F
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Randy Wilson14823
Well-known member
- Messages
- 135
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks for the link
"Steve's Conclusion"
...
"The nearly flawless point-n-shoot automatic mode lets anyone take great pictures the first time they use it. "...
F
Frances
Guest
After looking at the images I don't think that there is any significant image improvement , If anything, they are as mediocre as the S10.
Now at the same time I can see improvement from the latest images of the
CP990 over the CP950 or CP800
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
By the way you welcome for the link.
Now at the same time I can see improvement from the latest images of the
CP990 over the CP950 or CP800
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
By the way you welcome for the link.
I
ian
Guest
Hmmm. I can't agree.
First of all, 90% of the images in Steve's S20 review seem to be missing, so
I'm not sure what you're looking at.
Second, I think people are losing sight, literally, of what's really happening
with the 3.3MP cameras. The problem is this. Now that all these images at
full size are bigger than the biggest monitors, you start examining images
on a pixel by pixel basis. Take these two images of Phils
(removed http so they won't inline)
One from S10
photo.askey.net/gallery/original.asp?orig= gallery/canons10_samples/originals/991023-0754-23.jpg
Another from S20
photo.askey.net/gallery/original.asp?orig= gallery/canons20_samples/originals/000112-1742-17.jpg
What I see is two images that totally fill my screen, both with
comparable image quality based on what I can see. Pixel for pixel they're both
pretty good, and may be equivalent to each other.
The difference is, the S20 image has 60% more pixels and is
30% wider/taller.
Print each one at 8x10 and the S20 will blow away the S10 easily.
If they both contain the same information per pixel and the S20 has
more pixels per inch for any given fixed size output medium
then that means more information per inch and that is a valid
objective measure of higher quality.
Nothing you can do on your limited sized screen will show you that in a
meaningful way until you have something like the objective resolution
target on Imaging Resource.
That's why the CP990 looks so impressive today, because it blows away
all the competition in a purely objective measure of resolution.
Frankly, the CP990 shots of people, and places haven't really impressed
me much, partially because of boring subjects. The 990 only resolves
1100 lines per image, versus the 950's 850 lines, because it's got 30%
more pixels across the image to work with.
We've seen that not all 3.3MP cameras are the same with the comparison of
the CP990 against the Casio QV 3000EX in the Comparo-meter. The S20 shots
I've seen so far are pretty damned impressive, but then Phil seems to take
very impressive photos, but with limited objective value, unless you want
to print them all out.
I want to see the S20 in the Comparo-meter.
Oh, and I haven't been talking about color rendition.
1. It's subjective. I don't subscribe to the Kodak Color view of the world.
2. Different cameras focus on point-and-shoot versus photographer's choice.
e. I don't think there's anything wrong with the S20's colors one way or the
other.
All that said, the S20 looks like a nice point and shoot camera with limited
manual overrides. Not my style.
ian
D
Daniel
Guest
The S20 does not seem to have improvement over S10. Images are still quite soft and pixelated. Overexposure is still a problem. Hope Canon will improve the focusing and overexposure problems in their final production model.
R
Robert Maclellan
Guest
And if the picures were tack sharp you would say "Too much 'in-camera sharpening'!!" We need to gve the camera a break!
F
Frances
Guest
I agree!
Pictures are out of focus, can this camera focus?
Yes overexposureis still a problem.
Frances.
Pictures are out of focus, can this camera focus?
Yes overexposureis still a problem.
Frances.
I see your at it again Ken!
K
Kyriakos
Guest
Frances,
This is a little advice if I may.
Since it is well known that you are prejudiced against Canon, I would suggest you to avoid talking about it, because it is almost certain that you will create an uproar in this thread. Sorry for intervening.
This is a little advice if I may.
Since it is well known that you are prejudiced against Canon, I would suggest you to avoid talking about it, because it is almost certain that you will create an uproar in this thread. Sorry for intervening.
I completely agree with you Robert!
