My Canon A430 digital has died on me.

[wahiba]

Bought new as end of range on line this little 4MP camera has served me well, especially snap shotting my real cameras and even negatives with a good back light. Still works but the pictures are nearly white which suggests the sensor has gone. What I really like was the proper view finder, something missing on all the latest pocket digitals.

Well it is time to look around the charity (thrift?) shops and boot fairs. Even the second hand camera shop will probably have something similar, with a viewfinder. 4MP is more than enough for on line pictures so hopefully there is something out there from one of the reputable names,

I must admit I was beginning to think digital cameras might be immortal, seems they are not.

 

[Willy T]

Ah, I know how you feel. I don't think these little Canon shooters have been properly appreciated - tiny, unobtrusive and discreet, very easy to use, yet capable of wonderful results.

My own Canon SD1100is (the Euro IXUS 80is) has been with me since new (2008), and has served me well. Indeed, probably because it is so portable, I have always had it with me and available at times when opportunities present themselves in the regular, more prosaic course of life and larger cameras were at home.
kim by du Tabac, on Flickr

The resolution has been sufficient for 16 x 20 inch prints, and I too have used it have used it to digitize negatives (thanks to the remarkable close-focusing abilities).

Lamentably, it has begun to develop "hot" pixels that must be cloned out in Photoshop, and total failure may be just around the corner. I am always looking about for replacements - they seem to be widely available and very, very cheap on the used market, with the understanding that age-related fatal conditions are never far away. Good luck in your own hunt!

 

[DWThomas]

I must admit I was beginning to think digital cameras might be immortal, seems they are not.

Nay! I bought a Canon A80 (4Mp P&S ) in 2004, my first foray into digi-stuff. Circa 2014 I had relegated it to my toolkit for visits to the ceramics studio at my local community college, and one day I took a shot of a work in process and it looked all smeary on the LCD display. Tried the usual power down/power up, mystic incantations, etc., no joy. A little online research that night disclosed it was a common sensor-related problem in that model and that Canon had repaired/replaced them for a two year period -- about five years earlier! Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances. I took about 8500 shots with it over that decade.

 

[blockend]

I purchased a Canon A540 because I'd read that 6 megapixels represented everything anyone could ever want from a digital camera. The experience was disappointing, it rarely moved from the Auto mode and after a few shots my wife became the sole custodian. The problem wasn't the camera, it was me, I didn't get on with digital photography. It was only with the T2i/550D that I bothered looking under the digital bonnet, and by then I'd discovered film photography wasn't as dead as I'd been told.

The A540 expired a few years ago after the lens refused to emerge from the body. A much better camera in the same idiom that includes an optical viewfinder is the Fuji X10/20/30 series. It also has Raw capability.

 

[Lee Rust]

I have two 2007-vintage Canon SD1000s that I carry in the front pockets of my two rangefinder camera cases. Handy for video, closeups or flash. One of them I've had since new, and the other was purchased from KEH for $11.00.

 

[blockend]

I wonder who buys digital compact cameras nowadays? With ubiquitous high quality phone cameras, the market for pocket cameras with 1/3" sensors and no Raw capability must be fairly small, but they are still made. Strange...

 

[Sal Santamaura]

I wonder who buys digital compact cameras nowadays? With ubiquitous high quality phone cameras...

People who refuse to carry around "smart" (stupid) phones.

 

[Willy T]

Interested persons may enjoy the specific section of Dan James' blog (https://35hunter.blog/digital-classics/) with a wealth of posts (2017-2019) on the virtues of 'vintage' CCD digis, and many examples of the images he has made with them,

 

[DWThomas]

I wonder who buys digital compact cameras nowadays? With ubiquitous high quality phone cameras, the market for pocket cameras with 1/3" sensors and no Raw capability must be fairly small, but they are still made. Strange...

