Customer Reviews

Canon PowerShot A3000IS 10 MP Digital Camera with 4x Optical Image Stabilized Zoom and 2.7-Inch LCD

5 star:		(50)
4 star:		(35)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

For serious photography, I prefer a big, heavy digital SLR. But where my goal is not photography but I want a camera along for snapshots, I use this.

I expected to buy a Lumix LX-series or Canon S95 - both attempts to match the capabilities of a SLR as much as possible in an easily-pocketable camera. But as I kept reading the reviews I got more confused, until I remembered the basic laws of physics haven't been repealed.

To roughly summarize the camera review sites, all major-brand subcompacts do a good job in bright light. The differentiators are low light, flash, performance, and manual control. And when you read carefully, you realize there's not a lot of practical difference here either. But there's no way to compare them without exaggerating the differences, which makes them sound more significant than they really are.

LOW LIGHT
In low light, digital cameras increase the ISO, which means the weak signal coming from the sensor is amplified. This also amplifies noise, which causes an overall grainy look and, in dark areas, colored confetti. I don't expect any camera to work well in low light; this goes for pro-level DSLRs and film cameras as well. So paying extra for a camera that's really bad in low light rather than terrible doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It's a lot like choosing sunglasses based on their performance in dim light, or a screwdriver for its ability to drive a nail.

FLASH
For flash, a commercial photographer typically uses a power pack that may draw 15 amps AC and power multiple heads which range in size from 4" diameter to over 36". Subcompact cameras have ridiculously small batteries and tiny flash tubes (typically under 0.2 sq inches) located at the worst possible place: near the lens. It amazes me that any of them work as well as they do. Do I really care that one extends to 13 feet and another only 11.75? There have been times where I'd wished for a more powerful flash, but I'm thinking an extra 30 feet; I wouldn't notice an extra 2 or 3.

The A3000 flash will synch any ordinary slave flash if you turn off the red-eye feature in the camera. It won't meter it, however, so it's easy to wash out the picture. I believe this is true for all Canon subcompacts.

PERFORMANCE
When prefocused, picture-to-picture processing time is barely noticeable -- less than half a second. When you include focusing time, less than 2.5 seconds. It's faster with the continuous shot option, which does not refocus between exposures. This is respectable, and more than enough for my needs. To keep up with a very active child or pet, you might want faster performance. Tested with 4 GB Lexar Platinum II 9MB/sec SDHC.

MANUAL CONTROL
I use manual control on my SLR most of the time. I had it on my last two subcompacts, and seldom used it. The A3000 doesn't have it. The only time I missed it was using slave flash. If I'm out with the family, I don't want to be thinking like a photographer, so the camera will probably make better decisions. And manual control is less convenient on a subcompact because of the ergonomic compromises necessary for such a small camera. Nice to have, but as processors get smarter, less important.

MEGAPIXELS
The best professional color printers print 90,000 dots per square inch. That means it takes 4 x 6 x 90,000 = 2.2 megapixels for a 4 x 6 print. 5 x 7 = 3.2 megapixels. 8 x 10 = 7.2 megapixels. Higher megapixels increase image file size and shot-to-shot delay (while the camera compresses the image and writes it out to the card). The only advantage to "higher resolution" than that required for your final print: you can crop the picture a bit without losing any picture quality. The A3000 is 10 meg; if they had a 6 meg version, it would be a better camera. Canon knows this; they also know megapixels are a lot easier to sell.

SENSOR SIZE
Bigger is better, but more important than sensor size is pixel size - the larger the pixels the higher the dynamic range, which means more detail in very bright and very dark areas. It usually means better low-light performance and less noise because of other engineering choices available because of the larger pixels.

The difference in sensor size between this and some of the more expensive small cameras (S95) seems significant until you put it into perspective. The pixel size of a Canon S95 is 6% that of a 12-meg professional DSLR (FX format). A3000 is 4%. Given the dynamic range and low-light performance of a pro DSLR isn't that great, I don't see any reason to pay a premium for 6% vs 4%.

CONCLUSION
My ideal small camera - pocketable, usably large viewfinder (I can accept a smaller LCD), 5-6 megapixels, manual control, image stabilization (small cameras are hard to hold steady), not cluttered with silly features - is no longer made. If a camera manufacturer wants me to spend more, they're going to have to come closer to that; more megapixels won't do it.

Until then, I'm OK with the A3000. Pictures are excellent for a subcompact. Flash even in a big room is more than acceptable for on-camera flash, focus is quick and remarkably adept at identifying the right subject, image stabilization works as well as I'd hoped. Controls are well laid out and intuitive. LCD is bright and clear, even outdoors. The shutter release could be more prominent, and I may attach a thin rubber disk to make it easier to find by feel.

The A3000 doesn't looking expensive, so subjects tend to ignore it. And I'm more likely to take it along because it if gets damaged or lost, or encounters the uneconomical-to-repair "lens error" that seems to afflict all brands, it's not a big deal. Manual is pdf file on disk, also available on-line. Camera made in Malaysia. 1-year limited warranty.

7 July 2011 UPDATE: The "excellent value" comment was based on a selling price of under $100 directly from Amazon.

Purchased the camera for my wife, who was going to Thailand on a University trip. She came back with 500+ photos, taken in all kind of light conditions. All except two or three were in sharp focus, and the best of the lot are good enough to put on the wall. She had to recharge the battery once a week, she says. We uploaded her photos to our computers, no problem. I would recommend this for any casual photographer, including the one that is technically challenged.