Isn't it funny that the more experienced photographers (such as Steve
and Phil) seem to appreciate the ability of the S20, and how some others
do not. I believe what this is called is ignorance of the senses.
and what Ian says about comparison of images, its only fair to compare
and look at images of various digicams at the same resolutions.
Comparing 2 images, one at 640x480 and one at 1600x1200 is ludicrous.
I completely agree that the S20 is a somewhat limited camera in terms
of manual controls, but as a typical point and shoot, it looks like it
will do an adequate job... regardless of what some ignoramous would say.
Isn't it funny that the more experienced photographers (such as Steve
and Phil) seem to appreciate the ability of the S20, and how some others
do not. I believe what this is called is ignorance of the senses.
and what Ian says about comparison of images, its only fair to compare
and look at images of various digicams at the same resolutions.
Comparing 2 images, one at 640x480 and one at 1600x1200 is ludicrous.
I completely agree that the S20 is a somewhat limited camera in terms
of manual controls, but as a typical point and shoot, it looks like it
will do an adequate job... regardless of what some ignoramous would say.
P
Phil Askey
Guest
Still Canon bashing Ken?? I've warned you.. one more attempt and you'll be banned again.
FWIW I got great samples out of the S20 which you can see on this site...
F
Frances
Guest
Your samples are great!
Sandy #16803
New member
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
Allso I can see slight purple cast in the sky, maybe something to do with their different color handling scheme, not much improvement over S10, but the focusing is still off, images are not very sharp .
Sandy.
Sandy.
R
Rob Patterson
Guest
With all due respect, the S10 is not as sharp as the Nikon. Close, but the Nikon wins in sharpness. Each camera has it's merits. I think the Nikon has more. I have personally owned several Canon film SLRs and was quite happy with them. I may very well purchase the new Canon SLR when it arrives and if it meets my standards. Canon is apparently not being pushed by marketing to get their 3meg camera on the street. I'm really anxious to see the results.
Here's a prime example of Nikons "point and shoot" digital Coolpix 800 versus the S10 "point and shoot". Check out the building shot taken from above. The building is made of bricks! You can't even see the brick pattern in the S10 shot. They stand out quite nicely (not perfect) in the 800 shot. With the S10 one is left only to speculate regarding the buildings structure. It could be stucco if I hadn't seen the bricks depicted with the 800. The Nikon's propensity for blue is in the snow as usual. This can be taken out quite quickly. You can't put the brick pattern in, regardless of image editing program being used.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1005&message=113385
Here's a prime example of Nikons "point and shoot" digital Coolpix 800 versus the S10 "point and shoot". Check out the building shot taken from above. The building is made of bricks! You can't even see the brick pattern in the S10 shot. They stand out quite nicely (not perfect) in the 800 shot. With the S10 one is left only to speculate regarding the buildings structure. It could be stucco if I hadn't seen the bricks depicted with the 800. The Nikon's propensity for blue is in the snow as usual. This can be taken out quite quickly. You can't put the brick pattern in, regardless of image editing program being used.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1005&message=113385
R
Roman
Guest
I would disagree, but read on...
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1005&message=113385
Are you sure about this? The S10 shot appears to be slightly redder
and also shows the individual bricks more clearly - especially on the
front house's chimney stacks. I can make out the white mortar in
between the bricks on the S10, but with the CP800 the overall
muteness of colour appears to work against this detail.
Plus, the S10 image is about 400+Kb - are you using Fine or SuperFine?
(as SuperFine should yield 1.5+Mb images at 1600x1200 on something of this
complexity) The recompression by Photoshop would make any
comparison more difficult. Can you post the raw images?
Also, the CP800 image is more muted - although you could say the
converse i.e. S10 is more Kodak-colour, but I doubt many
Canon owners would characterise their S10 as being like
the Kodak DCxxx's in terms of overall colour-saturation
(far from it, I think).
J
Jason
Guest
The comparison between the 2 pictures are not fair in any case people.
A true test should be done with same light/day/time conditions.
