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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 13, 2005, 12:17 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 141
Default

Perhaps one of the moderators is a Canon lover, and deleted the photos?

If this is the case, I hope they're honest ernough to tell me that my photos were deliberately removed. If that's the way things function around here, I'll then make sure that I never use these forums again.

I don't recall other photos suddenly vanishing in other threads - so my photos disappearing seems to be an exceptional occurrence. A very curious one, at that.
EOS RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 1:32 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

EOS RT wrote:
Quote:
If this is the case, I hope they're honest ernough to tell me that my photos were deliberately removed. If that's the way things function around here, I'll then make sure that I never use these forums again.
Don't be so paranoid. Probably just a server issue or some sort. I posted another image a couple posts prior to this from an S2. Full resolution, unedited straight from the camera.

That should help people judge as well. You should take a look if you are so interested and make a note to yourself whether it looks better or not.
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 1:51 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 141
Default

Actually, you're the one who sounds like he's got something up his butt...

Sorry if I hurt your feelings by saying (and showing) that the S2 produced lousy photos - but I'm just telling (and showing)my experiencelike it is - andsoliciting possible explanations.Prior to testing the S2, I had no bias either for or against the S2. And I've never had any bias for or against Canon or any other camera company.

...Yet my photos still disappeared...

I looked at your photo. It is certainly more clear than any of mine were at full wide... butI've definitely seen crisper photos from other digital cameras. Who knows, though? - 'crispness' might evenbe subjective...
EOS RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 1:02 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

EOS RT wrote:
Quote:
Actually, you're the one who sounds like he's got something up his butt...
lol, dude...I was just trying to be helpful. Why you getting so defensive? I doubt anyone removed the images intentionally. And it doesn't change the fact that there is still a discussion going on about them and that many of us DID see the images, so we know what your concern is.

Reason I posted my image is to show that it is likely that the camera you had was somehow faulty.

Though, I do agree that the images from the S2 could be a bit sharper.I'm sure it had to do with the lens mechanics.

I know there are about 2304892340 other S2 users out there. Maybe we can get a few more 100% crops (if not full images) posted for review to further verify...

P.S. I honestly do not have any bias towards a particular camera. I go by features and performance. I think the S2 is one of the better UZ's based on those two criteria, but I wouldn't necessarily say ithas the bestimage quality.

And, the fact of the matter is thateveryone who posted in this thread agreed with you. Even S2 owners. But, none of us could justify a reason, becauseour camera's seem to work fine.
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 1:09 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 243
Default

The S2 has MANY, MANY features BUT the picture quality really is CRAP for a camera of this price.


No matter what I do the images ALWAYS seem a LITTLE out of focus, they just don't seem as SHARP as they should be.


videosilva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 4:06 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 113
Default

videosilva wrote:
Quote:
The S2 has MANY, MANY features BUT the picture quality really is CRAP for a camera of this price.


No matter what I do the images ALWAYS seem a LITTLE out of focus, they just don't seem as SHARP as they should be.


This is correct. The S2 definitely has a "soft focus" issue. I love my S2, but I'm not going to sit here and lie to people over a material item. Alot of photos lack a "locked in" look. And I'm not talking about edge sharpness but what actually appears to be a lazy focus end result.
montana500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 6:55 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

videosilva wrote:
Quote:
The S2 has MANY, MANY features BUT the picture quality really is CRAP for a camera of this price.


No matter what I do the images ALWAYS seem a LITTLE out of focus, they just don't seem as SHARP as they should be.
Alright, here's another picture, straight from the camera. No editing has been done (aside from the liscence plate) Looks sharp to me, though it looks like I was using ISO 100...couldn't tell from the EXIF data.

I really don't think calling this camera CRAP for it's price is a fair statement. But, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

http://www.danshobbyshack.com/temp/car.jpg

P.S. Maybe you could provide solid evidence of your claim by posting images...It would be worth much more to someone who is looking to purchase the camera. Just saying the camera sucks doesn't say much when others are providing evidence otherwise...(unless you think the images I am posting sucks too...lol...can't argue against that!)


*edited for the following comment*

I'm a bit surprised to hear this comment from you videosilva after seeing the comments from you about how much better the S2 IS is than the *ist dSLR camera.
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2005, 7:08 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 407
Default

swgod98 wrote:
Quote:
videosilva wrote:
Quote:
The S2 has MANY, MANY features BUT the picture quality really is CRAP for a camera of this price.


No matter what I do the images ALWAYS seem a LITTLE out of focus, they just don't seem as SHARP as they should be.
Alright, here's another picture, straight from the camera. No editing has been done (aside from the liscence plate) Looks sharp to me, though it looks like I was using ISO 100...couldn't tell from the EXIF data.

I really don't think calling this camera CRAP for it's price is a fair statement. But, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

http://www.danshobbyshack.com/temp/car.jpg

P.S. Maybe you could provide solid evidence of your claim by posting images...It would be worth much more to someone who is looking to purchase the camera. Just saying the camera sucks doesn't say much when others are providing evidence otherwise...(unless you think the images I am posting sucks too...lol...can't argue against that!)


*edited for the following comment*

I'm a bit surprised to hear this comment from you videosilva after seeing the comments from you about how much better the S2 IS is than the *ist dSLR camera.
haha, nice touch on the license plate.

EOS RT - Do you think you could repost your pictures? I'm interested in this camera, but I'd like to examine these kinds of issues before I make such a large purchase.
Nizidramanii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2005, 2:19 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 141
Default

Ok... I'll try to re-post the photos.

Save them quickly, though, as they, too, might have a hidden expiry date on them (out of my control)...

First, the S2 Photo...


Attached Images
 
EOS RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2005, 2:26 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 141
Default

Now, the same photo (essentially) taken with the Olympus C-755...




Attached Images
 
EOS RT 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 12:10 PM.