700is review just posted

Nice gleaming review for the SD700. Impressive results I have to say, though I couldnt agree more about the AiAf system being terrible. I got some very bad results with it on my SD450 too (terribly underexposed in bright light and overexposed in dim-light - honestly though not much better with it off either, I think I may have a lemon, dont know - at least my F30 puts it to shame!) . I also got my F30 recently, Im loving it, a great camera and very capable (much better than the SD450).

I have to comment on the sample images of the SD700 against the F10. I prefer the SD700's images here. It seems the F10 overexposed (which is common with the F10 - thank god they fixed that for the F30 which has perfect metering as far as I can tell). Even though the images contain noise, its the kind that cleans up well in neatimage (sacrificing some sharpness of course however) and the shots look very sharp (again, not like some shots ive seen on this forum). Still, impressive results from the SD700, I dont see corner-softness either, looks like the DPreview guys certainly didnt get a lemon - coincidence? haha just kidding , I hope Canon fixes thier QC though, Ive certainly seem some bad representations of the SD700 and Canons QC is the only one to blame for that. Im looking forward to the F30 review as well as I want to see how it does in their test shots (I dont really like the sample galleries since theyre downsized so much). Good results - better than I expected in the studio shots - I wish DPreview did some more test shots in real life situations too. F30 vs. SD700, should be an interesting comparison, looking forward to it, just for kicks of course (i got the F30 already since it offered what I wanted but im interested in the comparisons here since I like the reviews at this site, at Dcresource the F30 has the advantage, lets see what its going to be here -but like I said, only studio shots - id love to see more real-world comparisons.)

george37 said:

Very positive new DP review posted today on the 700is, excellent
results. Waiting for mine to arrive. Confirms my conclusion after
checking out lots of web photos -- this camera gives best-in-class
results for clarity and overall image quality at normal ISOs.

Some competitors may seem to have better optics or sensors in
theory, but their images don't have the punch, contrast, crispness
and 3D feeling of this little Canon jewel IMO.

Click to expand...

PIXSurgeon said:

And here is, head on, agains the 20D. You tell me:

Click to expand...

They aren't even close to the same luminance level! I can't tell squat from that!

Here's an F30 versus 30D sample image:



--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

OK. Im an idiot - I forgot the links were at the bottom for the full-size sample images. My bad - before anyone starts bashing at me Yes, though, not much corner-softness (a very little amount) as noted in the review - though the overall images at full res look a little soft to me (i could be spoiled by the very sharp F30 here, I dont know). Just my observation.

Hi Sinan!

Great points for sure that you make . . . as always. The F30 certainly improved on things from the F10/11 and there were indeed things needing improvement there. Just a point on Canon "QC". Canon probably puts out several times as many cameras as most of their nearest competitors and in some cases puts our more cameras than several other competitors combined. That being the case, even with pretty good quality control there are bound to be statistically far more cameras out in the field with some "issues" that escaped "QC".

Consequently, we're bound to have a higher number of reports of "QC" issues surfacing for Canon than their competitors. This often creates the impression that Canon has more problematic units out in the field than other competitors. LOL . . . I suppose you can say they in fact do because they also in fact have far more cameras out there !!!

Yeah, I have to agree with that, Erik. I think I was just very surprised because I had always though of the SD700 as having the same image quality as the SD600 series, which on the FX01 review, the FX01 compared to very nicely. I expected more of the same for the SD700, so I was very impressed with the review.

That said, there's still a $150 price premium between the SD700 and pretty much any other compact camera. Factor that in with the wide angle on the FX01, and ISO performance, better image quality IMO, manual controls, (and flare coating!) on the F30, and the SD700, although outstanding image quality wise, still isn't am immensely great camera for the price.

Oh yes, and we also have the brand new Panasonic FX50 coming our way.

http://www.panasonic.es/fichamod.asp?codegam=142&coderang=24&codeprd=67&codemod=2302&codeagr=

The search for the ultimate camera never ends!

Your statistics are skewed quite a bit regarding the number of cameras Canon produces compared to their nearest competetors. Think Sony and Kodak.

--mamallama

Law of large numbers at work probably, I guess so too, though since I had to deal with Canon warranty on a barely used Sd450 (and I think it now has other issues - metering - im picky about this, LOL. I dont know though, ive never been able to compare it to another SD450 so I dont want to jump to conclusions either, maybe the F30 has much better metering - or maybe theres still something wrong with the SD450 (i think theres something wrong - I have to pick at them for this

Here look at the link and tell me if the results from the SD450 seem normal, I would like to know actually, maybe I'll send it for repair while its under warranty still.

http://sft109.myphotoalbum.com/view_album.php?set_albumName=album06

CobraWing said:

Hi Sinan!

