Canon 160sx has anyone tried out the video
Jun 3, 2014 21:33:15 #
Jun 8, 2014 22:13:00 #
Not personally, but if you check out the reviews on Amazon, 64 out of 496 reviews were 1 or 2 stars out of 5. Reviewers mentioned awful video and poor, slow auto focus. I'd look elsewhere based on the large number of bad reviews.
Jun 9, 2014 08:19:36 #
It's too late Bob. I already bought it. If you can find a new one they're very cheap now. I saw one a couple of months ago for about $100.oo brand new. The video is not the best as you already know, but overall the camera seems to be a half-way decent camera for someone like me who is on a budget. It is a little chunky for what you get, but I'm stuck here at home most of the time so weight and size don't matter. Thanks for replying to my inquiry.
Seeya,
ronny
Seeya,
ronny
Jun 9, 2014 11:14:53 #
Ronny,
Good luck. I think even cameras that may not be top of the line today are often way better than anything available just a few years ago.
Bob
P.S. I just saw the flower shot you posted with this camera and it looks outstanding. With that quality lens, and selecting superfine video, and with the stereo mic I think it ought to do very nice video as well.
Here's a video test of the camera on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYoHnKNXs08
Great quality. The only thing is the guy should have used a tripod. Handheld video makes me seasick.
Good luck. I think even cameras that may not be top of the line today are often way better than anything available just a few years ago.
Bob
P.S. I just saw the flower shot you posted with this camera and it looks outstanding. With that quality lens, and selecting superfine video, and with the stereo mic I think it ought to do very nice video as well.
Here's a video test of the camera on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYoHnKNXs08
Great quality. The only thing is the guy should have used a tripod. Handheld video makes me seasick.
davidheald1942 wrote:
It's too late Bob. I already bought it. If you can find a new one they're very cheap now. I saw one a couple of months ago for about $100.oo brand new. The video is not the best as you already know, but overall the camera seems to be a half-way decent camera for someone like me who is on a budget. It is a little chunky for what you get, but I'm stuck here at home most of the time so weight and size don't matter. Thanks for replying to my inquiry.
Seeya,
ronny
Seeya,
ronny
Jun 9, 2014 21:03:45 #
I know what you mean Bob, hand held videos make me sick too. I'm having a lot of fun with my little canon sx160,
but I still haven't used the video but just about a minute
in a snow-storm we had a couple of months ago. That video did look very good and the image stable-iser worked as advertised. I have tremors so the IS must really be good. (spelling). Thanks for the time to answer.
Have a terrific day.
seeya,
ronny
but I still haven't used the video but just about a minute
in a snow-storm we had a couple of months ago. That video did look very good and the image stable-iser worked as advertised. I have tremors so the IS must really be good. (spelling). Thanks for the time to answer.
Have a terrific day.
seeya,
ronny
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.