750 vs 850 - Initial Reaction

I walked around today with the 750 in one hand and 850 in the other and took a bunch of pics - indoors, outdoors, bright, dim, etc.

Overall I'm still torn but here is one thing that I've noticed about the 850 that irked me. All the pics come out with what appears to me as a smokey blueish layer over them. I think that takes away from the sharpness and the vividness of the colors.

For example, my daughter's beautiful brown eyes are hazy. The picture would be perfect without that haze.

Can anyone shed some light on how I can get rid of that? It's really strange. I think that if I can figure out what is causing that, I'd stick with the 850.

Other than that, the only other notes I can share is that the 750 is sharper, especially in close up shots. I like 850 macros better.

But can you fine folks help me out with the haze?? I'm especially interested in hearing from those who have both cameras and can take test shots.
 
I know ecactly what you mean. I think thats part and parcel of the exposure problem along with the lack of dynamic range. If i had a fix i'd tell you, but thats why i stick with the 750. You could try white balance adjustments , but the problem is you'd always have to choose WB's manually whenever you change scenes. Whatever fix there was would be some sort of compromise of point and shoot. You can fix them in post processing tho if you don't mind doing that. But what i'm curious about is why you are torn when you keep citing the 750's pics better in most ways. Is it the low light video you like about the 850? Cuz if it is i would say do as you mentioned before and keep both and use the 850 for low light video.
I walked around today with the 750 in one hand and 850 in the other
and took a bunch of pics - indoors, outdoors, bright, dim, etc.

Overall I'm still torn but here is one thing that I've noticed
about the 850 that irked me. All the pics come out with what
appears to me as a smokey blueish layer over them. I think that
takes away from the sharpness and the vividness of the colors.

For example, my daughter's beautiful brown eyes are hazy. The
picture would be perfect without that haze.

Can anyone shed some light on how I can get rid of that? It's
really strange. I think that if I can figure out what is causing
that, I'd stick with the 850.

Other than that, the only other notes I can share is that the 750
is sharper, especially in close up shots. I like 850 macros better.

But can you fine folks help me out with the haze?? I'm especially
interested in hearing from those who have both cameras and can take
test shots.
 
I like the features on the 850 like the movie light, brighter screen, etc etc. It's been listed a million times before. I also wonder if the haze I see is caused by the record light (but as I'm typing, I realize that it's not necessarily on all the time). Maybe it's the really bright flash??

I'm gonna wait to see what my husband thinks tho I'm sure he doesn't want to go through each one of the pics like I did tonight.

Does anyone else with an 850 see the haze I'm talking about??
 
We'll be able to diagnose your problem if you can post an example--preferably with the EXIF information intact.

Bart
--
http://www.pbase.com/zumbari
 
I've loaded a few samples (2 from each camera). I can do more but have to start work now. This haziness is more evident indoors.

All images are original size, so I will link to them. EXIF should be intact.

1. Shot in full auto mode so the camera chose all settings:

750: http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/750/CIMG0165.JPG
850: http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/850/CIMG0992.JPG

2. Changed to ISO 50:

750: http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/750/CIMG0173.JPG
850: http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/850/CIMG1001.JPG

sorry about my daughter's dirty nose
 
Yes, I upgraded to 1.1B ... but the pics didn't look any different before the upgrade.
 
Try jacking up the saturation on the 850. But what i'm seeing is the overexposure which as i said is what gives it that cast i think. Problem of course with over exposure on these cameras to is that lowering it doesn't work sdue to the shadows also being lowered and losing detal. The 750 does that too but to a far less degree. But thats why i started with the curves thing and the main reason i went to the 750. Because the 750's exposure problem is low enough to be fixed and only happens in bright light. But try saturation and it will help some i think. If you have any sunny outdoor pics they would be better examples because thats where it does it worse. The indoors shots reveal the OE but not so much that cast.
 
I do have outdoor pics. I can post them when I free up later today. That blue-grey haze takes away a lot in my opinion. I messed with saturation some and it didn't do a whole lot. Do you think it's a defective camera b/c I don't hear that from others on this forum.
 
I wouldn't have called that haziness unless you're talking about the focus--the Z850 shots don't seem to be as well focused. The Z850 is also giving a cooler white balance and is brighter in these examples which I'm guessing is what you are calling haziness. I personally don't worry about color issues too much because I don't mind tweaking them in PP if needed.

