No Fluff or Mumbo Jumbo - "Just The Basics" on Digital Cameras

If you're a return visitor, make sure and click on your browser's "Refresh" button on each page to make sure you have the newest version of this page loaded.

Comparison Review

PHOTO VIA CANONS A520 PAGE

Canon A520

5/23/05

What Are The Differences Between The Canon A510 & A520?

The Canon A510 and A520 are nearly identical.  The A520 outer colors are just a bit different, but the shape, size, LCD screen, button layout, movie mode, and lens are a clone of the 3 megapixel A510.  The only major difference is that the A520 offers a 4 megapixel resolution - 1 million more pixels than the A510, with a top image size of  2272 x 1704 pixels as opposed to the A510 top image size of 2048 x 1536 pixels.  Not a HUGE difference, but these extra pixels will allow you to see just a bit more detail on larger 8 x 10 prints (you'll see no difference on out of camera 4 x 6 or 5 x 7 prints between the two, however).  Having more pixels also allows you to crop away some of a photograph, and still have enough left over for a decent sized print - for instance, cropping a person out of a portrait shot of two people, and still being able to make an enlargement of that one person, etc.

As you can see from the photo below, the A-series are small enough to easily hold in an adult's hand...

Image Quality Comparison With The A510

Canon faces the same problem all of the other camera makers do.  Create a series of cameras in the same model ranges, each offering minor tweaks over the others, yet still try to keep the costs down.  In the case of the A510 and A520 cameras, Canon would have been faced with an expensive task to produce an entirely different CCD for the A520 (the chip that being very basic about it, captures the images within the camera).

The A510 has a 3 megapixel CCD.  The A520 has a 4 megapixel CCD.  Both CCDs however, are the same *physical* size.  What this means is that Canon had to cram 1 million extra pixels into a CCD which is physically the same size as the A510 CCD, which only has to carry roughly 3 million pixels.  In order to do this, the tiny little pixels (or more precisely, "photo diodes") had to be made smaller on the A520 chip, so the extra million of them could fit on the chip.  Smaller diodes gather less light compared to larger diodes.  Less light means some loss of overall quality to the images.  The biggest difference between these two models is that the A520 images show more "noise" (similar to grain on film prints) in lower light photos, than the A510 images do.  It's not a huge difference for regular sized 4 x 6 snapshot prints, but something to be aware of, and the extra noise can start to be seen in larger prints beyond this size under certain conditions.  Close inspection of images on a monitor show visible noise in areas of solid color, even when you have good lighting outdoors on a sunny day, and the camera is set for iso 50 (which SHOULD be a very "clean" setting for most cameras).  The A510 showed almost no noise until you reach iso 100, and even then in most shots it was not as pronounced as the A520 at iso 50.

Another issue I did notice on the A520 photos is what is called "Chromatic Aberration" (CA for short), which you may also hear called "Purple fringing".   This is seen mostly when you take photos where high contrast areas meet, such as tree limbs against a bright hazy sky, glass or metal against a sky, etc.  This is unfortunately a somewhat common occurrence in digital images, but some cameras have this problem more than others.  A510 images showed very little of this, and you have to look hard to find them, but I found them to be a bit more common on A520 images - possibly a side effect of those extra pixels on the CCD, along with the same lens for the lower resolution model being used on the higher resolution A520.  Whatever the cause, if you're into taking shots of trees against skies a good bit, this is something to consider.  This effect CAN be fixed in a good image editing program, but this may not be something novices want to fool with if this is the type of photo you take often.

CANON A520 PURPLE FRINGING

Above is an example, taken in mid-afternoon on a sunny day, aiming the A520 through tree limbs.  The A510 images I saw showed minor versions of this problem, but the A520 was a little worse.  I have been asked via emails how bad this problem is compared to another camera which might be considered a similar competitor to the A520, the Fuji E550.  While the Fuji is a higher megapixel camera, it's overall features and lens is very similar to the Canon.  Here below, is the same section of tree, taken with the Fuji E550...

FUJI E550 PURPLE FRINGING

Note the Canon takes crisper/clearer shots, but the purple fringing is roughly the same on both models.  I feel that this issue could be resolved better if makers were to use physically larger CCDs, and perhaps improve the overall quality of the lenses in their consumer level cameras as well.

For those who asked... the Canon A520 and Fuji E550 side by side for size comparisons (close!).

