Canon IXUS 255 HSCanon SX260 HSSamsung EX1Fuji F100fdRicoh R4Optio 555Oly C700UZ
George Veltchev: Sooo much stress around this little harmless noisy aphid ... but where are these photographic geniuses when you browse the photo challenges above, I wonder .... after the first top 3.. 4 images the rest seems a total garbage ....
Most people have given up on the challenges due to cheating by entrants and infighting between those that try to run it.
beavertown: Comparing this camera to Canon S series is naive.
Sour grapes all over this forum.
For small prints and web images I think the IXUS looks much better, can you demonstrate otherwise, I have already given the link to my album. Everyone doesn't need billboard prints or shoot in the dark, some people actually use their cameras for their holiday trips, and family etc. As I said, this camera delivers a lot of what I don't need and by the increasing use of phone cameras, I would say what most people don't need.
photo perzon: Brianj they look good to me. Does the rx100 seem better to you?
@ dpmaxwellI took your suggestion and had a look at the RX100 images, and they are excellent, no doubt about that.
So what went wrong with dpreviews examples, is it the mk III or a bad day for photography or do the flickr examples have a lot of PP.
I know that good results can be coaxed out of any camera, so is sony's jpg engine a dud?
brianj: The images look quiet bland, lacking in contrast and no real blacks, maybe EV -.3 would help, They look like they were taken in a smoke haze, no real vibrance to them at all. I get much better images from a cheap IXUS.
I guess I am shocked at how ordinary these examples look, I was prepared to be blown away and feel under pressure to buy a new camera. Everyone is frothing at the mouth at how good it is in the dark, but I shoot in the dark about 1% of the time, of course some people may shoot in the dark 99% so this will be a good camera for them. A good picture is more than just having low noise, and yet that seems to be the emphasis in these comments. it needs consistant and accurate WB, some of these shots look way off, too much cyan.
For me, this camera would deliver a lot of what I don't need, so fine, people can say, then don't buy it, but that's not the point of these comments, we are here to say what we think of the examples, and I think they are poor.
dpmaxwell: Canon fans seem really active around here lately. Something has them all riled up...
I make web sized images and small prints, why would I need to spend a huge amount for that. What is the use of a good blown up image if it is washed out.
jimjim2111: I'd not normally post such a lame off-topic question but what the heck.. after 2000 posts in the thread... have a 15 second break from worrying about the corner pixels..
I use my iphone for pub photos and I'm fine with that compromise. But for holiday photos, would an rx100 (i/ii/iii) achieve any improvement over my small canon ixus p&s for daytime, bright light, low iso landscapes. No pets, kids, evenings, results viewed on computer screen.
I would hang on to your IXUS if I was you and use the savings for your vacation as previous poster suggested. If you are worried about DR causing washed out skies then turn on Icontrast.
My $200 IXUS looks better, I wouldn't pay such a ridiculous amount for a camera. Maybe the sony can do higher ISO with less noise, but I seldom have that need. My album: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/5128303546/albums/ixus-255
The images look quiet bland, lacking in contrast and no real blacks, maybe EV -.3 would help, They look like they were taken in a smoke haze, no real vibrance to them at all. I get much better images from a cheap IXUS.
brianj: Let the person who has never downloaded copyright software, music or videos critisise him.
The latter, but I must admit english is becoming polluted with american spelling probably due to the internet.From the above link:English: criticise, criticizeUS: criticize
We speak english here in Australia!http://www.englishclub.com/writing/spelling_american-english.htm
Then feel free to criticise.
I could have used an alternate analogy due to the shortage of plutonium. Like, is selling guns and bullets a crime, no, not in most places, its using the gun to kill somebody that is a crime. Just because someone will sell you a gun doesn't make it right to kill someone with it, same as information, you do not have to act on it and do the crime. This is how it has always been, unless I have not noticed some change occuring in society.
Calling him names will do nothing. I can find out how to build an atomic bomb on the internet, it is up to me whether I build one, likewise with stealing an image, it is mine or your choice.
Let the person who has never downloaded copyright software, music or videos critisise him.
So the earth really is round !
jcmarfilph: Lets see, I will bring this ring flash, macro lens, telephoto lens, tripod, WA lens and many more plastic accessories.
Good Lord, I might as well bring a backpack for my iPhony's useless accessories.
Or just bring a proper camera.
Does a photo need to be about some sort of violence to draw people's attention?
How do you hold it with one hand, there is no finger hold on the front and no thumb grip on the back, and your thumb will be right on top of the video start button?