Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 29, 2007, 9:20 PM   #11
Member
 
gerrydee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 83
Default

Tullio wrote:
Quote:
I can't speak about the S3'cause I don't owe onebut I had an S2 (also well praised by reviewers) and sold it after 2 months. The primary reasons were:slowAF system, poor low light performance, poor built-in flash, poor focusing at 432mm and...I got the infamous "memory card error" on a perfectly good SD card that I currently use with my dSLR. So, I'm not sure you can go 100% by the reviews. I found the H1 to beway superior when compared tothe S2. If having excellent video capabilityis your #1 feature, get a video camera instead. Some can also take still photos.
To each his own, but the S3 has received top marks by reviewers, whom I believe know more about cameras than you or I even if we both own DSLR's .
Steve, DPR, CNET etc...are experts at what they do. You may have had a defective camera because I have seen nothing but praise for the S2.
The Canon S3 is so popular it has it's own dedicated website with over 2000 members and growing. The Flickr! S3 site has over 1200 members, the S2 group has 900.
This kind of popularity is not based on poor performance, it is an aknowledgement of a superior product.
gerrydee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2007, 11:07 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

gerrydee-

Might we please have some posted photo samples from your personal fabulous Canon S-3 so that everyone can be sure that the photo quality of the Canon S-3 exceeds the photos from the Sony H-5.

Thanks for posting some really good photo samples from the Canon S-3. you will post samples won't you?

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2007, 10:11 PM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 30
Default

[align=left]I am not interested in the video of the camera. Do you still recommend the H5-9.
Also if I were look to a Ultra camera is there one that uses AA that has at least a 6x optical with viewfinder? Thanks -gle
[/align]
gle56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2007, 10:55 PM   #14
Member
 
gerrydee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 83
Default

mtclimber wrote:
Quote:
gerrydee-

Might we please have some posted photo samples from your personal fabulous Canon S-3 so that everyone can be sure that the photo quality of the Canon S-3 exceeds the photos from the Sony H-5.

Thanks for posting some really good photo samples from the Canon S-3. you will post samples won't you?

MT/Sarah
Why Sarah, what a strange request. Since you shoot both the fabulous Canon S3 and the Sony H5, being a professional photographer, are your photos not good enough? We could then compare side by side.
l8r
gerrydee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 10:26 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

gle-

If you were very interested in the video capabilities of your proposed UZ camera, then it would be quite logical indeed to take a good look at the Canon S-3. The S-3 excels in the video clip department.

However, when you consider the photographic capabilities of the proposed UZ camera, especially under low light level shooting conditions, then IMHO the Sony H-5 does a somewhat better job, and the soon to be on the dealer's shelves, Sony H-9 should doa bit better.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 10:26 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

gle-

If you were very interested in the video capabilities of your proposed UZ camera, then it would be quite logical indeed to take a good look at the Canon S-3. The S-3 excels in the video clip department.

However, when you consider the photographic capabilities of the proposed UZ camera, especially under low light level shooting conditions, then IMHO the Sony H-5 does a somewhat better job, and the soon to be on the dealer's shelves, Sony H-9 should doa bit better.

MT/Sarah
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 10:46 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

gle, my H1 hasawesome video capabilities,more than good enough for its purposes. The only advantage of the Canon S3 video over the H1/H2/H5is the fact that you can zoom in duringrecording (more like a video camera), but that's about it. The stereo sound is a joke since the mics are so close together. You can not possibly have a decent stereo effect.Don't take me wrong, the S3 is probably a good camera (better than the S2, I suppose), however, you have to take reviews with a grain of salt. They test cameras in a very controlled environment (shooting the same subject on a sunny day at 2 o'clock in the afternoon with plenty of light and no high contrast will hardly give you an idea of the camera's real capabilities or short comings). When you actually go out and start taking pictures after sunset when light conditionis not as goodor in harsher light situations (lots of shade and bright areas mixed together), that's when you'll find limitations and those are the conditions the S2 fails to perform adequately (I doubt the S3 performs that much better since most components are the same between the two models). I'd seriously consider the H7/H9 (choose one depending or your needs) since they are just around the corner. I truly believe they will beat the S3 hands down.Always remember that just about any goodcamera can producedecent quality images. The question is,what is the ratio between the number of pictures you take vs. how many youkeep. That's what differentiates one camera from another. For every 100 pictures I take with my H1, 85 I keep. With the S2, I'd keep about 60.
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2007, 10:17 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 34
Default

You should also consider the Fuji S6500FD. Its a 6MegPix cam with 10x zoom (starting from a wide-angle 28mm going up to 300mm). Uses AA batteries, and has an EVF.It doesn't have IS, but compensates by having really really good high ISO image quality. This same high ISO ability allows it to be arguably the best low light ultrazoom camera out there.

Its a bit on the heavy side going on around 600g, but in my opinion the weight helps to stabilize the unit when taking photos.You might also appreciate the fact that, as a novice aiming to learn, it has manual zoom rings allowing for almost instantaneous zooming from 0% to the full telephoto position.

I'm a novice myself, but I've found that my understanding of photography has progressed immensely while experimenting with this unit.Image quality is fantastic. I highly recommend it.
Shahmatt 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 1:41 AM.