Hands-on: SD700IS vs F30

No, believe it or not I'm STILL sticking to my old S400 and SD20 combination! And it has nothing to do with money - I take so many P&S shots I would have gladly paid double if I could find a decent replacement. I still think in the really compact range they're the best Canons in terms of balancing pixels with sensor size. (I know the SD20 is a special case, it has drawbacks and you have to know when to use it, but for a pub camera it's amazing if you stay within flash range.)

Don't know if you remember my posts, but after 'upgrading' to the SD550 (which was actually a horrible downgrade) I sold it and lost faith in Canon for a while and just stuck with the S400/SD20 combo. When I saw the successors (SD700 etc) having an even smaller 1/2.5" sensor than the SD500, I nearly died - I wasn't going to waste my money again.

I'm pretty much thinking the same as you - either the F30 or one of these newer Canons, SD800 or SD900. Might be ready to give Canon another try, but to be honest with 10MP I don't hold much hope. I really want to believe that Canon are not just selling out, but I don't think they care about quality in the P&S range anymore. Their focus seems to be on DSLR now and they seem to be producing rubbish P&S cams - which is really sad for Canon! Never thought I'd see it. Instead of the nice clear images we used to get with the older S series, we now get mushy low-light pictures like the SD500 and all this over-blown noise reduction losing all the fine detail. I hope the new bunch show a change back to the good ol days but I doubt it.

I always prefer the bigger sensor (the SD900 is still pocketable enough for me) but with 10MP will it actually be any cleaner? I don't know. The 10MP really has me worried. This MP war is just so crazy.

So I await the reviews in the coming weeks with interest. If there's no clear winner I might even buy the F30 and the SD900 and then sell one. We shall see...

Cheers.

Gian_lle said:

And about the build quality, F30 or SD700 pleasing more you??
I feel that the black surface in the back of SD700 is more fragile
than the rest of the body´s camera and I can't define if it's
plastic or metal. Am I wrong??

Click to expand...

Hi Gian, both cameras felt very well built to me. Their weights (I've listed them in Part 1) are very similar, but somehow the SD700IS felt slightly "denser". Perhaps it's because I had a better grip on the F30. (In fact, I attached a lanyard to the SD700IS in fear of dropping it, but didn't feel paranoid enough to do so with the F30.)

In fact, I probably would have been happier if Canon and Fuji sacrificed a bit of build quality for lighter weight. In that regard, I really miss the Pentax Optio S I used to have -- it was all metal, but perhaps because the metal was aluminum, the camera was MUCH lighter -- only 115g (4.1oz). The combination of light weight and "thinness" (only 20mm or 0.8in think) made the Optio S much more pocketable (in MY opinion) than either of these two cameras.

To answer your other question, I don't know what material the black part is either. Maybe high-quality plastic? (I'm not ready to scratch it with a knife to find out.) ;-) But don't worry, it does not feel "fragile" or cheap to me at all.

--
http://retroblader.smugmug.com/

If you like my photos, praise the camera. If you don't, blame me (but please tell me how I can improve my photos.)

RetroBlader said:

To answer your other question, I don't know what material the black
part is either. Maybe high-quality plastic? (I'm not ready to
scratch it with a knife to find out.) ;-) But don't worry, it
does not feel "fragile" or cheap to me at all.

Click to expand...

It's metal, I'm pretty sure, ...it gets cold (as cold as the rest - just touch with your lips) if you leave the camera out of a case overnight. Plastic does not get cold. Simple test.

--
Peter Bendheim
http://www.imagessouthafrica.co.za

In this part, I'll compare two photos of the same scene, one taken with the SD700IS and one with the Fujifilm F30, within seconds of each other. I will offer my interpretation of these photos, but you are also welcome to download the originals from my SmugMug site and make your own interpretation. (As long as traffic doesn't get too crazy, I'll leave them up as long as possible.)

Thing you might want to know before flaming me:

1. It was dusk (approximately 30min before sunset), so light was changing fast. However, I do believe that light has not changed significantly in the few seconds it took me to switch camera. Moreover, from the F30 reading, I knew it was still bright enough to use the lowest ISO on each camera. AutoWB on both cameras.

2. Both were handheld, at the widest focal length ( 36mm equivalent). With shutter speed of 1/40s on the SD700IS (with IS set to Shoot Only for maximum stabilization) and 1/60s on the F30, I don't believe camera shake was a big issue.

3. I lock focus on the bush just below the two sitting men, and recomposed slightly for the shot. I was standing, with my elbows tucked in, and back against a telephone pole for maximum stability. I did NOT use the self-timer (even though that would probably reduce the motion introduced by pressing the shutter-release all the way), because I was worried about the light fading.

