PowerShot S2 IS vs. Dimage A200

[janniklindquist]

Hi,

What a great focus-thread! Thanks for pointing me to it - I've been learning quite a few things! Until now I have almost always been using Flex Focus - but I'll give the spot-method a go. It seems to me that the thread basically shows that the A200 is a complex camera - rather than a flawed camera. So much wasted time could have been saved with a better manual!

Regarding the judgement on high ISO in A200: Ironically, the review at dpreview - which may seem to be the hardest - is the most favorable on this question:

ISO 800 is usable in a tight spot, and if you don't try and print too large. The noise reduction (which can be turned off) does remove a lot of fine detail, but - if your exposure is spot on - you can get perfectly usable results at ISO 800 when there is no alternative.

and

[*]Low high ISO noise, efficient noise reduction [/*][*]Wide range of ISO settings, usable ISO 800

[/*]
But the review at http://www.imaging-resource.com isn't entirely negative in this respect either:

Image Noise: Good noise performance at ISO 50-200, high noise and lost detail at ISO 400 & 800. The Konica Minolta DiMAGE A200's image noise was low at ISO 50, and quite acceptable at ISOs 100 and 200. Better yet, loss of subtle detail to the anti-noise processing at ISOs of 200 and below was relatively minor. At ISO 400, the loss of detail increased significantly, as did the noise itself, and at ISO 800, the images were both much noisier and much softer. The color balance also shifted somewhat at ISO 800, the noise in the blue channel contributing to a slightly bluish cast. Nonetheless, ISO 800 images would probably be quite usable for 4x6 prints, possibly 5x7s.

I have a handful of high ISO A200 shots which I am quite content with. I'll put them in a seperate PBase-gallery for you later today.

[janniklindquist]

Here you go:

http://www.pbase.com/janniklindquist/high_iso_400800

[pterrr]

Your high ISO shots look fine. I do still expect the technology to keep improving, and things will never be perfect. My current assesment is that the Fuji offers perhaps less than a stops worth of advantage vs the A200 in terms of ISO / noise, offset by the ~3 stop advantage of IS from the A200 and others!

One of these days I'll scan in and inspect a few of my ISO1600 negatives - I was and am quite happy with the results, but I doubt they would withstand the kind of anal scrutiny I've been subjecting to digital images since reading a few too many reviews, and viewing a few too many samples @ 100% on screen.:?

I particularly liked PICT1059.JPG from your gallery. I take it you're from Copenhagen? The most photographed subject around here for the last couple of years is a family friends' five year old half danish, half tanzanian son. Soon to be caught up with by his baby sister, no doubt.

Cheers,
pterrr

[janniklindquist]

Thanks for your comments. Yes, I am living in Copenhagen - and has been for 39 of my 40 years :-) I do realize that the picturesought tohave been available at 100 % - but it was too much of a hazzle to upload them to PBase again (rather than just copy the relevant pics to a new high iso gallery). I hope that they were of some use for your ISO-studies anyway!

Pict1059 is showing my son visiting his grandmother :-)

[pterrr]

janniklindquist wrote:

Thanks for your comments. Yes, I am living in Copenhagen - and has been for 39 of my 40 years :-) I do realize that the picturesought tohave been available at 100 % - but it was too much of a hazzle to upload them to PBase again (rather than just copy the relevant pics to a new high iso gallery). I hope that they were of some use for your ISO-studies anyway!

Pict1059 is showing my son visiting his grandmother :-)

100% would be more revealing, but it's nice to see things that look pretty much like photos, anyway. For candid family snaps and so on, absolutely pristine quality isn't necessarily all that important, but the atmosphere of ordinary lights, rather than a flash straight into someone's face, often is. The emotion to noise ratio of the picture of your son and his grandmother was quite convincing:G.

Anyway, I'm glad to have joined these forums and discussed here. My ISO studies are not over yet, but this has been an interesting thread.

[janniklindquist]

pterrr wrote:

janniklindquist wrote:

100% would be more revealing, but it's nice to see things that look pretty much like photos, anyway. For candid family snaps and so on, absolutely pristine quality isn't necessarily all that important, but the atmosphere of ordinary lights, rather than a flash straight into someone's face, often is. The emotion to noise ratio of the picture of your son and his grandmother was quite convincing:G.

Anyway, I'm glad to have joined these forums and discussed here. My ISO studies are not over yet, but this has been an interesting thread.

Indeed. Just to end it properly I created a new gallery - this time at my FotoTime-account (which is infinitely more easy to deal with than PBase). When you are up to further ISO-studies these almost untouched (5% compressed) versions of my A200 high ISO-pictures might be useful to you. Good luck with your camera-hunt :-)

[pterrr]

janniklindquist wrote:

Indeed. Just to end it properly I created a new gallery - this time at my FotoTime-account (which is infinitely more easy to deal with than PBase).

Thanks, I look forward to seeing it - seem to be missing a link, though.

[pterrr]

Not to worry, I found it myself. Google is my friend.

First impressions are that they seem to hold up rather better at full resolution than I expected. I feel that more potential S9500 buyers should take a second look at the A200.

Take care,
pterrr

[B1ue]

The A200 was high on my list for a while. Great image quality and most of the features I am looking for. Then I began reading about some people having problems with the camera, and the slow or just plain bad KM customer service they received. Some reported their cameras in the shop for months. Still on my list, but closer to the bottom now.

[pterrr]

B1ue wrote:

The A200 was high on my list for a while. Great image quality and most of the features I am looking for. Then I began reading about some people having problems with the camera, and the slow or just plain bad KM customer service they received. Some reported their cameras in the shop for months. Still on my list, but closer to the bottom now.

Hmmm, another thing I hadn't really taken into account. I wonder if there've been any attempts to rate the quality of support from different manufacturers.