Canon Camera, Heads Up

Old Reflector
1

If the Moderator has no objection?..

Photos and movies play a big part of most SOTA activations.

I’ve been in the camera market for some time to replace my Samsung, which has no video capability. I decided against a dedicated video camera as I’ve got enough junk in my rucksack already.

Trawling through the Interweb, I happed upon this little gem…

http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/1415474.htm

Also avilable in black,

http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Product/partNumber/1084599.htm

This is a Canon 16mp, 28mm wide angle lens with 3 inch screen, 16x optical zoom and HD video capability. The video performance is excellent.

For technical details http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_sx160_is#Overview

At a tad under £75, reduced from £160 this looks like a steal to me.

Downside, a little larger than the average point and shoot camera and can be heavy on batteries, probably down to the very bright 3 inch screen. On the plus side, this camera runs on AA batteries, so good quality, high capacity rechargeable Hybrid or regular NiMH AA’s seems to be the way to go.

Just helped myself to one and I’m well pleased with the results.

This is a lot of camera for Mickey Mouse dosh. For the Bells and Whistles junkie, there’s plenty to keep you amused. For the point and shoot enthusiast, simply zoom and push the button.

To make the deal even sweeter, I was given a five Quid Argos vocher for spending over fifty Quid, bringing the effective cost of the camera down to just £69.99

HTH
Mike 2E0YYY

2

In reply to 2E0YYY:

How does that saying go, opinions are like ars^Wnoses, everyone has one. If you ask for views from 10 people you’ll end up with 11 opinions!

I’ve had a Canon point&click camera and it was good. But I bought a Panasonic Lumix last year. A good friend who is a serious photographer (he has many Canon DSLR camers) had one of these for everyday use. Having seen the quality of the images it took and learning how long the battery lasted I was won over. My sister and Brian G4ZRP were impressed enough to go and buy Lumix cameras having seen my results.

What I like about mine is not only that it has a Leica lens, but the software is miles above the software my Canon had. It’s so good that apart from a few occasions when I’ve take photos inside without flash, I leave it on Auto-Smart-Clever-Sod mode and it just works.

Have a look at some before you punt. But that price you mention is good. I don’t need to tell you to buy the fastest memory card you can to put in it.

Andy
MM0FMF

3

In reply to MM0FMF:

Indeed Andy, Panasonic cameras are excellent. I own a Panasonic Lumix FZ38 with the Leica lens. Sadly, far too big to carry on SOTA activations. I needed something with video capability that could be slipped into the rucksack and this seems to fit the bill.

I’m looking forward to testing it out on my next activation.

73 Mike
2E0YYY

4

In reply to 2E0YYY:
The black one is now on amazon at 69.99 with free delivery in the UK (lucky you!)

73 de IZ1KSW
Gab

5

In reply to 2E0YYY:

In reply to MM0FMF:

Indeed Andy, Panasonic cameras are excellent. I own a Panasonic Lumix
FZ38 with the Leica lens. Sadly, far too big to carry on SOTA
activations.

Just get me or STQ to carry it along with everything else! ;))))

R

6

Mickey, you’ve got a Samsung Galaxy Siii smartphone like me, In fact it was your enthusiasm of it on here that led me to get one for myself.

And I’m not disappointed, everything on it is great for the SOTA activator. Hence I’m surprised to see you bigging up a camera. The camera on the Galaxy Siii is great, really easy to use, and because the phone is synced with my Wi-Fi at home, the minute I walk through the door after a day of activating, all my photos are there waiting for me on Facebook without any cable connection or download process.

It took me a while to finally ditch the digital camera, but why carry that extra few ounces and extra few cubic centimetres when the phone does the job just as well if not better? Mind you, you don’t seem to mind carrying excess unnecessary weight in your kit… :wink:

Tom M1EYP

7

In reply to M1EYP:

There’s no disputing the Galaxy camera is brilliant, Tom. No doubt, the fact that phone cameras are so good these days, has been the cause of the crash in camera prices.