I've owned over countless Canon/Sony models over the decade but just want to give a heads up since this is a new model and I wanted to give my opinion first.
I just got this today. Very cheap feel...camera feels very hollow and light. Pictures are great as usual from Canon. Not as many functions as my SD940 but a good point and shoot for the price. The right corner nob is a new twist for Canon ELPH models which looked weird at first but fast if you want to switch shooting modes (compared to my SD940). The thickness could be more compact given that the camera feels so light and hollow inside. The buttons need to be more crisp but its the pictures what matters most. Overall, decent camera for the money. If I had to buy again for the same price, I would go with the SD1200 which is more solid and compact.

Got the camera one week ago and already had one problem. After taking about 200 pics (for work indoors), the camera stopped working. The screen went white and could not take any more pics. Took out the battery and hoped this would reset the camera but nothing. Was on the way home to return the camera and decided to try one more time to see if it works. It started up and for the past 4 days, no problems. I am debating whether to return or not so I am keeping the box and all packaging in case it happens again. The pics don't look great on the camera screen but when I downloaded them onto my computer, the pics were fine. I am not a professional and for $150, the quality of the pics are more than good enough. Praying the problem was a one time glitch.... If it does break down, I will definitely let everyone know so they will be aware of this issue.

I purchased this camera at Sam's club for $120 including tax. I was considering a powershot 1300 but this caught my eye. I enjoy the rotating knob on top, that is what hooked me. The photos seem to be as good as my Canon that last year cost me over twice as much. It has all the controls you need for everyday snapshots, and then some. It is light weight. It is thick enough to hold onto securely. The photos come out very sharp. Low light capability seems just fine. I normally use Program Mode so I can set my own ASA (100 or 200) and Neutral Color. You could spend 100 dollar more a get a few more functions but not necessarily better photos. I think you would have to put out 200 dollars more to get results and control that was significantly better. I don't take a lot of video so the video capabilities of this camera (which I have not even tried yet) might be one reason this camera is so inexpensive.

I am not a professional photographer but I do appreciate quality, and I greatly enjoy casual photography. I tried out this camera in a couple of stores and it really impressed me with photo quality and ease of use. In fact, I had already ordered the Sony Cybershot DSC-W350 to replace my previous Sony, but will be returning it as soon as it arrives. The W350 really has too many features I don't need, but this camera has just what I need - the ability to take great pictures in different circumstances. Not to mention, the price is pretty nice from many retailers.

Also, I like the way it feels in my hands. It's kind of chunky compared to other digital cameras of this generation, but I actually prefer that, as it's easier to hold and control. The buttons feel sturdy, and I like the fact that it has a mode selection wheel, which is very simple to use.

Out of all the digital point & shoot cameras I have had the opportunity to use over the years (including an older Canon, a Sony, and a Panasonic), I have found that this camera is the best at producing colors that are true to life. That is one of the major points that sold me on this camera, and was quite surprising to me!

The auto mode and easy auto mode work okay and are a good option if you just want to take a picture without having to mess with settings, but I prefer to use the program mode and adjust the available settings myself (keep in mind, this is a point & shoot so the manual settings are limited). I feel I can get better pictures, most of the time, if I tweak the settings myself. However you prefer to take the pictures, the options are there at the turn of a wheel!

The only bad thing I can really say about this camera is that the microphone is not all that great. It's perfectly FINE for most videos, but videos of concerts can sound badly garbled if it is very loud or if there's a lot of bass. If not for that then I'd give this camera a perfect 5 stars.

Overall, I really enjoy using this camera. It's not a pro camera by any means, but it is a nice point & shoot for everyday use, and 10 megapixels is PLENTY unless you plan on printing poster sized pictures. This camera caught me by surprise, and I'm glad it did! However, if you're in the market for something very compact, or with a lot of bells and whistles, then you might want to skip this camera. I've only had this camera for a few days, so I can't yet say how it will hold up in the long run, but if anything goes afoul then I will update this review.

For your consideration, I have a few sample pictures uploaded in the image gallery.

I ordered this camera for to replace my wife's old Canon. It's a small compact camera that fits her small hands quite well. This little camera takes great pictures indoors and out under all lighting conditions. It feels solidly built and has more functions than she normally uses, but it's nice to have them available when the need arises. Her last camera had a lot of scratches on the LCD, so I put protective film on this one right away as the large LCD looks like it will be prone to it as well, maybe even more so. My only complaint is that it doesn't have a through-the-lens viewfinder like her old one, but the LCD is large and bright enough even in sunlight. The Lithium battery lasts 10 times longer than AA batteries before it needs recharging.

This is the third digital camera I have owned. I've used it for a few days now and feel comfortable recommending it. I've tested it out in various lighting conditions both indoor and out. Each time the picture qualitly has been good to great. Exposure seems right on each time just on the auto setting. If for some reason the conditions are not right the compensation settings can be accessed right from the top wheel which is a nice feature. It is only 10 mega pixel, but I've since learned that picture quality and the number of mega pixels don't necessarily go hand in hand, at least not with cheaper point and shoot cameras. For example I originally bought a Nikon which was a 14 mega pixel camera which I returned because the picture quality was terrible in anything but outdoor conditions. My only complaint with this one is the buttons on the front of the camera are confusing as they do different things depending on how the camera is set, but that seems to be the case with most electronic equipment these days.

This is a great little camera. It is nice and small and it takes great pics. It is really easy to use and I love it. Also, the rechargeable battery that it comes with charges fairly quickly and it lasts for a long time.

This was my first digital camera and I found it easy to use and the quality of the pictures excellent. The computer program was also easy to implement for transfer of pictures and video. A good value for the money