Another Digital Camera Thread - Point and Shoot

paugie

Storage is cool
Joined
Dec 13, 2003
Messages
702
Location
Bulacan, Philippines
question again,

Can any of you please comment on the orange cast of the photographs? the sun was setting so the colors would be that way.

But would it have been more desirable to have changed the white balance at the time of exposure to lessen the orange cast?
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
I would have just a little, probably picked the white shirt in the bottom of the image as a white point.

Actually, I just stopped for a minute to play with it, and there is no way to cool the image down without making the hair in the foreground blue.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,497
Location
USA
Color looks pretty good. The fill is excessive and blue, and the overall exposure is over, which is rather common with the limited headroom on a P/S. At least you did not drag the shutter. If you do a lot of early/late fill flash try a 1/8 or even 1/4 CTO gel over the built-in flash.

I usually convert RAW files from sunny shoots at a color temp of 5000K even quite early or late. Occasionally I'll drop it to 4500K, but I'd rather have a warm look than make early/late look more like midday. I never use jpegs so I can't help too much with the camera settings. Different digital cameras vary in color palette. Skin tones are of course subjective and the human visual system is more sensitive to mismatches between expectation and perception of such viewed images. Your preference is most important unless it is a paid assignment.
 

paugie

Storage is cool
Joined
Dec 13, 2003
Messages
702
Location
Bulacan, Philippines
Thanks once again for the insights. Gives me an idea of what adjustments I can make prior to exposure.

Of course, RAW will have to wait until the DSLR, if ever.
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
As Samsung announces the utterly and completely absurd 14.7MP compact PnS, Panasonic has an interesting update, Lumilux LX-3, 24-60mm f2-2.8 lens. Minor improvement in sensitivity and saturation as compared to the older 10MP model (which means about what an 8MP would produce ;) ). Using the new Venus IV image degrading processor, we could expect far inferior performance compared to the discontinued Fuji F30/31.

But it has a host of manual features, RAW file format, HD video (though I'll bet you can use the zoom, which makes it basically useless as a substitute for a camcorder).

Still, I would have prefered a 4x zoom starting @24mm, instead of 2.5x. still a bit porky @27.1mm thick. Not sure I'd use that 'optical viewfinder' lol, not exactly through the lens, kind of like a rangefinder.

marketing hype got to love it:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0807/08072102panasoniclx3.asp

the new LX3 comes two years after its predecessor, the LX2, which earned an enthusiastic following among both professional photographers and serious amateurs for its exquisite image rendering (massive over processing via Venus IPE, lol...no thanks!), superior operating ease, and unique triple-wide system comprising wide-angle lens, 16:9 CCD and LCD. Panasonic has gone a big step further in the new LX3, upgrading every component to achieve a camera whose performance surpasses that of any compact camera that has come before. Simply put, the LX3 smashes all previous perceptions (think their marketing dept forgot about the Fuji F30/31?) about the limitations of a digital compact camera, setting a lofty new standard in performance, quality and creative capabilities.

side note, not sure if this post will take as it's heading towards the nightly triple witching hour of 1AM EST, when the backups start and the site becomes inaccessible :( *edit* well that was kind of painless, seems the server is a tad more responsive then it was 30 minutes ago ;)
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
Panasonic's excellent LX series (LX1, LX2, & now the LX3) all have RAW capability. The new LX3 has a hotshoe too, which is outstanding. The lens is fast, but I would rather have had more range on the telephoto end.

There are a lot of rumors regarding a Coolpix 6000 from Nikon as well.

Yeah, that's what I said above^^^ :D. Hotshoe if you need better flash capability, I prefer not to use flash at all costs :D. Optical vf looks funny, not really useful. RAW is useful for control, but I wouldn't expect much in greater IQ w/Venus IV IPE working it's magic upstream of the RAW data?

hmm, seems I answered Stereodude's question, with the post on CHDK in the dslr thread on all supported models- with regards to the A720is, anyone want to take a stab?

linky:

http://www.storageforum.net/forum/showthread.php?p=109944#post109944
 

Gilbo

Storage is cool
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Messages
742
Location
Ottawa, ON
Yeah, that's what I said above^^^ :D.
Oops. Posted without reading...

