If the S3 replacement doesn't have.... I won't buy it.

[Lee Jay]

The average purchaser picks up a camera in Best Buy, Ritz or CC and
when he/she zooms (as they will definitely will do) and they see
the significantly wider angle and (less important) tele
differences...they will gravitate to the Sony or Oly. They will SEE
the difference with their own eyes..and the Canon will be left on
the shelf.

I agree. And they will not realize what they are giving up until its too late. That's why manufacturers market "x-zoom" and "MP" instead of the much harder to understand "aperture" or "f-stop" - the average purchaser is just too ignorant to understand these things.

It's sad too, because faster f-stops would do them more good then either more "x-zoom" or more "MP".

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[jimr]

Let's agree to disagree. I think the minor (at longer focal length F stops) advantage of the Canon is far less important than the significant wide angle advantage of both the OLy and the Sony and that is what I would tell my less informed friends if they were out to purchase a super zoom. You find the f stop difference more important.

The average purchaser picks up a camera in Best Buy, Ritz or CC and
when he/she zooms (as they will definitely will do) and they see
the significantly wider angle and (less important) tele
differences...they will gravitate to the Sony or Oly. They will SEE
the difference with their own eyes..and the Canon will be left on
the shelf.

I agree. And they will not realize what they are giving up until
its too late. That's why manufacturers market "x-zoom" and "MP"
instead of the much harder to understand "aperture" or "f-stop" -
the average purchaser is just too ignorant to understand these
things.

It's sad too, because faster f-stops would do them more good then
either more "x-zoom" or more "MP".

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[saotupp]

--

If a man empties his purse into his head, no one can take it away from him. An investment of knowledge always pays the best interest.

 

[Lee Jay]

Let's agree to disagree. I think the minor (at longer focal length
F stops) advantage of the Canon is far less important than the
significant wide angle advantage of both the OLy and the Sony and
that is what I would tell my less informed friends if they were out
to purchase a super zoom. You find the f stop difference more
important.

I don't exactly find it more important, I find it shameful that they traded faster f-stops for more "x-zoom". I'd rather the Olympus be 28-336 (12x) and f2.8-f3.5 than 28-504 and f2.8-f4.5. I'd even be willing to go to 24-200 for faster f-stops. In other words, I like wide, but I'd trade tele to get it if it means keeping faster f-stops (which it does). I will not trade faster f-stops for more on both ends.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[Rockchan]

It is very important to average consumer. Just tell them that they don't need to move but still can take wider picture is very attactive. Not only convenient, there is sometimes situation where you can't move even you don't mind (e.g. there is a wall behind you).

Many people here know the important of F-stop. However, unless the difference is pretty large, average consumer may not be able to find the difference. Moreover, they may never have the chance to compare their result to other long zoom p&s. Even they know there is difference, they will not spend time to understand the reason. It is also too late when they find that what is the meaning of F-stop.

Therefore, in the marketing point of view, zoom is much more important than F-stop when considering the sales figures.

Let's agree to disagree. I think the minor (at longer focal length
F stops) advantage of the Canon is far less important than the
significant wide angle advantage of both the OLy and the Sony and
that is what I would tell my less informed friends if they were out
to purchase a super zoom. You find the f stop difference more
important.

I don't exactly find it more important, I find it shameful that
they traded faster f-stops for more "x-zoom". I'd rather the
Olympus be 28-336 (12x) and f2.8-f3.5 than 28-504 and f2.8-f4.5.
I'd even be willing to go to 24-200 for faster f-stops. In other
words, I like wide, but I'd trade tele to get it if it means
keeping faster f-stops (which it does). I will not trade faster
f-stops for more on both ends.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[Lee Jay]

It is very important to average consumer. Just tell them that they
don't need to move but still can take wider picture is very
attactive.

As I've said a dozen times, I WANT WIDER!!!

Not only convenient, there is sometimes situation where
you can't move even you don't mind (e.g. there is a wall behind
you).