If the focus problem is consistent I'd say you're camera might be defective. As for the color difference, you could try changing the WB for flash shots, but maybe the Z850 just has a cooler WB with the flash. I know in many cases the Z750 will be yellowish or orangish indoors, so maybe Casio was trying to counteract that. For the brightness, just remember, there might be some situations where the Z750 is too dark. You can see if the Z850 photos can be fixed in Picasa easily and if so, then that might affect your decision as well.

Bart
--
http://www.pbase.com/zumbari
 
Yes, maybe it's a focus problem. That's what I'm describing as the haze. It seems like a fine pic except with a layer of smoke on top of it, making it less sharp and less vivid in color. And yes, the 850 consistently gives me images like that indoors, which is why I've been disappointed. I thought I was just doing something wrong.
 
The reason i switched is because of these issues. The thing is, even if you can find a way to make it work better, it will be a ongoing thing where you have to manipulate the camera with most shots to rectify the problem. That to me is unacceptable. And then you have to come to terms with the shot that can't be fixed, which in my experience were many. The shots you took were show exactly what i kept saying when i was being persecuted for saying the 750 is better, tho not to the degree that they show outdoors. So your camera isn't defective because my second one which was better still does this perticular thing just as bad. The 850 CAN take nice shots. But in my experience the majority were anywhere from silghtly problematic to very because it's nite and day how it reacts from certain lighting/scenes to the next. But you have both cameras also and therefore see this. Why some with both don't i don't know. But it's so blatently obvious in my tests there was no mistaking that i made the right decision by switching to the 750. People kept taking that as my being biased and jumped all over me. But i'm just telling it like it is from the perspective of an owner with both, and ianyone looking at those pics you posted now know what i see consistantly when comparing the 2 cameras, yet to a lesser degree even than i get in many outdoor shots.

So you have to ask yourself whether the features of the 850 are worth it. Personally, and i'm not exagerating here, i have not found anything the 850 features have that really make any difference in the final product, the picture. I even find some features better. for example, the manual settings are all in one mode. So you can go to that mode and choose shutter priority and aperature and ev all in the same mode. I can't understand why they seperated it because in the 850 you can't do them both at the same time and you have to switch modes to do one or the other. The flash is also easier. Click thru the settings instead of having to click to get to the settings, then click thru them, then click to get out. Twice as much time and clicking. Makes no sense. So i look at the features and find nothing really that make a differnce other than simplicity, and the 750 is easier there ! The movie light is fun, but how often do you need it. plus i can hold a tiny LED flashlight and do the same thing with even better light for the rare instance where i need or want it. the stabilization feature can be done manually with the 750 and is a pathetic attempt at image stabiliazation anyways. The LCD IS a benefit, as is a little better battery life. But other than that i see nothing but benefits in the 750. i think some have a hard time believing that just because thier reaction is it's newer so it has to be better, and the 750 is older so it has to be old technology.

Now maybe you feel different as to the features, but also just maybe, and the reason i'm saying this, maybe you haven't really considered these things and weighed the benefits/disadvantages of each and what they really mean to you in the final results. Even the LCD deosn't seem to be a big issue because it seems most of your pics are indoors. Plus while much less bright, once used to it even outside its just not a big issue in the final anaylisis when you look again at what these things mean to you in the final product, the picture. Consider all these things and think about it. Because when i switched to the 750 i realized i had been worrying about things that in reality were nothing compared to the advantages. I miss absolutly nothing but the LCD which i can easily live with as the only disadvantage behind countless advantages. And it all comes down to the final picture. I know you see the difference there, but i'm suprsed you're seeing them as close as you are because to my eye it looks like the pictures from a very good camera compared to a mediocre one. I can't imagine a wider spread w/o the lesser pics being from one of those $99 no name things. So think about the features and what is really important to the final picture. If you're like i was you may have been putting more importance on certain things than you should, because if the pics aren't as as good then every feature on earth is useless.
 
No, I agree with you. I am favoring the 750 for sure right now. I took mine outside yesterday to take shots and didn't have problems with the LCD. I put it in direct sunlight and could see it ok. The 850 was better but the 750 was usable. I set the screen to the "bright" setting in the menu.

I think that I'm just disappointed that I paid so much for the 850 and can't get consistent shots from it. Bart didn't mention overexposure like you did. He said it was a focus issue and difference in white balance. Any thoughts? I may actually send the 850 in to see what Casio can do for it since I have two cameras now.