Hotshoe if you need better flash capability, I prefer not to use flash at all costs :D.
I wouldn't put a flash on the camera itself, hell, the balance would be way off! I would put one of my pocket wizards on it though, and drop a flash or two in the corners of the room to bounce off the ceiling when I was shooting indoors.

RAW is useful for control, but I wouldn't expect much in greater IQ w/Venus IV IPE working it's magic upstream of the RAW data?
Well, noise is a problem with all compact cameras unfortunately. One thing to bear in mind is that downsampling is a very effective noise reduction technique. Going from 10 to 6 MP will buy you a lot of image quality. Especially if you use a mild dose of a decent 3rd-party noise reduction application first.

I'd probably take this over the G9. The extra wide angle is more important to me than the missing tele, the previous lenses in this series were head and shoulders above their competition (they can actually resolve 8MP - don't know about 10 though, but most digital cameras run out of IQ at 6 MP or so) and the ergonomics of the LX series are just fantastic. I'm very curious about the Nikon P6000 though.

There are some decent first thoughts from someone whose handled one here. He finds the camera's highlight range and metering to be much better than he expected.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
The LX3 is an exciting development from Panasonic. It is basically the camera the LX2 was supposed to be but never was. They have improved the sensor slightly in high ISO performance (~20% they claim). Add to that a relatively fast 24-60/2.0-2.8 lens (that's almost 1 stop faster on average than lenses in competing cameras), optical IS, advanced auto ISO feature, RAW capability, hot shoe that is compatible with Olympus and Panasonic flashes, and improved NR, and we have a winner.

The Venus IV image processor is not nearly as bad as you think, uda. It is noticeably improved over the Venus III, which was basically Jack the Ripper masquerading as an ASIC. The NR has improved to the point where it can be considered competitive with the rest of the field instead of being a clear laggard.
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
Okay, now this is ridiculous. Nikon's P6000 and S710:

http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=3773

http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=3771

13.5 effective megapixel CCD? 14.5 MP on the S710? Up to 12,800 ISO on the S710? And all probably on 1/1.7" sensors? Arrggghhh! Can you say noise city? Stop the insanity!

IQ is in the eye of the beholder. Never mind that the lenses on these PnS and cell phone cams probably can't resolve enough even for 6MP sensors. Recall Fuji's class leading SuperCCD in the F30/31 was fairly noisy @1600 & 3200, but retained some semblance of detail...though clearly inferior to even a Nikon D50.

Pixel binning doesn't make for good quality images @low light levels, but marketing has to keep up with what ignorant consumers, who are being feed this nonsense by irresponsible PR wings of the camera companies.

Now we have 8MP cell phones, probably next year 10MP and ISO12800, :eek: .

http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/07/24/samsung.8mp.i8510.phone/
Offering an extremely high-resolution 8-megapixel camera, the new slim Samsung slider phone -- now called the INNOV8 -- features a 2.8-inch QVGA TFT display and also offers QVGA video resolution at up 120 frames per second (fps) or VGA quality recording at up to 30fps along with advance camera features such as find smile, face, and blink detection, image stabilization [optical/mechanical or high ISO?], and support for panoramic photos as well as a full editing suite on the device itself (including features for cutting video, dubbing audio, and adding subtitles).

From a year ago, on the Oly FE-250 which also pixel bins down to 3MP (though only 8MP sensor)

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/fe250_pg5.html

[FONT=arial, helvetica][FONT=arial, helvetica]These high ISO settings also show a significant increase in image noise. You can see for yourself on our samples page, where we took an available light portrait without the flash. The camera selected an ISO speed of 1000, which is not even the highest setting available, and the image looks horrible. Not even worthy of being used for a 4x6-inch print.[/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=arial, helvetica][FONT=arial, helvetica]At 6400 and 10000 (which the camera reduces the image quality to SQ1) images look as if they had been taken by a camera phone.[/FONT][/FONT]
ISO10,000
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/fe250/samples/p3290053.jpg

if you keep w/browser scaled to 40%, while not sharp, colors faded; many people...say Paris ;), would be happy with a blurr free image, and majority of PnS shots, probably <90% never get sized above 4x6in for sharing with others.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/FE250/FE250A.HTM
Shots captured at ISO 1,600 made rather soft-looking 8x10 inch prints, but I found them fine for viewing on a wall, at typical distances of a couple of feet or so. They were still slightly soft at 5x7, but looked great as 4x6 inch snapshots.
eye of the beholder :D