It is quite obvious that the pictures taken between the 2 digicams were during either different times of the day, or perhaps a different day altogether.
None the less, the light conditions were not the same in both test, so comparison of the 2 is INVALID!
Whose ever smartass idea it was to compare the pics between the 2 digicams in the first place is a complete moronic idiot!
In any true scientific test, same conditions must be established... so in this case, the cameras should have been taken at almost the same time, or at least within a few mins. of each other.
In any case, it is only fair to say that each camera definately has its strong and weak points!
END OF STORY PEOPLE!
A true test should be done with same light/day/time conditions.
It is quite obvious that the pictures taken between the 2 digicams were during either different times of the day, or perhaps a different day altogether.
None the less, the light conditions were not the same in both test, so comparison of the 2 is INVALID!
Whose ever smartass idea it was to compare the pics between the 2 digicams in the first place is a complete moronic idiot!
In any true scientific test, same conditions must be established... so in this case, the cameras should have been taken at almost the same time, or at least within a few mins. of each other.
In any case, it is only fair to say that each camera definately has its strong and weak points!
END OF STORY PEOPLE!
R
Rob Patterson
Guest
Whoops! Yeah your right. I was looking at the wrong title bar when I made my post. The bricks are clearer in the S10.
F
Frances
Guest
It will be nice if you STOP calling people names, idiots etc, by the way I agree with you comparison of the 2 is INVALID!
Have a nice day
Frnces.
Have a nice day
Frnces.
R
Robert Maclellan
Guest
...are you saying that unless two pictures are absolutely identical in EVERY way that there is no value in comparing them? The two pictures must be taken of exactly the same subject; under exactly the same conditions; at exactly the same time; from exactly the same angle; with exactly the same camera settings; by exactly the same photographer; wearing exactly the same shirt; having eaten exactly the same lunch; at exactly the same phase of the moon; at exactly the same distance from the galactic center... COME ON!!!
But... I see you allow some flexibility...they COULD be within a few minutes of each other. How many minutes would you say is fair? 4? 7.3? 32? 169? How long would the evil "camera comparers" have to wait before Camera B was made to look really BAD? What if that difference made Camera B look great?? Or what if... and this is the case... it doesn't really matter in the long run because the strengths and flaws of a camera become apparent across a series of comparitive pictures. If one camera consistently shows purple fringing (for example) and another doesn't, that flaw isn't just going to show up in a single situation but it will appear time and again across a series of shots. If a camera handles colors poorly, for example, alters certain blues to greens or greens to blue and you can see that another camera handles colors correctly...across the board...in several shots of the same objects...that is a valid test...and fair.
But... I see you allow some flexibility...they COULD be within a few minutes of each other. How many minutes would you say is fair? 4? 7.3? 32? 169? How long would the evil "camera comparers" have to wait before Camera B was made to look really BAD? What if that difference made Camera B look great?? Or what if... and this is the case... it doesn't really matter in the long run because the strengths and flaws of a camera become apparent across a series of comparitive pictures. If one camera consistently shows purple fringing (for example) and another doesn't, that flaw isn't just going to show up in a single situation but it will appear time and again across a series of shots. If a camera handles colors poorly, for example, alters certain blues to greens or greens to blue and you can see that another camera handles colors correctly...across the board...in several shots of the same objects...that is a valid test...and fair.
Randy Wilson14823
Well-known member
- Messages
- 135
- Reaction score
- 0
On most pictures, it quite obvious they weren't shot in the same MONTH, much less a few minutes of each other. When it gets down to nit picky details like colours & detail visability, lighting plays a HUGE role, esecially with non-flash pictures, which the majority of the examples are. Not sure I agree with using auto mode on one camera & manual on the other, too many hidden variables then. Full auto for both. Stand in one spot with both cameras & take the pictures within moments of each other. Otherwise it's like test driving one car on a dry summer day and another on a snowy day in January & saying the first one had better handling.
Both cameras take excellent pictures when used properly.
I'm sure we can stop beating this horse, it's been dead for a LONG time.
Randy
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum