Which one to get from Canon 870 or Sony W170?

I'm a super mentally retarded - manager level 4 hero, and the source must be given for citing the answer, otherwise there is a suspicion of plagiarism.

The original answer is here.

For the 870 and W170, the difference between them is not much, the key is still in the wide angle.

The wide-angle distortion of the 870 is better controlled than that of the W170, and the wide-angle end is not easy to see the deformation of the subject. The W170, on the other hand, can see a more obvious deformation.

At present, 870 new products are on the market, ** inflated, if you are in a hurry to buy a camera, it is recommended to be W170

If you are not in a hurry, it is recommended to wait for half a year before buying 870

Maybe you're seeing 860, not 870

Here's a comparison of the W170 and R8.

This is a comparison between W170 and 870.

The data for w170 in the two articles is consistent.

Or please lz provide the information you see, I also want to see which ** says more reasonable.

Reply to the lz question again.

As for the wide-angle distortion, it depends on your personal sensitivity to the image.

For example, if your computer monitor doesn't display a screen that is sub-screen, and it's elliptical or otherwise distorted, wouldn't you feel uncomfortable? If it will, then please believe that the wide-angle distortion has a great impact on **.

If not, then ignore the wide-angle distortion issue.

For the card machine, what motion detection is a vase function, and it is not practical to look good.

First of all, the premise of being able to shoot clearly** is that the camera and the subject being photographed are relatively stationary. In fact, unless you are taking a tripod and shooting a still life, it is difficult to ensure that the camera does not move, or that the person being photographed does not move.

Then the solution to this problem is to increase the shutter speed.

The shutter speed is high, and the amount of displacement of the movement is negligible.

The higher the speed of the object's motion, the faster the freeze shutter time.

Returning to the problem of motion detection, it is nothing more than the camera detecting that the photographed object is moving, and according to the pre-set program, the object movement trajectory is calculated, and the focus can follow the object. But shutter speed is still an issue to be solved.

Well, there are several ways to increase the shutter speed.

1.Increase the brightness of the subject being photographed, with light, with flash, etc.

2.Increase the sensitivity of the camera.

3.Use the maximum aperture.

For card players, the aperture is not adjustable, the flash power is limited, and the noise reduction ability is limited. It is actually impossible to get a clear **, or to increase the shutter speed, without changing the image quality.

So, be assured, motion detection is not good in most cases. It is only suitable for walking exercise in the daytime when the light is good. (If you ignore the influence of the mania, I'll say nothing).

Tell you simply.

Sony's 10 million pixels can't be compared to Canon's 10 million pixels!

You can rest assured of that.

The 870 is an upgraded version of the 860!

Not the average strong!

sony w170

Sony's machine is inferior to Canon, but it's not that Canon is better than Sony.

For card machines, the imaging performance is about the same, and it depends on luck to shoot moving objects.

Because the shutter is not adjustable, when the light is good, or when the light is good, it can shoot well, and when the light is bad, ......

Color bias is a characteristic of manufacturers, Sony thinks consumers like bright colors, Canon thinks consumers like light colors.

Canon's irritability is better controlled, Canon's imaging is soft, because of noise reduction, shooting people is not bad, shooting landscapes is not sharp enough, not as good as Nikon.

Generally speaking, as long as the focus is accurate, the shooting is clear (within 100% magnification, more than 100% will definitely be blurry).

The stabilization is indeed about the same, and the caliber of the CCD lens is about the same.

Macro is mainly used to shoot flowers and plants, and sometimes it is also used to shoot information and ID cards.

After all, it's a card machine, and the difference in macro distance is not too big, and the picture should be a good point for Canon.

The night scene is the same, you can only define the shutter ISO can barely shoot, and it is estimated that it will not achieve the effect you want.

And the average user doesn't necessarily know how to operate it.

For non-professional users, the difference between the two models is hardly noticeable.

Dude, 870 just came out,** It's obviously on the high side, and it's still a lot worse than w170. You also said that you are a non-professional user, so I personally think that W170 can meet your requirements. I bought 170 before the National Day, and it was compared with 860 at the time, although it was biased towards 860, but in the end, I chose W170 for cost performance.

If you have enough money, you can buy 870, if you are looking for practicality and cost-effectiveness, choose W170.

The 870 is much stronger than the 170, and Canon's advantage over consumer-grade cameras is quite obvious, so don't consider Sony if you have enough money.

Card machine, home, no need to consider any wide-angle distortion, for non-professional cameras, to talk about wide-angle distortion is to find faults.

Canon's camera is better!!