Not All Is Doom and Gloom

Not all is bad.  The world is not near it's end.  In MOST images, you do not see the dreaded purple fringing issue illustrated above, but instead you get overall decent photos.   I think most "average" consumers (if there is such a thing actually) will be happy with the image quality of the A520 for special events, parties, gatherings, and more.  If you're seeking a camera to make fine art prints to sell, then I doubt you'd be looking at this class of camera anyway but just in case that *is* on your mind, then the image issues that crop up with this model might put you off - look elsewhere to a higher specified (and more expensive) camera.

The examples above have been compressed just a bit so they'll load more quickly for those still using dialup connections (gasp), but you'll get the idea - pooch shots are nice and sharp, etc.  The close up (macro) detail just below it is similar to the one taken on the A510 review page, and if you look closely you can see just a tiny bit of fraying around the fine edges of the flower petals on the A520 images, where the A510 example looks a little smoother.  This is a 100% crop of a macro shot however, and you would normally not be looking at it at such close range, but it's another example of how using the same lens and CCD on a higher megapixel model of camera does not guarantee a better image.  Close inspection of many A520 images show this type of fraying around edges, where it's harder to detect in the A510 shots.  

I am adding this update on image quality, as between myself, a colleague, and a couple of user emails, we have started inspecting the A520 images even more closely than normal and have found what you may call a "glitch".  Note that this may mean little to those who are new to photography, but those who are a bit more experienced will understand (meaning some intermediate stuff beyond "the basics" is about to be discussed for a second)...

When taking shots on a nice sunny day, I realized that the camera almost always wanted to take shots with an aperture setting of F - 5.5.  Over and over it did this, even when I personally thought the camera maybe should be picking a slightly higher setting considering the conditions.  So, turning the mode dial on top to manual aperture mode, I manually set the camera for  F- 8 instead, and took some shots of the same scenes.  Putting crops of these side-by-side on the monitor next to each other, there was a noticeable difference in sharpness on the F- 8 shots than the camera selected F- 5.5 shots.  In other words, the camera goofs and does not always choose the optimum setting for the sharpest images.  We noticed the A510 seems to make better decisions when taking photos.  I'll try to get a small side-by-side sample up here as time allows.

You can override this yourself as I did using the manual aperture settings, but you really should HAVE to, and those new to photography in general really would have no idea to do this.  As a result, many images may not be as sharp as they can be by allowing the A520 to do the thinking for you.  As a result of this new discovery, I have lowered the grade at the bottom of this review for image quality from an "8" to a "7.5".  It's still above average when compared to other models on the market today, but not top notch and still doesn't match it's smaller sibling the A510.  Really, you could take the 3 megapixel images from the A510 and manually resize them up a bit in any image editor of your choice, and just about get the same results the A520 seems to get out of camera on it's own - without paying the extra price for the extra resolution.  I had purchased the A510 as a pocket cam to carry around but a colleague quickly talked me into selling it off to him, so the A520 was to be a replacement.  After seeing the overall image quality (still good, but not AS good as quick 1st appearances made it seem), I took the A520 back for a refund.

Closing Comments

At the time of this writing (May 2005), the Canon A510 can be found in most U.S. stores for $199.00.  If you look around real closely, you can find it on sale for $179.00 or so.  The Canon A520 until recently was as high as $299.00, but it has seen some recent reductions to $279.00 and I found mine on sale for $251.00.  If you don't plan on making a lot of prints over a 5 x 7 inch size, there is really no reason for you to spend the extra money on the A520, as up to that size you won't see any different in print quality.  

My prediction is that the A510 will be the hottest selling camera of this upcoming holiday season, and due to some of the noise and other issues of the A520 it will be considered just another "good but not great" model that fits alongside other maker models out there.  If someone buys you one for the holidays don't feel cheated - I will repeat that overall the A520 still takes "good" images... just not "excellent" images such as the A510 for it's range.  Hey, no one ever buys ME cameras for Christmas!

In my grades below, I took away a point for image quality due to the purple fringing issues and slight fraying of details in some images compared to the images from the A510.  Also per the update above, an addition deduction on image quality was made due to the camera's inability to choose the best settings for optimal sharpness on a consistent basis .  Build quality actually gained a notch, as the battery latch is not loose as it was on the A510 models I tried.  Features, battery life, and the movie mode grades remain the same, as they are virtually identical to the A510.

Build Quality / Design   =    8

Image Quality  =  7.5

Features  =  9

Battery Life  =  8.5

Movie Mode  =  7.5

If you found this review and site helpful to you, please consider making even a tiny donation to help offset operating and hosting costs.  Visit the bottom of the Q&A page, or the Gallery page, for links for donations and more info.

 Return to the  [  Canon A510 Review ]  page.

Return to the [  HOME  ]  page