Enh, I use my phone a lot, it's an iPhone 6s, but the other day in the course of documenting a big remodeling project here I switched to my Canon G15, a high end point and shoot of 2012 vintage. Perhaps it's just me, but under tedious conditions -- backlighting and such, the G15 seems far easier to coax into giving me what I want. The phone is cool because it's almost always with me when I'm out of the house, but some other things do a better job. The G15 is one of the increasingly rare cameras that actually has an optical viewfinder. I find the phone out in bright sun is not too helpful in terms of viewing the LCD.

Now my latest digi-toy is an EOS M5 which is a mirror-less DSLR. There, you can stick your eye to the thing like you would with an optical finder but you are viewing an internal screen. If sun is blazing toward the back, the internal screen works much better than the LCD screen on the back setup. That said, I have had some problems with my nose being taken as a tap on the rear LCD to redirect the focus point -- the suckers have a heap of features to digest!

 

[blockend]

That said, I have had some problems with my nose being taken as a tap on the rear LCD to redirect the focus point -- the suckers have a heap of features to digest!

Haha, same problem here on a Panasonic GX80. I also have an iPhone 6s but honestly, it rarely occurs to me to use it as a camera. My wondering isn't about the need for a small camera, but specifically the sub £100 compact zoom jpeg shooting no-viewfinder models everyone carried 10-15 years ago. Smartphones should have killed them stone dead, but they linger on. How they fit 20mp on those sensors is anyone's guess. Perhaps iPhones are too expensive in some markets and they can only afford a Nokia and a P&S? I find is charming that those little cameras are still being shot, but it's hard to know who's still shooting them, given the alternatives.

 

[Willy T]

I find is charming that those little cameras are still being shot, but it's hard to know who's still shooting them, given the alternatives.

I have a Samsung Note 9, and the images it makes are fine, but somehow the experience (for me) is not the same as using a dedicated camera, even an old, small, cheap one.

The pro Sofi Lee (profiled sometime ago on DPReview ?) uses (or used) lo-fi CCD cameras for her work, and I do. From 2008, I have the habit of routinely keeping a little CCD or CMOS shooter in a pocket for those times when you stumble across something that strikes you as photographable, and a more 'proper' camera is not to hand.

chev 3100 s95 by du Tabac, on Flickr.

 

[blockend]

The pro Sofi Lee (profiled sometime ago on DPReview ?) uses (or used) lo-fi CCD cameras for her work, and I do. From 2008, I have the habit of routinely keeping a little CCD or CMOS shooter in a pocket for those times when you stumble across something that strikes you as photographable, and a more 'proper' camera is not to hand.

That's interesting. Looking who made digital compacts in 2019, I noticed Praktica branded P&S cameras still have CCD sensors. I wasn't aware charged coupled devices were still being put in cameras. I checked out Sofi Lee, she has learned to embrace chromatic aberration, blown highlights, high noise and the rest rather than fight it, which is a good philosophy.

Link to article: https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/5683481585/sofi-lee-on-digital-nostalgia

 

[Willy T]

That's interesting. Looking who made digital compacts in 2019, I noticed Praktica branded P&S cameras still have CCD sensors. I wasn't aware charged coupled devices were still being put in cameras. I checked out Sofi Lee, she has learned to embrace chromatic aberration, blown highlights, high noise and the rest rather than fight it, which is a good philosophy.

Yeah, those "faults" can have their place; not usually to my own taste, but de gustibus, and all that.

For, ah, more traditional images being made with old CCD machines, see Dan James per above.

 

[blockend]

see Dan James per above

Googling Dan James photographer throws up lots of images, do you have a link?

 

[Willy T]

Googling Dan James photographer throws up lots of images, do you have a link?

Shots are scattered throughout his blog, with especial concentration in his series about his appreciation of old-tech cameras:
(https://35hunter.blog/digital-classics/

 

[blockend]

Shots are scattered throughout his blog, with especial concentration in his series about his appreciation of old-tech cameras:
(https://35hunter.blog/digital-classics/

Thanks!