Great points for sure that you make . . . as always. The F30
certainly improved on things from the F10/11 and there were indeed
things needing improvement there. Just a point on Canon "QC".
Canon probably puts out several times as many cameras as most of
their nearest competitors and in some cases puts our more cameras
than several other competitors combined. That being the case,
even with pretty good quality control there are bound to be
statistically far more cameras out in the field with some "issues"
that escaped "QC".

Consequently, we're bound to have a higher number of reports of
"QC" issues surfacing for Canon than their competitors. This
often creates the impression that Canon has more problematic units
out in the field than other competitors. LOL . . . I suppose you
can say they in fact do because they also in fact have far more
cameras out there !!!

Click to expand...

Ps. the SD450 doesnt always underexpose though (as can be seen in some shots), only in tough situations like buildings against the sky, etc.. I guess it could be hard to tell without knowing actually seing the coniditions that the shots were taken in, but the F30 is very close to what I saw with my eyes so that should be a good guide, so is it normal for the SD450 to underexpose in situations like these (the only reason I havent sent the thing in for repair is because it doesnt always underexpose (and if really was a lemon shouldnt it always do that?) but it does underexpose in scenes such as this

http://sft109.myphotoalbum.com/view_photo.php?set_albumName=album06&id=SD450_Transco

If you look at the prior photo, youll see what the F30 did, and see what I mean. Normal or no? Anyone?

Well the SD450 photo looks like later afternoon approaching dusk, which judging by the shadows in your picture, it is. The F30 looks more towards mid-afternoon. What time of day was it actually?

According to many on the Fuji forum, it's actually the F30 that overexposes a little, although typically in my testing (between my Fuji F30 and Canon SD550), when the exposure was wrong the F30 was probably over by 1/3 stop, and the SD550 under by -1/3 stop, although both cameras got it right most of the time.

I wouldn't say you have a problem per se, it's simply that auto-exposure doesn't always do it correctly. In cases such as yours, I doubt it's something covered under the warranty (and after horror stories of refurb cameras coming back worse, I'd tend to avoid sending in an RMA). Just bump the EV up a little.

Not skewed at all !!!

The IDC research company lists Canon sales at 12.63 million cameras last year (we can't do this year because we're only half way through). Sony sales came out to 12.32 million (close but still behind). Kodak sales came out to only 8.71 million.

Now if you re-examine my statement, I didn't say Canon sales surpassed the "very next TWO closest competitors combined". I stated that Canon puts out several times as many as "MOST" of their nearest competitors. So if you look at Kodak (which you named . . . not me). Canon puts out a lot more cameras than them AND a clearly several times more cameras than several of the next competative groups which are even lower than Kodak!

(It helps to have facts before you call things "skewed").

I know this is a Canon forum, but the competitors are as much the Sony T9 and T30, as the F10.

Any comments on that comparison? Apart from the greater lens reach with the Canon and the optical viewfinder.

...you are comparing ISO3200 from a 1/1.7" CCD sensor, vs. a more state-of-the-art 20D's CMOS sensor, AT A STAGGERING ISO3200 says it all, my friend!

In any case, I do not need the F30 to perform at ISO3200. ISO 100 to ISO800 is a wide-enough ISO-band for me, just as it is on my 1D MarkII-N and 30D.

Enjoy!

Hi again Sinan!

I compared the Balcony SD450 image to the same Balcony image of the F30. Then I recalled what Jeff at DCResources found as a conclussion of his pretty good review of the F30. He indicated that aside from a problematic purple fringing issue with the F30 . . . he found that the F30 tended to render "muted" colors than other comparative cams. However, he very much liked the camera and I agree wth you that it is indeed a very good camera.

In looking at the Balcony images, I think his explanation fits quite well. I don't think it's so much of the SD450 having an underexposure metering issue . . . as it is the F30 naturally rendering images a bit muted or softer in color than other cams. This could lead you to "think" the F30 might be overexposing a tad when in fact that may not be the explanation. I'm not sure but at least that's what it could possible be to me.

...I was particularly impressed on this ISO400 shot (Fuji F30) vs. the 450's ISO200 shot. The little Fuji torpedoed the 450 until it sank it:

http://sft109.myphotoalbum.com/view_photo.php?set_albumName=album06&id=F30_Flower

and here is the 450 counterpart:

http://sft109.myphotoalbum.com/view_photo.php?set_albumName=album06&id=SD450_Flower

Truly amazing!

Here's what you said:

"Canon probably puts out several times as many cameras as most of their nearest competitors and in some cases puts our more cameras than several other competitors combined."

Several times??? You do the math.

