hapm
5th of July 2002 (Fri), 12:14
I have been trying out this new pocket camera and comparing it to the Sony P-31. Images from the A200 are here:
http://www.pbase.com/hapm/canon_a200
Sony P-31 shots are here:
http://www.pbase.com/hapm/sony_p31
A200 has great macro down to 2". White balance is more consistently accurate than the Sony's. And images are sharper although I didn't mind the softness of the Sony shots.
The Sony P-31 has one major advantage over the A200 and every other digital I have used under a $1,000. It has virtually no shutter lag. It made the A200 feel really slow both in shot time and recording time.
If you like a very compact camera with a fixed lens (39mm) AND your subjects are standing still, the A200 is a great buy. If you are shooting small children or other athletic events, check out the Sony P-31 (33mm).
All the best, Hap
http://www.pbase.com/hapm/canon_a200
Sony P-31 shots are here:
http://www.pbase.com/hapm/sony_p31
A200 has great macro down to 2". White balance is more consistently accurate than the Sony's. And images are sharper although I didn't mind the softness of the Sony shots.
The Sony P-31 has one major advantage over the A200 and every other digital I have used under a $1,000. It has virtually no shutter lag. It made the A200 feel really slow both in shot time and recording time.
If you like a very compact camera with a fixed lens (39mm) AND your subjects are standing still, the A200 is a great buy. If you are shooting small children or other athletic events, check out the Sony P-31 (33mm).
All the best, Hap