So seeing that the old camera was getting colors a bit "orangey" and "too dark" on the low-light setting but "too bright and uneven" on flash, I bought a new one in May. And then just let it sit for 2 months...
So I decided to set it up yesterday. Reconsidering, I shouldn't have chosen it. I was looking for a simple camera and this one said "for kids and seniors" and it was cheap. Since I only use a camera for blog pics, that sounded fine. I probably should have read the specifications more carefully.
There are some oddities about it. No "low-light" setting. No semi-click while it focuses. And the buttons are annoyingly monochrome silver, which makes them difficult to read.
It takes surprisingly large pictures. The only choices are 24/36/44 MB. I have no use for that. I reduce everything to 200-300 KB anyway.
But all that may not matter. I took a few test pictures around the house and outside. I haven't tried to process any yet (I don't want 2 different series of sequentially-numbered pics in my folders). The camera display does show them as accurate in color and single-click works (the pics show as clear.
I'll take pictures of identical scenes with both cameras and compare them. Flash and low-light using the old one and normal (the only choice) with the new one. If the new one results in better pics than the old one I will start using that one.
I save originals at full size and processed ones at 200-300 (see above). But I'm sure not going to save originals at 24 MB! So I would have to reduce the size of the originals too. Actually, I'm not sure why I save originals. I suppose because I have the space to do it. I may have to rethink that.
I think the new camera will produce better pictures. We'll see...