At ISO settings over 3200 (and there are two: 6400 and 10,000) you're shooting 3-Mp images, not 8-Mp images. Normally, 3 megapixels would be enough resolution to make decent 8x10 inch prints, but the noise processing applied to these very high-ISO images from the Olympus FE-250 meant that they were really only usable for 4x6 inch snapshot prints. Still, given the choice between getting a blurred mess (from camera or subject movement) vs a slightly soft 4x6 inch snapshot, I'd take the latter any day of the week.
And so too would the majority of the target market for these PnS digicams, choose the latter.

But I got to thinking, with OLED's sure to come about on digicams soon...Samsung already has one; will the brightness of these larger screens, reflect off a white clothing, such that at close-up range there is a 'light pollution' effect? That you'll need to manually reduce screen brightness, or find out later the images suck? Not so easy to tell if this was occurring, until later when viewing on a computer monitor, or on playback in good lighting, while zooming in 10x on the digicam???

Bigger news, IMHO was the Sony T700 with huge 3.5in LCD and 900k pixels, equivalent to the Nikon D300/700/3 LCDs. Hope this is a tread that gets adopted quickly (Canon...hurry up!).
 

Gilbo

Storage is cool
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Messages
742
Location
Ottawa, ON
Okay, now this is ridiculous. Nikon's P6000 and S710:

http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=3773

http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=3771

13.5 effective megapixel CCD? 14.5 MP on the S710? Up to 12,800 ISO on the S710? And all probably on 1/1.7" sensors? Arrggghhh! Can you say noise city? Stop the insanity!

That isn't even the worst thing about the P6000.

1. New, more proprietary RAW format. It only works in Windows, through an engine that ACR/Lightroom can't access. Adobe is being forced to reverse engineer the format. It doesn't even work in Capture NX! This is straight up retarded.

2. Completely gimped CLS support, and maybe no AWL support. The thing has a hot shoe, but even if you put an SU-800 (infrared controller) or other valid commander unit on it (SB-800/SB-900) you get only 1 flash group. I.e. they are consciously disabling the capability of the flash commanders when you combine them with this camera. I would have loved to have a point & shoot with the capacity to fully control a Nikon CLS/AWL setup. I can't even express how valuable I would find this, but even if I strap an SU-800 to it, I'm still out of luck. AHHH!

3. This is really just a little nitpick, but the lens, considering its size (and the sensor's) is a little slow on the telephoto at f/5.9. And if they could have just gotten to 135mm equivalent I would have really appreciated it. That little extra helps a lot for candids across the room in social situations.


I had high hopes for this camera. I haven't bought a point & shoot for 4 years, and I had high hopes for this one, particularly considering how aggressive Nikon has been with their DSLRs. The all-out, hold nothing back approach they took to the D700 surprised a lot of people, but I was hoping they were ready and willing to go no-holds-barred across the entire line.

Oh well... The Panasonic LX1 is still a fantastic camera.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
1. New, more proprietary RAW format. It only works in Windows, through an engine that ACR/Lightroom can't access. Adobe is being forced to reverse engineer the format. It doesn't even work in Capture NX! This is straight up retarded.

That sucks.

2. Completely gimped CLS support, and maybe no AWL support. [...] I would have loved to have a point & shoot with the capacity to fully control a Nikon CLS/AWL setup. I can't even express how valuable I would find this, but even if I strap an SU-800 to it, I'm still out of luck. AHHH!

Really? I don't understand why you would want a crappy P&S with a super-noisy sensor and no usable RAW format over a dSLR if you've still got to deal with the bulk of multiple flashses anyways? What did you have in mind with a P&S based setup?

BTW, what's AWL?

3. This is really just a little nitpick, but the lens, considering its size (and the sensor's) is a little slow on the telephoto at f/5.9.