--mamallama

CobraWing said:

Not skewed at all !!!

The IDC research company lists Canon sales at 12.63 million cameras
last year (we can't do this year because we're only half way
through). Sony sales came out to 12.32 million (close but still
behind). Kodak sales came out to only 8.71 million.

Now if you re-examine my statement, I didn't say Canon sales
surpassed the "very next TWO closest competitors combined". I
stated that Canon puts out several times as many as "MOST" of their
nearest competitors. So if you look at Kodak (which you named . .
. not me). Canon puts out a lot more cameras than them AND a
clearly several times more cameras than several of the next
competative groups which are even lower than Kodak!

(It helps to have facts before you call things "skewed").

Click to expand...

My Canon 70-300 DO has spoiled me with IS. It's one of the most underrated pluses around. And you don't have to be shooting teles or at slow speeds. On any camera with virtually any lens most of us would create significantly sharper pix if we used tripods -- even at 1/125.

When you start splitting hairs and looking at resolution, camera shake is one of the biggest factors even at "normal" shooting speeds in my opinion.

And with these featherweight sub compacts IS really can make a visible difference. Another reason I went with the 700.

I too analyzed several samples of the F30, SD700, and many others. The first high-iso F30 images available I thought were horrible based upon the hype. Impossible to fix in post work. Then I found a good deal on an F30 with an additional $50 rebate. I had an XD card (stupid format).

The images I am getting are better than what I have seen by the early adopters. Actually, I am very impressed up to iso800 (only had it a couple of days). I don't see the real nasty nr effects on edges or mottled effects in the subtle contrast gradations like before. Maybe they settled the black point down a bit, don't know. It's a shame there is no image parameter control. That would really help.

That being said, imo the SD700 is the better overall tool and would recommend it as the number 1 compact at this time after having used one a bit. However, for me the F30 was half the price of the SD700 + card at this time.
Regards,
Kelly

I can't tell you how many blurry, out-of-focus pictures I got with my previous Elph camera, the SD500. The SD700 virtually eliminates those problems.

Hi Nathan, The Shots were taken right after each other in all the tests. It was about 7pm and still very bright and not cloudy at all. The SD450 makes it look like a solar eclipse was about to happen or something, the F30 does still overexpose a tiny bit (not as much as F10) but the SD450 is def way too dark (trust me, I was there). Yeah, I agree I dont know what I can claim in warranty, theyre going to look at the cam and be like, looks fine to us, take it back. The same applies for the Pool shot and the Balcony shot (though the F30 overexposed a little in that one too, but the SD clearly underexposed more). I dont know why (those are around 6pm) lots of light. Yet, it still looks like a solar eclipse is about to happen Oh well. Its really my parents cam but I use it too, hehe.

Hi Cobra,

Yes the F30 can have more muted colors, I agree completely, but, in these examples to me, the SD450 actually looks more muted (and underexposed). I dont know - maybe Im blind or something, the Pool shot, the Transco full zoom and transco shot (the one I showed you) I guess I will just let it be, Ive taken some good shots with the SD450 (but that was before it got it sent out to warranty for the E18 error - and then I didnt really take many pics on it, only to test it against the F30 when i got it and now it seems to have this problem. I wonder if something happened to the metering system. Anyways, both are good cams but I gotta say Im loving my F30 - even more so since I got it for $265 with the rebate cheaper than what I got my dads SD450 for.

Anyways, I actually did more of the same tests the next day as-well (AiAf turned off this time) and I got similar results which Im uploading right now, itll be up in about 15 mins after this message is posted to see more of what I mean. The F30 def. has more muted colors for sure, but. theres something wrong about this SD450 after it came back from warranty, at least thats what it seems like to me, all the shots have this look like a solar-eclipse is happening Oh well.

http://sft109.myphotoalbum.com/view_album.php?set_albumName=album06&page=5
Page 5 and beyond.

CobraWing said:

Hi again Sinan!

I compared the Balcony SD450 image to the same Balcony image of the
F30. Then I recalled what Jeff at DCResources found as a
conclussion of his pretty good review of the F30. He indicated
that aside from a problematic purple fringing issue with the F30 .
. . he found that the F30 tended to render "muted" colors than
other comparative cams. However, he very much liked the camera
and I agree wth you that it is indeed a very good camera.

In looking at the Balcony images, I think his explanation fits
quite well. I don't think it's so much of the SD450 having an
underexposure metering issue . . . as it is the F30 naturally
rendering images a bit muted or softer in color than other cams.
This could lead you to "think" the F30 might be overexposing a tad
when in fact that may not be the explanation. I'm not sure but at
least that's what it could possible be to me.

Click to expand...