Call me old fashioned, but I just feel more comfortable taking shots with a camera…

73 Mike
2E0YY

8

In reply to 2E0YYY:

I’m with you there, Mike, but as a long time SLR man I prefer to go out with my Fuji S5700, since my little Praktica DCZ 8.2 is practically unuseable in bright sunlight and I hate having to do my framing with Picasa!

73

Brian G8ADD

9

In reply to 2E0YYY:

Just helped myself to one and I’m well pleased with the results.

I had the earlier model, SX150, 12 X optical zoom, 14.1 megapixels.

It died on an activation when it was in my pocket, the power button was pressed and the lens motor died trying to push the lens out through my pocket.

Great photos, great zoom, absolutely killed batteries. Now replaced with a Samsung Galaxy Ace Plus phone camera for activations and looking around for a less battery hungry camera for other times.

73
Peter VK3ZPF

10

In reply to G8ADD:

In reply to 2E0YYY:

I’m with you there, Mike, but as a long time SLR man I prefer to go
out with my Fuji S5700, since my little Praktica DCZ 8.2 is
practically unuseable in bright sunlight and I hate having to do my
framing with Picasa!

When I think back to what I paid for my Canon 35mm gear in the 80’s, I could weep, Brian!

As far as photography goes, in real terms, it’s excellent value for money these days.

73 Mike
2E0YYY

11

In reply to VK3ZPF:

Thanks for the info, Peter. I was aware of the battery issue when I purchased the camera. However, reading a review suggested that rechargeable batteries made a big difference. My first impressions after playing with the camera are extremely positive. If it performs as well as many of the reviews suggests and coupled with the price paid, I’ll forgive the battery indiscretion.

73 Mike
2E0YYY

12

In reply to 2E0YYY:

“Sadly, far too big to carry on SOTA activations.”

Are you cutting down on gear Mike? I thought you employed a Sherpa.

73 Richard G3CWI

13

In reply to G3CWI:

More like a team of them under a sirdar!

73

Brian G8ADD

14

In reply to G3CWI:

I was using the services of G4ASA. My cunning plan of employing him under the old YOP scheme was rumbled and he started demanding minimum wage. Sadly, I was forced to let him go.

We still remain friends…

73 Mike
2E0YYY

15

In reply to 2E0YYY:

Thanks for the info, Peter. I was aware of the battery issue when I
purchased the camera. However, reading a review suggested that
rechargeable batteries made a big difference. My first impressions
after playing with the camera are extremely positive. If it performs
as well as many of the reviews suggestsl and coupled with the price
paid, I’ll forgive the battery indiscretion.

Hi Mike,

I was very interested to read your report on the SX160, as I had been thinking of buying one even before I saw your posting. In fact this model has been superseded by the SX170, which is much more expensive at £154.50. Amazon are selling the black SX160 for only £69.99 including postage, and they also do a nice carrying case for it.

My only slight reservation is about the batteries. If you use two alkaline AA cells, the voltage would be 3v. However, I assume it would be only 2.4v if you used a pair of rechargeable NiMH cells. Have you tried it with the rechargeables, and does it perform just as well on the lower voltage?

Also I read in someone’s review that the flash is very slow to charge up (about 15 seconds). Have you had any experience in using the flash, Mike.

Interestingly, it seems the only significant difference between the SX160 and the SX170 is that the SX170 comes with a Lithium Ion battery and charger!

Apologies if I have offended anybody with this posting.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

16

In reply to G3NYY:
.

Hi Mike,

I was very interested to read your report on the SX160, as I had been
thinking of buying one even before I saw your posting. In fact this
model has been superseded by the SX170, which is much more expensive
at £154.50. Amazon are selling the black SX160 for only £69.99
including postage, and they also do a nice carrying case for it.

Hi Walt,

Yes, I was aware the the SX160 had been superseded aithough the 16mp and 16x zoom specs appear to be unchanged. The difference seems to be the inclusion of a rechargeable lithium battery as opposed to AA’s. IMHO, for SOTA, AA’s are a better bet as they can easily be changed and couple of spare batteries weigh just a few grammes.