Many people here know the important of F-stop. However, unless the
difference is pretty large, average consumer may not be able to
find the difference. Moreover, they may never have the chance to
compare their result to other long zoom p&s. Even they know there
is difference, they will not spend time to understand the reason.
It is also too late when they find that what is the meaning of
F-stop.

Yep, I agree. And that's why manufacturers can take advantage of them.

Therefore, in the marketing point of view, zoom is much more
important than F-stop when considering the sales figures.

Yep. But they won't sell one to me, or most other educated buyers. I'm even a bit grumpy about the f3.5 on my S3. I'm essentially always deep into IS territory at the long end of the zoom range, even outdoors. Modestly cloudy day (EV11), ISO 80, f3.5 = 1/120th at 432mm equivalent (450mm really, but that's another story). That's 2 stops of IS just for good quality in good light. Inside? EV6 at ISO 400 gives you 1/20th. These little sensors have a tough time beyond ISO 400, regardless of the nonsense "ISO 5,000" or "ISO 10,000" on the packaging. The Fuji's can manage about one stop better.

The Sony 717 was f2-f2.4. The G6 was f2-f3. Their modern replacements are f2.8-f4.5 and f2.8-f4.8. That's a testament to what sells, regardless of what works.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[Robert Deutsch]

The Sony 717 was f2-f2.4. The G6 was f2-f3. Their modern
replacements are f2.8-f4.5 and f2.8-f4.8. That's a testament to
what sells, regardless of what works.

And don't forget: what costs less to make!

Bob

 

[aretzios]

I am anxiously waiting for the replacement: S4/S5. I want to add
two items to your list :

-S4/S5 should look like a DSLR camera. S3 looks like a plastic toy.
-Manual and automatic focus and zoom.

Do you have any idea when the replacement will be announced???

I know Canon can do it!

Who cares if it looks like a dSLR? Who wants to cart around a large compact camera?

Manual zoom is not an issue. The current electronic one is just fine. The current manual zoom needs some refinement

What this camera needs are the following:
-much better low light focusing (without a flash)
-less noise in higher ISOs
-wider at the low end

-better EVF/LCD resolution. The size is not a problem, the resolution is (and I do like the articulation)
-support of RAW without excessive delays
-Ideally, 720p video mode

I think that all of this is possible but I doubt that it will happen. At least, not this season.

 

[aretzios]

If you are waiting for Canon to deliver Sony/Oly competition, you
maybe disappointed. Canon and Nikon have eliminated completed
models, dumbed down to end P&S model to avoid competition for the
highly profitable DSLR/Lens products. Canon will not even increase
EFV and LCD resolution to match excellent Sony features.
Oly/Pany/Sony/Fiji are trying to get into the DSLR line but cannot
bet the farm on them so each will continue to develop high end P&S
and transition cameras.

Develop some flexibility and shop around for a camera that meets
your needs. There is an exciting, full featured world out there
other than Canon and Nikon.

I would agree that Canon is terribly conflicted about superzooms because they can seriously cannibalize their low end dSLRs. If they improve the successor to the S3 to match some of the Olympus 550 or Sony H9 features, and provide a much better low light experience, that would seriously compromise sale of low end dSLRs and replacement lenses.

 

[yahooqq]

lets all wait wait wait.. wait for canon close its door. no more upgrade.. then buy it

 

[Stephen McDonald]

The photo on the Canon forum on another discussion website, that shows

what appears to be a Canon S4-IS? The front of this camera shows the model number and the usual specs, such as 15X----6mm to 90mm and 9-MP.

There's no indication about the CCD size, so it can't be determined what the 35mm-equivalent focal-length would be. If the CCD was .4-inch, the focal-length would be 36mm to 540mm. If it was a .55-inch CCD, it would be about 32.7mm to 490mm. The photo is from a photography website in Thailand and the text in in Thai. Isn't posting a link here to another discussion forum website banned? Otherwise I'd do that. Perhaps this has already been noted here and discussed? There seems to be some doubt about the authenticity of this photo on the other forum.
--
Steve McDonald

 

[Robert Deutsch]

The photo on the Canon forum on another discussion website, that shows

what appears to be a Canon S4-IS? [snip]There seems to be some doubt about the authenticity
of this photo on the other forum.