4. The 100% crops were captured by Alt-PrntScrn, pasted into PS Elements 3, then saved as TIFF (to avoid compression artifacts). [Let me know if there's a better way.]

Canon SD700IS photo: IMG_0108
Manual mode, Average Metering and ExpComp -1 (see end of this post for why)
Manual ISO at 80, F2.8, 1/40s (EV=7.6)



Fujifilm F30 photo: DSCF0971
Manual mode (not A/S), Multi/Pattern Metering and ExpComp -1
Manual ISO at 100, F2.8, 1/60s (EV=7.9)



Comparison #1: Detail at centre of frame



http://retroblader.smugmug.com/photos/96365921-D.jpg

My interpretation: Excellent amount of detail in both photos, but perhaps a little more in the Fuji photo (see the signs in the window of the ticket booth). [Sorry, I made the crops too big, you may have to download the original of this TIF file to be able to read the signs.]

Comparison #2: Detail in the corner (left lower)



http://retroblader.smugmug.com/photos/96365922-D.jpg

My interpretation: Again, excellent amount of detail in both photos. This time, I can't see a clear winner. (Some of you probably have sharper eyes.)

Comparison #3: Chromatic Aberration (left upper corner)



http://retroblader.smugmug.com/photos/96365923-D.jpg

My interpretation: Even after taking into consideration the difference in colour temperature between the two photos (both were taken with AutoWB), there was still way too much purple in the diagonal metal bars (and under the green roof tiles) in the F30 photo.

Comparison #4: Smearing (right lower corner)



http://retroblader.smugmug.com/photos/96365924-D.jpg

My interpretation: The grass looked much "greener" (almost unrealistically so, given the low light levels) in the SD700IS photo, but it also looked smeared or water-colour-like. The F30 grass, while dull-looking, has more realistic "texture".

Again, I stress that these are MY interpretations, based on 100% crops of the original photos. Despite my effort to preserve them by saving them as TIFF, the 100% crops still don't look the same when I previewed this post. If anyone want to download the original two photos and post 100% crops of the same sections (or different sections, for that matter), please be my guest.

P.S. My surprise about the SD700IS blowing out the sky: I first took the photo with Evaluative Metering, but it looked blown on review, and the histogram confirmed it. (I still stand by my opinion that the histogram is an extremely useful tool, no matter how accurate the LCD is.) So I reshot with -1 ExpComp, but the sky was still blown:



(This is a screen capture with the histogram by PS Elements 3 placed in the right lower corner.)

So I switched to Average Metering (still with -1 ExpComp), and the in-camera histogram looked ok (but PS Elements 3 histogram still showing a small area of blown highlights):



It's partially my fault -- with landscape/wide-angle shots, I have a habit of focusing 1/3 into the scene for maxiumum DOF. On my Panasonic FZ5, I separate AF from the shutter-release/AE, so it's usually not a problem. However, in these two cameras, AE was also locked when I prefocused, and since the bush was darker, I essentially forced the cameras to overexpose somewhat. My sincere apology to the fanboys of each camera. ;-)

P.P.S. I also hereby acknowledge my contribution to the CA in the F30 photo, since I probably overexposed the shot. At the time, I forgot that for high contrast scenes I should use Average Metering on the F30.....

--
http://retroblader.smugmug.com/

If you like my photos, praise the camera. If you don't, blame me (but please tell me how I can improve my photos.)

Looked at both fullsize pics and have to say the differences are so minor, it's hardly worth noting. It's a peeing contest to me.

theranman said:

I'd love to see a shootout between the Ricoh R5, Panny FX07, and
Canon SD800IS.

I make the final decision after Photokina and after a few pro
reviews come in.

Click to expand...

So would I ! These are exactly the 3 cameras on my shortlist after a few weeks of research and checking out these forums. I'm actually amazed that there isn't a single FX07/50 review yet - in terms of feature set vs price it appears to meet all of my requirements but I'd rather not buy without reading an objective review.

I apologize for this question before I even ask. I may have missed something-which pic is from which camera? I'm assuming all the one's on left are from 700 only because you commented on the "purple fringing" of the other camera and that is obvious in the pic. Did I miss where you mentioned that? I thought at first the F30 was on the left because it is the top photo above. I guess a wrong assumption on my part!

That was my first reaction but now that I look closer the Fuji is definitely better, and the Canon is showing signs of the noise reduction and loss of detail that was so terrible in the earlier SD models.