That is slow. Makes the super high MP count even worse, 'cause you'll be at 1600 ISO in anything but daylight at f/5.9.

I had high hopes for this camera. I haven't bought a point & shoot for 4 years, and I had high hopes for this one, particularly considering how aggressive Nikon has been with their DSLRs.

I haven't trusted Nikon to make a good P&S for years. They haven't produced anything good since the CoolPix 995. That's, what, 7 years ago?
 

Gilbo

Storage is cool
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Messages
742
Location
Ottawa, ON
Really? I don't understand why you would want a crappy P&S with a super-noisy sensor and no usable RAW format over a dSLR if you've still got to deal with the bulk of multiple flashses anyways? What did you have in mind with a P&S based setup?
It could've been nice for social photography for example. Put some flashes in the corners of rooms and control them remotely.

Also, the electronic shutter would be nice for high sync speeds that DSLRs could never support.

BTW, what's AWL?
Nikon's "Advanced Wireless Lighting". It's the subset of CLS that allows you to manually set flash power remotely, and maybe a couple other fancy functions.
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
Although this is nothing definitive, given other issues to IQ besides pure resolving power. But for those who say 14MP is a joke on a PnS, what would you think of the comparison of the IQ on the beer bottle lettering, finer print?

Seems to me the Sony W300 is doing almost as good as the Canon XTi, even Nikon D700? And while scale makes it more difficult to see, I'd also say the Sony is about as good as the Fuji F30d, with respect to the Samuel Smith beer bottle print. So for most people buying a PnS, would the 14MP really be 'hype' to them, or a useful distraction for determining what to buy :p?

Fuji F30d test shot
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/F30/FULLRES/F30hSLI0100.HTM

Sony W300 test shot:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/W300/FULLRES/W300hSLI0080.HTM

Scroll down to near bottom of this Canon XSi review to see the thumbnail crops of the beer bottle labeling comparing against 5D, D700, D300, & XTi:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/XSI/XSIA.HTM

Also note the ISO3200 image of the doll in the Sony W300 review, would be useful image or adequate resolution/sharpness for many...so the question begs why is the Canon XSi dumbed down to a limit of ISO1600 when a much smaller PnS sensor can make useable images @3200?

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/W300/W300A.HTM
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
I'm helping my sister pick a camera for her needs:

I need something for the archive, probably a compact digital point-and-shoot. It should have optical stabilization, as not all archives (including the one I'll be in for November) permit tripods. It has to work well in low light (no flash permitted) and have excellent macro capabilities (shooting a document a foot or so away). In addition, it should be small, have a reasonable battery life, and make as little noise as possible (so I don't annoy other folks in the archive). Ideally, it should use some standard rechargeable battery, so that I can carry spares.

She wants to spend less than $200, and was looking at the Canon SD700 ELPH or the Fujifilm Finepix F50fd. Though other options will certainly be entertained.

Thanks!
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
I'm helping my sister pick a camera for her needs:



She wants to spend less than $200, and was looking at the Canon SD700 ELPH or the Fujifilm Finepix F50fd. Though other options will certainly be entertained.

Thanks!

One I mentioned above, but it's more than $200.

For archive? What type of archive (locations)? Depending on what kind, if indoors, you'll probably want something that has a wider angle lens, than the 2 you've mentioned...that's a fairly substantial limitation, IMHO. And you should know that from your own photography experiences so far.

Size and low light performance are relative/subjective measures, you'll have to be more specific. Fuji will have an improved higher MP sensor on the market early next year, it is said...
and more importantly for your sister's usage, supposedly better DR:

Fuji promises better than F31 performance
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092308fujifilm.asp

Super CCD EXR will initially appear in a 12 megapixel 1/1.6" sensor premium compact camera, due for launch in Spring 2009...The new color filter array is designed so that there are always adjacent pixels recording the same color. This allows pixel binning (the combination of information from adjacent pixels to make larger effective pixels and help reduce noise), of pixels recording the same color. The result should be 6 megapixel images with none of the false color that can appear in existing pixel-binning modes which combine information from different colored pixels. "We think the signal-to-noise ratio of the sensor means pixel quality in dark regions is superior to the F31fd," Nishimura.


You'll want one that can do a good job for incandescent lighting, (not many are good in this area, some are pretty bad like the Canon's), where their auto WB's tend to fail. Don't think you're sister is going to want to deal with things like proper WB, so manual setting is out of the question; you want one that is fully auto, just point, press shutter (faster AF is good) and record image.

Other than the Ricoh, I can't think of any PnS that makes any noise that could be said to be a distraction in a quiet environment (this would be sound of zoom lens moving in and out), as unlike dSLR (if you wait for the new 3/4ths standard models to come out later that would be different, but then given dd's usual buying patterns, I assume this is *urgent*), there are no sounds from a physical mirror/shutter system, it's all electronic in a PnS...you should know that already ;).

If AA batteries, then size is limited to how compact/thin you can go.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
Don't worry about the compact so much. When she says archive, think a basement under a library full of books. Lighting is poor, and the environment is very quiet and acoustically live. This camera will be used as a copy machine for documents that she can't touch, or at the very least remove from the room. Also, no flash is allowed.

I like the thought of a wider-angle lens, and a close minimum distance is also a must. The purchasing window is very short, so the camera should be out now.

Thanks!
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a Fixture
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
17,497
Location
USA
Don't worry about the compact so much. When she says archive, think a basement under a library full of books. Lighting is poor, and the environment is very quiet and acoustically live. This camera will be used as a copy machine for documents that she can't touch, or at the very least remove from the room. Also, no flash is allowed.

I like the thought of a wider-angle lens, and a close minimum distance is also a must. The purchasing window is very short, so the camera should be out now.

Thanks!

Why not use an SLR, for example borrow your 40D and an IS lens? Is this an illegal copyright infringement operation?
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,728
Location
Horsens, Denmark
Why not use an SLR, for example borrow your 40D and an IS lens? Is this an illegal copyright infringement operation?

Not illegal. My sister is a historian, working on her PhD. She has fellowships to do research at various universities and libraries around the country. She will need this permanently, so a loan from me won't work. Something smaller than an SLR would be beneficial.
 

nikopol

What is this storage?
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
4
... This camera will be used as a copy machine for documents that she can't touch, or at the very least remove from the room. ...

The archive itself is probably rather dark, but documents are generally well lighted (or can easily be taken do a decent light source). Therefore, no reason for extreme ISO values or particularly wide angles (distorsion issues ..) Clarity and readability of the photos are obviously paramount, so I'd consider a camera with a good lens, IS, a decent macro capability, and maybe options for manual white balance as well (or at least a reliable incandescent WB). If it is possible to bring a small tripod, it would be great, of course ....
 

nikopol

What is this storage?
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
4
FWIW, I noticed that Canon's Powershot A590is presently sells for $120 at Amazon. It seems to fit the bill just fine -- and while it may not be the most elegant of pocketcams, it has the advantage of AA batteries and a decent grip. It was recently well reviewed at Imaging-Resource, and its predecessor the A570is got relatively high marks at DPReview.
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
A coworker of mine bought a Nikon Coolpix 7900, he is not happy with it.

Apparently it does a HORRIBLE job at auto-focusing in low-light conditions, taking tons and tons of blurry photographs.

He is looking to trade it in for a different camera.

Does anyone have a recommendations of cameras under $400.

The options he wants are multiple shutter speed settings, good focus, 3x zoom or more, good video and COMPACT.

If you need more information let me know and I will ask him.

Just 3 years late :D

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09020402fujifilmfinepixf200exr.asp#specs

More efficient pixel binning, dropping resolution down to 3MP or less (which was fine 3yrs ago), you get 12,800 ISO...w00t.

Finally a thin Fuji that has a wider angle lens 28mm-140mm equiv, and unlike previous models, independent control of aperture & shutter speed, custom white balance. Either let the camera auto select sensor mode, or you can drop down to 6MP and get extended dynamic range, as the camera does it's own type of limited HDR processing in camera, cool.

No manual focus, however :(. Would be nice if Fuji could have made a brighter highest f-stop...only goes to 3.3 @wide angle setting :(

A bit expensive too in today's market @MSRP$400.

Wait for the reviews, I'm sure the Fuji has some hidden flaws.
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
As could be expected, too much NR is the downfall of most PnS digicams :(.

If only Fuji would make an 'enthusiast' PnS with the new sensor inside, but keep it pocketable...unlike the bulky Canon G10, a wider range zoom, unlike the paltry <3x on the Panasonic LX3.

A step in the right direction, but it's only 1/2 way there to image nirvana.

http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com/2009/02/fuji-f200exr-at-1600-iso.html

So am I thrilled? No ... not quite. I like the high ISO trick, and I love the dynamic range trick. I even like that they reintroduced a full manual mode to this camera. It allows setting of aperture and shutter speed independently.

But they use sensor shake to stabilize. And they have no live histogram. Few buttons and dials on the outside. And no RAW mode! This is a compact camera ... probably the best social snapshooter to come along in years. But it is not really an enthusiast's camera at all ... I've become addicted to the serious control I get with my Canon G10. I can no longer enjoy fiddling in crappy menus for 20 or 30 seconds to set up the next shot. That's a waste of time and energy.

Samsung sort of has the right idea with their new semi-pocketable, 36mm thick, HD capable WB500 starting at 24mm...going all the way out to 240mm, if only they had a Fuji sensor, raw mode, histogram, etc

http://www.samsungcamera.com/product/pro_view.asp?prol_uid=4584&cat_uid=176
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
These new Samsung's the industry 1st's with high res. 960,000 pixel OLED screens, and full manual controls (including focus and WB)/wide-angle lens are interesting/exciting news. Now if they only could drop that Fuji sensor in them, with a Raw mode.

WTF is up with what appears to be actual analog (TL320 only), repairs needed, red colored/watch type spindle/sweeping hands gauges---click on top panel image? Couldn't they have used psuedo analog, electronic 'watch hands' instead??? Real mechanical watch hands, like the seconds hand, fall off with the slightest impact (at least that happens on my mother's watch).

Only 21mm thick on the 5x 24-120mm WB100 (TL320)...but while F2.8 at wide is nice, F7.3 at Tele is very slow! Would have been better if they made it slightly thicker, and included large style lens like the WB550- for faster aperture and maybe higher quality lens?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09022303samsungtl320hz15.asp

Where were these PnS's when I needed them 3yrs ago?

Now just have to wait for that Canon dSLR 1080p, 3in OLED 900k, FF Rebel update...for <$1k :p
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
your choice of 1 of 2 PnS digicams, or a HD camcorder from Panny, 1 prize/day until end of May, got to reg @ the site, to be able to enter:


link
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,865
Location
Michigan
That actually looks really good.
The sample pics from Canon's US site look pretty good, but they're all ISO80, so the jury is still out on how the camera will perform overall.

http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/PowerShot_2009/PS_S90/sampleimg/sampleimg_1.jpg
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/PowerShot_2009/PS_S90/sampleimg/sampleimg_2.jpg
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/PowerShot_2009/PS_S90/sampleimg/sampleimg_3.jpg

Their Japan site has one image that's different from the US site and it doesn't look so good. There's a pile of noise in the sky and it's ISO80. :(
http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/powershot/s90/img/sample/outside-org.jpg
 

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
The sample pics from Canon's US site look pretty good, but they're all ISO80, so the jury is still out on how the camera will perform overall.

Their Japan site has one image that's different from the US site and it doesn't look so good. There's a pile of noise in the sky and it's ISO80. :(
http://cweb.canon.jp/camera/powershot/s90/img/sample/outside-org.jpg


Well while I'm waiting for that image to load on my ultra slow dialup, I can see it's in bright outdoor light. I want to see what ISO400 or so looks like inside a restaurant using the 28mm f2.0 setting. I only need a 600pixel width image for that. Ah crap, FF doesn't have a rotate image function, my neck is killing me trying to look at that image, so far I don't see a ton of noise, maybe it's a Windoze problem :p, or a calibrated Dell monitor problem :p

.... oops, I noticed my browser is displaying @only 23%, where you can't see any noise. I take it you have a high-res 30in monitor, for sure you'll see noise that way, but then you can see noise in most images from almost any source when you go to *that* Xtreme. How many people who buy the S90 are going to be looking at the image that size, most of the time? Not for my uses. At best I'd go to only 50% and not very often either, do you see noise @50%?