Whenever new cameras that are expected to be announced, there are what appear to be "sneek preview" photos of these camears on some discussion group. Almost invariably, they turn out to be fakes.

Bob

 

[saotupp]

The photo on the Canon forum on another discussion website, that shows
what appears to be a Canon S4-IS? The front of this camera shows
the model number and the usual specs, such as 15X----6mm to 90mm
and 9-MP.
There's no indication about the CCD size, so it can't be determined
what the 35mm-equivalent focal-length would be. If the CCD was
.4-inch, the focal-length would be 36mm to 540mm. If it was a
.55-inch CCD, it would be about 32.7mm to 490mm. The photo is from
a photography website in Thailand and the text in in Thai. Isn't
posting a link here to another discussion forum website banned?
Otherwise I'd do that. Perhaps this has already been noted here
and discussed? There seems to be some doubt about the authenticity
of this photo on the other forum.
--
Steve McDonald

That's a very old picture and totally fake. More likely leak has also been announced here and in that specs were 12x optical zoom, 1/2.5" sensor 8MP, 2.5" flip lcd screen. That guy was right on the money with TX1 and those other cameras so it's very likely that this new S-series camera will have those specs above.

--

If a man empties his purse into his head, no one can take it away from him. An investment of knowledge always pays the best interest.

 

[PixelMinded]

S3 Max aperture: @28mm: --; @31mm: --; @36mm: 2.7; @432: 3.5; @450: --; 504mm: --.

H9 Max aperture: @28mm: --; @31mm: 2.7; @36mm: ???; @432: ???; @450: 4.5; 504mm: --.

UZI Max aperture: @28mm: 2.8; @31mm: ???; @36mm: ???; @432: ???; @450: ???; @504mm: 4.5.

We need to know the question marks above, F4.5 of Oly or Sony, should not be compared to the F3.5 of S3 because these f-numbers are not at the same focal point. The UZI in particular might be much less than it seems on the specs sheet with regards to lens speed, how much is its max aperture @432mm, so that we can make a fair comparison between that value and S3's f3.5 on its tele end. I guess that the difference will so small that it is completely overshadowed by the advantage of the extended focal range (for those who seek zoom power and ignore its degrading effect on image quality: PF/CF more than f-numbers).

There are many other points to be taken into consideration when comparing these cameras:

• S3 has an excellent movie mode, I bet neither the Sony nor the Oly can beat or even equal S3 in this respect.

• Oly lenses are generally excellent as far as barrel distortion is concerned, Canon lenses are horrible especially @ wider than 35mm eq (eg Pro1's lens & EF-S 17-85mm IS). Possibly this is what makes Canon reluctant to offer more PowerShot models with wider than 35mm than they do currently.

Canon's policy seems to be if an additional feature or functionality is going to result in bad image quality than dropping it is better, so as to avoid image quality criticism to their cameras. A bad policy IMHO, they should not care about the stupid criticism (ie if u don't want barrel distortion, all u have to do is to avoid using the widest angle) and u should be happy with havign the extra wide range (28-35mm), which can be used and corrected in PP if necessary.

--
Ahmed Elnagar

 

[Lee Jay]

S3 Max aperture: @28mm: --; @31mm: --; @36mm: 2.7; @432: 3.5; @450:
--; 504mm: --.

H9 Max aperture: @28mm: --; @31mm: 2.7; @36mm: ???; @432: ???;
@450: 4.5; 504mm: --.

UZI Max aperture: @28mm: 2.8; @31mm: ???; @36mm: ???; @432: ???;
@450: ???; @504mm: 4.5.

We need to know the question marks above, F4.5 of Oly or Sony,
should not be compared to the F3.5 of S3 because these f-numbers
are not at the same focal point.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=22288576

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)