Eric Bazan
New member
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 0
(I also posted this to rec.photo.digital, but I'm also
posting this here as it was phil's review of the camera
which finally prompted me to buy it.)
I remember going down to the local camera shop to see
the Canon S10. It looked like a nice point-and-shoot film
camera. With its small body and cute looks it seemed nice,
but it was hard to take seriously. I mean, the diameter
of the objective on this camera is about the size of a
penny. Focused onto a tiny 1/2" CCD. It looked nice, but
was it worth $600.00?
I bought a Kodak DC210+ a little over a year ago. Not
a bad camera, but I was always disappointed with it. The
resolution of the Kodak just wasn't that good. So I
vacillated a long time before buying the S10. I wanted
a small no-fuss camera, but it had to produce decent images.
Well, I finally decided to purchase the S10 last Friday.
I've been simply floored with the image quality of this
camera! It's better then I expected (it completely blows
the Kodak away).
The S10 produces bright, sharp, contrasty images. It
has a small but beautiful LCD display, easily visible even
in direct sunlight. The controls are well laid out, and
overall the camera feels solid. The Canon's processor is
quick - I seldom had to wait for the camera before I could
take another shot - something that happened often with the
Kodak.
I ran around all weekend taking pictures like some sort
of maniac. Took a couple hundred pictures with the camera.
I've put up a small gallery (9 images) at:
http://www.geocities.com/theoneboo
Overall I love the camera, however I have two complaints/
observations.
First, the camera should come with a rechargable
battery and charger. I can see not including a battery if
it was something that could be purchased elsewhere, but
Canon's recharchable battery is proprietary, and must be
ordered from Canon. I almost didn't buy the Camera when I
found this out. Sure, one can purchase the lithium 2CR5
(disposable) battery, but at $10.00 a pop who can afford
them?
The S10 uses a CYGM CCD filter to extract color
information. Most manufactorers use an RGB filter. I
think the CYGM mask is partially responsible for the
Canon's outstanding contrast. You see, the CYGM filter
preserves luminence information better than an RGB filter,
but does so at the expense of color accuracy (chroma).
It's a classic example of information theory at work.
Using a single CCD to extract color information means you
can have one or the other, but not both (color accuracy vs.
luminence accuracy). Most manufactorers use an RGB filter,
which probably gives better color accuracy.
I've got no major beefs with the Canon's color balance,
though it definitely has some interesting biases. For
example, the camera has trouble with deep blue skies.
Almost all the sky shots had a purple/magenta bias.
Shadowed areas sometimes displayed a blue cast.
See my galley for an example of the purple sky
Despite the above complaints I love the camera, and
recommend it without hesitation. Don't be deceived
by the S10's small size - as far as its performance
goes it really is a 'mighty mite'
-Eric B.
posting this here as it was phil's review of the camera
which finally prompted me to buy it.)
I remember going down to the local camera shop to see
the Canon S10. It looked like a nice point-and-shoot film
camera. With its small body and cute looks it seemed nice,
but it was hard to take seriously. I mean, the diameter
of the objective on this camera is about the size of a
penny. Focused onto a tiny 1/2" CCD. It looked nice, but
was it worth $600.00?
I bought a Kodak DC210+ a little over a year ago. Not
a bad camera, but I was always disappointed with it. The
resolution of the Kodak just wasn't that good. So I
vacillated a long time before buying the S10. I wanted
a small no-fuss camera, but it had to produce decent images.
Well, I finally decided to purchase the S10 last Friday.
I've been simply floored with the image quality of this
camera! It's better then I expected (it completely blows
the Kodak away).
The S10 produces bright, sharp, contrasty images. It
has a small but beautiful LCD display, easily visible even
in direct sunlight. The controls are well laid out, and
overall the camera feels solid. The Canon's processor is
quick - I seldom had to wait for the camera before I could
take another shot - something that happened often with the
Kodak.
I ran around all weekend taking pictures like some sort
of maniac. Took a couple hundred pictures with the camera.
I've put up a small gallery (9 images) at:
http://www.geocities.com/theoneboo
Overall I love the camera, however I have two complaints/
observations.
First, the camera should come with a rechargable
battery and charger. I can see not including a battery if
it was something that could be purchased elsewhere, but
Canon's recharchable battery is proprietary, and must be
ordered from Canon. I almost didn't buy the Camera when I
found this out. Sure, one can purchase the lithium 2CR5
(disposable) battery, but at $10.00 a pop who can afford
them?
The S10 uses a CYGM CCD filter to extract color
information. Most manufactorers use an RGB filter. I
think the CYGM mask is partially responsible for the
Canon's outstanding contrast. You see, the CYGM filter
preserves luminence information better than an RGB filter,
but does so at the expense of color accuracy (chroma).
It's a classic example of information theory at work.
Using a single CCD to extract color information means you
can have one or the other, but not both (color accuracy vs.
luminence accuracy). Most manufactorers use an RGB filter,
which probably gives better color accuracy.
I've got no major beefs with the Canon's color balance,
though it definitely has some interesting biases. For
example, the camera has trouble with deep blue skies.
Almost all the sky shots had a purple/magenta bias.
Shadowed areas sometimes displayed a blue cast.
See my galley for an example of the purple sky
Despite the above complaints I love the camera, and
recommend it without hesitation. Don't be deceived
by the S10's small size - as far as its performance
goes it really is a 'mighty mite'
-Eric B.