Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Canon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 28, 2005, 11:29 AM   #11
alg
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 9
Default

The last photo the stone wall by the lake and the grass appears more natural to me with the Sony. The cannon seemd to have a reddish tint to the wall.

Did anybody else notice this?
alg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2005, 12:37 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 24
Default

WHen I first heard of the H1 I considered it an option for my new camera, but after looking at the specs I quickly ruled it out. 1/1000 max shutter!?!? WHat were you thinking SOny? I live in Arizona and shoot mostly outdoors. I need a little quicker shutter then that! .7 fps continuous shooting vs 2.4, no flip and twist screen (which if you have never had one you do not know how great they are)... Plus I'm not a memory stick fan.

The 30 second shutter and less noise is nice, but not worth the features I'd lose to get it.
Louddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2005, 8:09 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11
Default

It's really difficult to pick between them, they're so similar! I would say you really can't pick a clear winner based on image quality alone; have to factor in other features, and in that case the Canon will most likely come out ahead.
Steve2005 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2005, 11:00 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
atlantagreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 243
Default

There are going to have to be a lot more sample pics posted by the major reviewers before the quirks of each are fully known. I'm tapped out money wise, and since I'm small potatos on my site I doubt I'll get the makers to send me review units to test out, myself.



My *personal* opinion based on what Jeff posted on his site (dcresource) is that the Sony seems to be just slightly ahead of the Canon in terms of noise and overall image quality, with the exception of the greater CA visible in the Sony images. And this comes from someone who in his personal photography life, usually does prefer Canon. From what I've seen in his samples and a scattering of others for each camera on the web however, I'm afraid I'd have to say that I personally do not feel that EITHER camera has what you could call "outstanding" or class-leadingphoto quality.

Time will tell, but I feel this may just be a case of the two makers rushing to get their models out first, and maybe missing out on the design and fine tuning of them along the way. Again, we'll see.
atlantagreg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2005, 9:25 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4
Default

atlantagreg wrote:
Quote:
There are going to have to be a lot more sample pics posted by the major reviewers before the quirks of each are fully known. I'm tapped out money wise, and since I'm small potatos on my site I doubt I'll get the makers to send me review units to test out, myself.



My *personal* opinion based on what Jeff posted on his site (dcresource) is that the Sony seems to be just slightly ahead of the Canon in terms of noise and overall image quality, with the exception of the greater CA visible in the Sony images. And this comes from someone who in his personal photography life, usually does prefer Canon. From what I've seen in his samples and a scattering of others for each camera on the web however, I'm afraid I'd have to say that I personally do not feel that EITHER camera has what you could call "outstanding" or class-leading photo quality.

Time will tell, but I feel this may just be a case of the two makers rushing to get their models out first, and maybe missing out on the design and fine tuning of them along the way. Again, we'll see.
+1:roll: agreed. But don't forget that we're talking about entry-level cameras !
azazga001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2005, 6:48 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 24
Default

The Nikon 8800 (a $1,000 camera a few months ago) can now be had for under $600 if you are a good shopper. It's 8mp and supposedly a great, as close as you can get to DSLR quality,camera. I was highly considering it, but noticed that it too has a lot of noise (only 350mm max zoom and a nikon battery too). My point is that if you look hard enough you will find problems and things you don't like about any camera that is not a DSLR with L glass. (and cost $5000 and weighs 50 pounds...)

I need a small light camera that gives me a lot of options. To this point the S1 has done that, and it looks like the S2 will be a nice step up. I considered the Panasonic and the Sony H1, but frankly, neither has shown image quality superior enough to out weigh the loss in features (compared to the S2) for me. Again, my point, everyone has their own priorities so there is no one perfect camera for all.

And.. just my $.02, the samples I've seen from the S2 so far seem noticably sharper then the H1, and sharpness is one of my big complaints on the S1. I've been dealing with the noise on the S1 and have become a pro in neat image...
Louddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2005, 7:11 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 113
Default

"I've been dealing with the noise on the S1 and have become a pro in neat image..."





This is why im looking at the Z3 now, and wasn't before. The S2 is loaded with noise. And if I am going to have a noisy camera, it's not going to be 500$ The Z3 can be had for 269$ and it also has a great high quality movie mode that allows 12x zooming - and it uses AA's. The only thing it lacks is the swivel LCD.



It seems going this route, and saving the money for an F10 or DSLR is the way to go.

montana500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 30, 2005, 10:52 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
atlantagreg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 243
Default

azazga001 wrote:


agreed. But don't forget that we're talking about entry-level cameras
_____________________________________________

I'm not sure buyers who spend $500.00 consider a camera an "entry level" camera, though. I would put the Canon A510 or Fuji 300s more in that category. Once you reach the $500 mark, you're entering the enthusiast or low-end prosumer area (to me, anyway).
atlantagreg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31, 2005, 9:01 PM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 69
Default

i agree. a $500 camera is no toy.
turkish a. punkass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 2, 2005, 7:32 AM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 10
Default

Going back to the original Japanese site, the Panasonic FZ5 pics are here: http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/re...02/25/989.html
I think that Canon wins on features, but the Lumix is ahead on quality by a long shot. This really is a 3 way shootout. Perhaps we'll see a price war.
GrahamD is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:32 PM.