 

[MNM]

I wonder who buys digital compact cameras nowadays? With ubiquitous high quality phone cameras, the market for pocket cameras with 1/3" sensors and no Raw capability must be fairly small, but they are still made. Strange...

I don't know if this actually explains the market, but you generally have more flexibility regarding focal length with the pocket camera vs a phone.

But that would be my reason and maybe not reflective of the bulk of purchasers.

 

[Willy T]

Well, they're fun and cheap, and some can produce great shots. CCD has a "look" in color that some enjoy.
I've moved on to the Canon S95 and S100, which are stellar (for my uses and iIMHO).

 

[DWThomas]

... you generally have more flexibility regarding focal length with the pocket camera vs a phone.

That's another important point -- digital zoom may be OK for posting on social media, but for printing 5x7 or 8x10, it quickly becomes a disaster (unless you're really into pointilIism!)

In the little creek valley where I live, I find myself wishing the phone people would concentrate more on making the basic phone work better!

 

[blockend]

you generally have more flexibility regarding focal length with the pocket camera vs a phone.

The latest smartphones have a number of lenses, if I've read the hype correctly. The consensus seems to be that 12mp is sufficient in any format unless you're cropping or printing very large. Amateur film photographers used to consider 15 x 10" prints worthy of exhibition, and a 12 megapixel offers an excellent printed image at that size. A 4mp camera gives a fine 8 x 6, which was a "large" lab print in the old days, or a very good 12 x 8. So we've had the equipment for the last 15 years at least. What's changed is people hardly ever print if they do it at all. There are no limits to our requirements on screen if we keep pressing the enlarge function.

 

[MattKing]

I find the small point and shoot digital cameras with a viewfinder far easier to hold and use than any phone camera I have ever tried to use.
I'm sort of restricted to 1.5 hand use.

 

[MNM]

you generally have more flexibility regarding focal length with the pocket camera vs a phone

The latest smartphones have a number of lenses, if I've read the hype correctly. The consensus seems to be that 12mp is sufficient in any format unless you're cropping or printing very large. Amateur film photographers used to consider 15 x 10" prints worthy of exhibition, and a 12 megapixel offers an excellent printed image at that size. A 4mp camera gives a fine 8 x 6, which was a "large" lab print in the old days, or a very good 12 x 8. So we've had the equipment for the last 15 years at least. What's changed is people hardly ever print if they do it at all. There are no limits to our requirements on screen if we keep pressing the enlarge function.

I checked and the iPhone XS as an example has two lenses. One is a 26mm equivalent, the other 52mm. So you've read the hype correctly. That being said, my old Kodak Z915 gives 35-350 coverage and in good light works well enough. I bring it with me on the motorcycles.

Agreed on the print vs screen, that's why I've turned to printing more. I'm happier that way.

 

[DWThomas]

I find the small point and shoot digital cameras with a viewfinder far easier to hold and use than any phone camera I have ever tried to use.
I'm sort of restricted to 1.5 hand use.

I've grumbled in the past there should be a law that any device sold with a camera function has to have the lens in the central third of the frontal area of the camera! There were (maybe still are) some "cameras" that had a lens up in some corner (well, with electrocuted bits there's no mechanical requirements for film paths and handling.) Even at my "advanced age and experience" I occasionally inadvertently "crop" a shot with my iPhone.

 

[wahiba]

Seems i am not alone in appreciating a proper view finder in a small digital. with the demise of the Canon I have dug out my first digital, a Fuji A202 2MP fixed lens.When I first got it I took it on holiday to Italy and the snaps i got printed up as 6x4 are surprisingly good. I am also amazed at the on screen image quality. I know 2MP is not going to be much use fro big prints, but for on screen without to much cropping it is fine. Fortunately I managed to pick up an XD card with decent capacity recently on spec and that is now in use. currently using it for snapping model rail project. A good demonstration of the pretty decent flash as well.

 

[MattKing]

2 MP is the same resolution as the so called High Definition televisions.
2 MP files look great on our 43 inch High Definition television. Any file with more pixels needs to be resized down to display properly on that television.