Damn I forgot, you've got that 4k res projector, don't you? :)

Well Ken Rockwell says ISO80 on most PnS is as bad as dSLR's @ISO800 (which would be great if he was referring to a D3 or like model)...full of noise, for pixel peepers that is.

How many PnS types are using it for massively large image resolutions or massive cropping (like airshows where you don't have a long, long tele to get you close enough :p ).

But the IQ pretty much has to be better than prior PnS's save for *maybe* an old Fuji 6MP. But then the old Fuji had few of the manual controls, far fewer options and no ability for shooting RAW. How many PnS's do you know of that you can shoot (slowly compared to dSLR, of course) Jpeg + Raw? How many have f2.0 on the wide end? Can think of only the Panny LX3, and that one is fantastically limited with the 35mm equivalent of only 60mm on the long end.

S90 is going in the correct direction, and it's more compact than the Panny. Only thing lacking in features is a HD video mode, which the G11 does :(...S90's replacement next year will have. Ok, stepless zoom would be nice too. more aperture settings.

It's like Apple stock, you got to buy now before the price doubles...so says Ken R... don't you believe him? :D It's the greatest PnS camera there is! More functional than a dSLR, it's so wicked, Ken says so!

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/s90.htm

1.) First compact camera with two click-stopped direct control rings, which is better than DSLRs! Few compacts have even one control ring, and DSLRs have maybe one.
This means you can make your settings directly and instantly, without the stupid press-and-spin nonsense of DSLRs. The S90 lets you set your camera instantly, just like cameras of the old days. You can program the rings as you want. I program the ring around the lens as exposure compensation, and the one on the back as ISO. In manual mode, you can set one for aperture and another for shutter speed — just like a real camera!
You can flick the big front control ring with one fingertip. This is worlds better than the dorky top-mounted thing on the G10 and G11.
2.) Fast f/2.0 zoom. This lets in twice as much light as any f/2.8 L SLR zoom, Powershot, G series or whatever.
3.) Full-Sized Image Sensor. Well, not really, but considering that other makers lie about their 4/3 system DSLRs and E-P1 PEN as having full sized sensors (they are really only have quarter-sized), I'm saying "full sized sensor" here to light up the fact that the S90 and G11 have the biggest sensors of any compact cameras I've seen. Yes, they are a lot smaller than even the puny 4/3 system sensors, but about 20% bigger in each dimension (40% bigger in area) than most other compacts. (The old G10 also has the same sized sensor, but with too many pixels jammed in.)
OK, so it's still a compact camera sensor and won't be anywhere near as good as real SLR like a Digital Rebel or a Nikon D40, but as compacts go, this could be a step towards improvement.
The most important potential improvement from Canon's "high sensitivity sensor" isn't at high ISOs, which are used infrequently, but at low ISO 80. Sadly all compact cameras have sensors so tiny that even at ISO 80 they are very noisy and use firmware noise reduction, which smudges over details. A compact at ISO 80 is about as noisy as a DSLR at ISO 800

Ok, after 10min, image has loaded and I can't see any noise in the sky...must be a Windoze problem! What I can see instantly however is the metal radio? tower on the hill is of very poor detail. Must be a ton of noise reduction software at work to smudge all detail? Same loss of detail in all of the green foliage...ah well, it's not supposed to be a D3 or D3X. Even the foreground doesn't look very sharp- but again, full res, how would it compare to any other PnS?. Where does it say it's ISO80 in that link, I don't read Japanese?

Lens or image processing flaws, or both< I'll bet both? And how good would such an image be if you processed RAW files, sharpened it later, run though light noise-reduction software?
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,275
Location
I am omnipresent
I just bought a Canon SX100IS to replace my now-dead Casio Exlim. As of yet I have no comment on it as a camera, except that it works a great deal better than the camera in my phone.
 
Top