Most of my shots are indoors right now b/c it is so stinking hot outside, but as the weather gets nicer, there will be more outside pics for sure.

I'm still curious to hear what others on this forum have experienced.
 
No disrepect to Bart, but i tried everything including WB but the overexposure problem would absolutly not be reconed with. Same for the 750, but as i said to a far lesser degree. Might even be a normal degree after what i read the other day. But in any case these cameras have an overexposure problem that cannot be fixed with camera settings. I didn't just decide that after trying a few things either. Don't forget, i had my 850 for months before the 750 and tried everything imaginable to no avail. Nothing the camera offers in the way of settings made any difference. It just isn't possible and thats why i changed. I believe the overexposure problem is part and parcel of the other issues. But it is the main problem and it is the way the camera is, period. I can't tell you anything more than just to either live with it or go to the 750 because those are your only 2 options. Other may say different, but to my mind it's a fact after testing ad nausium and running completely out of other options to try. I have yet o see anyone post a way to eleviate the problem and there is a reason for that. You can try another 850, but i will bet my life you will find the same thing. I don't believe yours is defective unless the majority of 850's are defective. Of course that WOULD speak to those who say theirs are great. But i suspect thats not the reason. And even if it were true, bying numerous 850's to find one that works would be silly.
No, I agree with you. I am favoring the 750 for sure right now. I
took mine outside yesterday to take shots and didn't have problems
with the LCD. I put it in direct sunlight and could see it ok.
The 850 was better but the 750 was usable. I set the screen to the
"bright" setting in the menu.

I think that I'm just disappointed that I paid so much for the 850
and can't get consistent shots from it. Bart didn't mention
overexposure like you did. He said it was a focus issue and
difference in white balance. Any thoughts? I may actually send
the 850 in to see what Casio can do for it since I have two cameras
now.

Most of my shots are indoors right now b/c it is so stinking hot
outside, but as the weather gets nicer, there will be more outside
pics for sure.

I'm still curious to hear what others on this forum have experienced.
 
Hang tight. I'm FTPing some outdoor pics right now. Once they are there, I will post the links.
 
No disrepect to Bart, but i tried everything including WB but the
overexposure problem would absolutly not be reconed with.
Haha, that's okay, I don't even own a Z850, so I'm just guessing here. It appears as though the Z850's flash is stronger and might have a harder time throttling it down for relatively close subjects. It might be that the Z850 flash shots will look better for more distant subjects. I remember folks last year comparing the Z750 with the Canon SD500 (which has a REALLY bright flash) and the Canon would blow the heck out of highlights in closeup flash shots, but looked better for wider shots of, say, a whole room.

Although I've seen a lot of great photos from the Z850, I'd say Dazco's troubles with overexposure were pretty much validated by what Jeff Keller said in the dcresource review:

"My one beef with them as that the camera overexposed almost all of the shots in the gallery, so do yourself a favor and turn the exposure compensation (called EV shift on the Z850) down a notch".

Bart
--
http://www.pbase.com/zumbari
 
Ok, here are three outdoor pics taken at the same time. They are not beautiful or artistic but definitely show a difference in the two cameras.

1. This one shows the "haze" I was talking about. Look at the two cars in the driveway. The 750 looks much better.

750 - http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/750/CIMG0182.JPG
850 - http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/850/CIMG1010.JPG

2. This one looks terrible on the 850. Everything out of focus. Look at the ugly pink house. You can read the house number on the 750 shot but not even close for the 850.

750 - http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/750/CIMG0183.JPG
850 - http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/850/CIMG1012.JPG

3. One of boring ivy.
750 - http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/750/CIMG0188.JPG
850 - http://www.theheimburgers.com/CasioTest/850/CIMG1018.JPG
 
Of course ! Thats the first thing i tried. As i've said, the problem isn't just that it overexposes. My 750 overexposes to a degree. But the problem is that it overexposes so much in some shots that there in no fixing it by lowering the EV because once you've lowered it enough to catch the details in the hilights, the shadows are so dark they're beyond help even with post processing with curves. In other words, the way the camera exposes dark areas and light areas they are much too far apart. Now this isn't every shot, and you CAN shoot some at -EV and then process with curves in photoshop as i've talked about many times. But you can't fix the problem by turning the EV down on either camera.
Dazco, have you tried playing with the EV shift??
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top