My only slight reservation is about the batteries. If you use two
alkaline AA cells, the voltage would be 3v. However, I assume it
would be only 2.4v if you used a pair of rechargeable NiMH cells.
Have you tried it with the rechargeables, and does it perform just as
well on the lower voltage?

I’m in the process of testing the camera with a fresh set 2500 mAh Hybrid cells which showed 1.43 volts after charging this morning. The camera seems happy enough running on them at the moment. After an hour or so of use including some flash they’re showing 1.32 Volts,

Also I read in someone’s review that the flash is very slow to charge
up (about 15 seconds). Have you had any experience in using the
flash, Mike.

Yes, seems to be one of the complaints, however, I’ve been using the flash last night and this morning and it’s taking about about 5 seconds to reboot, running off the rechargeable batteries.

The still images are excellent and the video quality is brilliant. After my piddly little Samsung screen, the 3 inch Canon is a vast improvement, albiet at the cost of batteries, However, the brightness can be adjusted to save battery power.

BTW, the 200+ page user manual (which comes on a disk) will give you some serious bedtime reading :frowning:

HTH
73 Mike
2E0YYY

17

In reply to 2E0YYY:

Thanks very much, Mike. I do value your opinion, especially about the batteries.

I think I’ll grasp the nettle whilst they are still available! I have not bought a new camera for more than 10 years. The last one was a Pentax Compact 3.3 Megapixel and it cost me £255. Ouch!!! Amazing how prices have come down and spec has improved in the past decade.

73,
Walt (G3NYY)

P.S. The deed is done!
:slight_smile:

18

In reply to 2E0YYY:

It would be interesting to find out if CHDK (CHDK Wiki | Fandom) works with it (The website states it’s ‘alpha’ on this particular model)

I used it with a previous ‘cheap’ Canon and found it added great things like time lapse, motion detect and RAW capability, all with the ability to ‘boot’ from SD card so no permanent firmware changes were necessary

19

Canon PowerShot SX160 IS

Battery life report…

The batteries I used were fully charged 2500 mAh Hybrids…

Firstly, over the course of the day, I took 110 shots 60 of them using the flash. I then ran the camera in video mode with the 3 inch display set at level 4 out of 5.

Being a camera, the video mode can only run for a maximum of 30 minutes before it shuts off automatically. IIRC, I read somewhere ages ago, there’s some sort of weired EU ruling that if a camera runs for more than 30 mins in video mode, it’s no longer classed as a camera, but as a camcorder.

The video mode ran for a staggering 2 hours and 1 minute before the batteries were totally exhausted. The video ran for so long, the card filled up and I had to delete files to continue the video test!

For the last 40 minutes or so of video recording, the battery warning light flashed, probably down to the voltage of the cells dropping rather than the batteries being exhausted.

Of course, it would be possible to run the camera using 2900 regular NiMH batteries, however, I would advise against this as the self discharge rate would be bad news, should the camera be stored for any length of time. If bog standard NiMH cells are used, I would certainly advise topping them up before taking them on an activation.

This camera has had bad press due to poor battery life and slow flash recharge reports. Shame really, as this camera, fitted with the correct cells is a wonderful bit of kit.

Bottom line, a camera with these features, of this quality and performance, which retails for under 70 quid must be one of the best deals of the year.

If you’re only into miniscule point and shoot cameras then this is probably not the camera for you. If you can forgive its slightly bulky size, given that it will still easily fit inside of your rucksack, then you will not be disappointed.

HTH
73 Mike
2E0YYY

20

In reply to 2E0YYY:

Thanks for that report, Mike. That’s very encouraging news. I have ordered the camera from Amazon and expect to have it by the end of the week.

I will need to get some hybrid cells, as I only have NiMH cells at the moment. Will be in touch with you about that!

73,
Walt (G3NYY)