![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Been debating over all three of these cameras because I want the best bang for my buck. I can get the A400 for $135, the A510 for $165, and the SD200 for $207. If I buy the A400 or A510 I will also get rechargeable's and a nice 256mb SD card. That up's each cost by ~$50. If I get the SD200 I don't need the rechargeable just the SD card.
So in the end the A510 is just $30 more and the SD200 is just $47 more.
I'll be using it mainly around campus. We have a beautiful botanical garden here where I plan on taking the camera so macro might be somewhat important. I value quick shooting (my girlfriends camera waits like 3 seconds between shots, ugh) and small size. I'm used to using a Canon EOS Rebel so I'd love to have something light that I can just toss into my pocket and go. Zoom isn't terribly important to me, the 2x in the A400 might be kind of low but the 4x/3x in the A510 and SD200 seem like enough.
Is the SD200 worth the extra money or will I end up just as happy with the A400/A510? Should I be looking at any other cameras?
So in the end the A510 is just $30 more and the SD200 is just $47 more.
I'll be using it mainly around campus. We have a beautiful botanical garden here where I plan on taking the camera so macro might be somewhat important. I value quick shooting (my girlfriends camera waits like 3 seconds between shots, ugh) and small size. I'm used to using a Canon EOS Rebel so I'd love to have something light that I can just toss into my pocket and go. Zoom isn't terribly important to me, the 2x in the A400 might be kind of low but the 4x/3x in the A510 and SD200 seem like enough.
Is the SD200 worth the extra money or will I end up just as happy with the A400/A510? Should I be looking at any other cameras?
