom image into your computer and blowing it up. That's all the camera is doing, and it's not even doing as good a job as some image editing softwares could.

[David Metsky]

Most cameras (whether they use AA or proprietary batteries) will require you to pull out the batteries to recharge. All cameras can and should be using rechargeable batteries; they last much longer. If you look at the reviews of the cameras you listed they all show the expected battery life.

For cameras with AAs, you will need to buy a set of rechargeable NiMH batteries (get Enloops or similar low discharge brands) so they will hold their charge for a long time if the camera isn't in use.

[KCook]

Panasonic LZ8 easily fits this price bracket, has 5X optical zoom.

Kelly

[graceslick_23]

Dammit, that Lumix LZ8 is AU$329 at the cheapest here. That's about AU$100 over what I want to spend!

Hey...what's the difference between the Canon PowerShot A580 IS and the A590 IS? Anything??

[florin]

Most people actually don't need more than, let's say, 5 megapixels or so. 8 MP is already beyond the needs of an amateur. The quality of the image is given by many other factors, such as the sensor size, technology, lens, etc.

E.g., an entry-level DSLR camera has 10 MP, yet it provides images many times better than a compact camera which has the same 10 MP. Reasons? Better lens, much bigger (and better) sensor.

The megapixel race is artificially created and maintained by the manufacturers. People are being led to believe they need lots and lots of "megapixels" (a concept which many users don't even understand fully), or else their pictures would look bad. This is false.

For similar examples, see:
- the megahertz (then gigahertz) race by the computer manufacturers, which led sometimes to the creation of microprocessors with lots of "megahertz" but whose performance did not reflect those high numbers
- the "diamonds are forever" campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers#Marketing) by DeBeers which essentially pushed diamonds from being rather just expensive mineral oddities to the status of much coveted gems and status symbols

All this doesn't mean you should avoid that camera. It simply means you should stop paying attention to the "megapixels" altogether. All current cameras have more than enough "megapixels".

[KCook]

Strange that Panasonic prices are so much higher than Canon in Oz. Citiwide does show the older (2007) Panny LZ7 (6X optical zoom) with 2GB card for 185 AUD.

"www.citiwide-online.com"

Kelly

[graceslick_23]

Yes, for some reason the compact digital Canons here are very cheap. The Panasonics here are quite cheap too, but beyond a certain point, they go up in price quite a bit more than the Canons for similar specs...or maybe not.

Everything is more expensive in Aus though than the US, which is annoying. Especially now with the hideous exchange rate for us.

Anyway, what about the Pentax Optio M60? This is another one I've had my eye on...is it any good in terms of clarity?