Frills but no image quality ...

Frills but no image quality ...

Canon IXUS 510 HS Digital Camera (10.1 megapixels, 12x opt. Zoom, 8.1 cm (3.2 inches) touch screen, WiFi, Full HD) (Electronics)

Customer Review

Have a few weeks feverishly on the new compact flagship of Canon back. My verdict is, however, rather disappointing. But more on that in more detail below. Another note first: My reference is the Canon IXUS 850IS (also a compact camera that is only slightly larger).

OPTICS + HANDLING
Top! Very stylish, very chic, very small. Little buttons as touch and all buttons easily accessible. The menu seems Canon typical tidy. Those who know Canon will quickly find everything. Instructions unnecessary. Only for people with somewhat chunky fingers, the touch screen can be a challenge. Really happy I do not feel so well. But is probably more a matter of habit.

BATTERY + MEMORY CARD
Easily accessible compartments for both the battery and the memory card. Yes, there are two different subjects. The battery is not held by the lid in the camera but of an extra hook, that is very good. The microSD card could be a problem for people with large hands or poorer eye already.

IMAGE QUALITY
And here I have my problem. I find the picture quality should be the main reason for choosing a camera. The most beautiful camera loses its charm if it makes no reasonable images. Well as mentioned is my reference IXUS 850IS my old. So both cameras, fixed point on the table and picked out pictures taken of the same object: dining room with table, chairs, picture on the wall, floor lamp and plants. Distance to the wall about 3.5 meters. The room is relatively dark and the floor lamp in the corner is on. The result is sobering. I did not make it a better photo of the new IXUS 510HS as to do with the old 850IS.
With my old camera I simply turned on the Autobots, 2 sec. Shutter lag set (so I do not wiggle) and the highest resolution with the finest setting. The camera automatically uses the flash and took the photo 'my reference.
With the new camera, I first tried every which way to auto mode. Cute photos but lacks the detail and brightness under the table and on the opposite side of the lamp. Why? Because the camera does not use flash. OK nice, could not take my old one. But since I have with flash also like much better picture. So flashlight on also when new. But do not go in the car mode 'I already knew from my old when it was too bright. So set to P (program), and again worked through all setting options. Result: Even the best version of Flash does not begin to at my old camera zoom. I am really surprised and thought first of a confusion. But it was not. The colors are fresh, the outlines clearer, easier to see the details.
Example 1: On my floor lamp missing on the new photos of the screen! There is instead just a bright spot with slight contours. The opposite with my old Canon. The screen can be seen 1A.
Example 2: The plant on the opposite side of the floor lamp are in the new Canon just so washed the sheets to see. By contrast, the edges of the sheets and also the flowerpot on the old camera photo are clearly better. The new camera, it looks as if someone had wiped over it again.
Well now you could say were not the points on which was centered. Correct. Both cameras I have focused on the center of the table and also as cuts off my old camera with more focus, less edge blurring and better colors.

MORE TEST RESULTS
After this test, I no longer looked at the camera. The result is simply depressing.

CONCLUSION
I'm disappointed. Make the manufacturers but just so that advertising that the cameras should be as good in low light conditions. What is the point to me that the camera works without flash when shots are junk. Well, scrap is an exaggeration but my claim is that a new camera for 350 euros at least my 7 year suggests (!) Old compact camera especially for photos in somewhat difficult circumstances. Unfortunately, however, is precisely not the case.
I am shocked and confused and put myself to the search for an alternative.

ADDENDUM
Part 1: Frightening was the fact that the camera until the first photo after switching takes one second longer than my 7-year-old IXUS 850 IS! When closing the same phenomenon.
Part 2: I have found an alternative: DSC-WX100. 100 euros cheaper and more pleasant than the Canon. Are compared to my old camera photos similarly sharp (or maybe even slightly better), have similarly beautiful colors and what made me very happy, better illumination and thus a better overall picture impression. I am happy...

Thanks to Amazon for as always perfect delivery and redelivery!

Phillips Dual Gaming Rank: 4/5
March 12
Very good book! 168 Rank: 5/5
September 21
super super super 8 March Rank: 5/5
June 17
13 must-have 9 January 29 Rank: 4/5
March 26
criminal child. Rank: 5/5
January 20

Related Reviews


Good concept but poor image qualityNikon Coolpix S32 Digital Camera (13 Megapixel, 3x optical wide-angle zoom, 6.7 cm (2.7 inch) LCD monitor, full HD video function, creative effects, waterproof, shockproof) pink (electronics) Good camera, but the image quality is also only compact camera levelSony DSC-HX20VB Cyber-shot digital camera (18.2 megapixels, 20x opt. Zoom, 7.5 cm (3 inch) screen, Sweep Panorama) (Electronics) But good image quality defects in the operationFujifilm FinePix F200EXR Digital Camera (12MP, 5x opt. Zoom, 3 '' display, image stabilizer) (Electronics) Convenient and solid, but poor image qualityKodak Playsport Pocket Camcorder Zx5 Port SD / SDHC 5 Mpix Digital Zoom 4x Waterproof Black (Electronics) Good price, but the image quality is only adequate.SDC 38.1 cm (15 ") Touchscreen Monitor (24 months immediate replacement in case of service !!!) (Electronics) Easy to install, effective anti-glare, but degraded image qualityAtFoliX 3 x Film Screen Protector Canon EOS 700D (Rebel T5i) - Anti-reflective FX-Antireflex (Electronics) Works well, but the image quality is more than cruel.Foscam FI8918W / white IP network camera (640 x 480 pixels, WiFi, 300 MBit / S, IR LED, up to 8m night mode) for Mac / Win / Linux / Android / Apple iPhone, Colour: white (optional) Cool feature, but the image quality leaves much to be desiredLytro light field camera (8GB, 11 Megaray, 8-opt. Zoom) graphite (Electronics) Quick but poor image quality (out of focus, sometimes almost like watercolor)Casio Exilim EX-ZR700 Digital Camera (16.1 megapixels, 7.6 cm (3 inch) display, 36x Multi SR Zoom, Triple Shot, HDR) (Electronics) But good image quality defects in the transmitter ManagementSamsung UE26EH4500 66 cm (26 inch) TV (HD Ready, Twin Tuner) (Electronics) Protects but degrades image qualityAtFoliX 3 x Film Screen Protector Sony Alpha A6000 (ILCE-6000) - FX-Antireflex antireflection (Electronics) Correct but misleading image quality!Delamax Light Reflector 5 in 1 Gold, silver, black, white, translucent 55 cm (Import Germany) (Electronics) good reception but moderate image qualityMemoryStar MS BM per 5800 digital baby monitor baby monitor baby monitor with camera monitor screen display Babyphone phon baby fon Baby surveillance video 300 meter range - infrared night vision function (Baby Product) For the outdoor area perfectly, but the image quality suffers very2x Dipos antireflective screen protector for Microsoft Surface Tablet (Electronics) Solid build quality, good operating concept, image quality standardPolaroid XS100 Extreme Edition HD 1080p 16MP Waterproof Sports Action Camera + mounting kit included (Electronics) Good image quality 1D-Link DCS-5020L / W Repeater Network IP Camera + WiFi White (Personal Computers) Slightly inferior image quality through anti-reflective coating4 x mumbi screen protector HTC Desire X Protector Anti Reflex Anti-glare (Electronics) Good and compact outdoor camera - image quality acceptableSony DSC-TF1 digital camera (16.1 megapixels, 4x opt. Zoom, 6.9 cm (2.7 inch) LCD screen, 25mm wide-angle lens, Waterproof) (Electronics)