Don't forget, you can't compare 2 cameras just on one photo. I think the lighting was good enough for them to be quite close in this shot. Depending on the lighting, you will sometimes be hard pressed to tell the difference between a P&S and a $3000 DSLR. I think some indoor shots with fine detail will show the Fuji to be def better - and I'm just going on what I can see in this one shot. (I have nothing against Canon, I own all Canon gear, I just know how mushy some of the SD models are).

As I said, I think the light was such that the differences were not as noticable. But if you flip back and forth between the photos at fill size, the Fuji is showing better detail in the brickwork, and signs etc. but I admit the Canon is not as bad at all as I expected.

Need more samples to be concusive!

LRando,

In the upper left side of the side by side shots you can see the ISO info, he made the shots at the lowest ISO for both cams. Fuji lowest is ISO 100, Canon lowest is ISO 80, so they are easy to identify (once you know this).

; )

Retroblader, thanks for an awsome comparison!

I agree that the Fuji has better detail. The Canon looked better to me, mostly because the blue cast of the Fuji bothered me. I imagine that can be fixed in post-processing, but I'm curious how easy it is to avoid up-front, for those of us who don't do post-processing?

Also, the difficulty you had avoiding blowing out the sky with the Canon is interesting. That's a common problem in ordinary photos. Did you find it easier to avoid that sort of thing with the Fuji? Or harder since it doesn't have a histogram?

Thanks...! I would not have know that.

--
Miguel

Nice work Retroblader. Is there any chance we can get you to do some comparisons at the higher ISO's? Say 800?

Great job with this!

Hi,

I think the Canon-pics look much more pleasing than the Fuji-counterparts - and I am not just talking about the color. Exept for the crop with the fence, where the Fuji has a little edge, both cams seems to hold detail well. But the purple fringing in the Fuji-pic is quite ugly. The grass (well, it always looks greener on the other side of the fence - doesn't it? ;-) seems more detailed in the IXUS-pic as well.

Thanks for the comparision, btw!

Greez

Flo

Aussie bloke said:

No, believe it or not I'm STILL sticking to my old S400 and SD20
combination!

Click to expand...

No reason not to believe as I'm doing the same thing! I don't want anything bigger, I don't want anything that isn't as sharp!

Aussie bloke said:

Don't know if you remember my posts,

Click to expand...

Yep, I remember everything and even the test you did and how the sd20 was sharper than the sd500 even with its six foot flash! (You did use the flash on those pics, right?

Aussie bloke said:

I'm pretty much thinking the same as you - either the F30 or one of
these newer Canons, SD800 or SD900.

Click to expand...

I did a few comparisons between the sd800 and the sd900 and I'd really value any comments you'd like to make! (I've never said much about the Fuji as I think the it's a bit too big, has inconvenient menus, and only has like 5x zoom on playback)

The thread (essay) I really had fun with was this one:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=20086542

I didn't comment as much on differences as much as I commented on WHY they have the differences.

Then I made a general comparison here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=20072782

Aussie bloke said:

I always prefer the bigger sensor (the SD900 is still pocketable
enough for me) but with 10MP will it actually be any cleaner? I
don't know. The 10MP really has me worried. This MP war is just so
crazy.

Click to expand...

The 10 MP sensor has a lower pixel density than the 7 MP 1/2.5", but it isn't huge, and, since the 7 MP gets the IS, we'd be able to use lower ISOs and get what we like: clearer pictures. It'll still not be an s400, but what else can we do, start our own company? I'm kind of surprised that you mentioned the sd900 and not the sd800. Check out that first essay thread that I wrote, though, at least to see why I like the sd800.

Are you looking at the image name prefixes at the top of the screen shots? Are you also looking at the "full-sized" crops thru the provided links? Keep in mid the original poster switches the positions of which side is Canon, which Fuji (left vs. right) b/w shots and I found this out by noticing the differences in picture quality first and that they were inconsistent b/w the images. After I noticed which is which, all fell into place

The embedded images in these posts are auto downsized and not 100% crops. They show nothing useful for a fair comparison.

The full-sized links on the other hand show clearly that the Canon smears the corners quite a bit (significant enough for me and will show in 8x12 print) and also loses by a small amount in center sharpness (no big deal).

The Canon is warmer with oversaturated colors, the Fuji - cooler and saturation is close to the true levels. Neither is accurate IMO and for prints without PP I would probably prefer the Canon, with PP - the Fuji.

The purple fringing is clearly worse on the F30 and can certainly be distracting and require painful removal from some shots.

ackertschneck said:

Hi,

I think the Canon-pics look much more pleasing than the
Fuji-counterparts - and I am not just talking about the color.
Exept for the crop with the fence, where the Fuji has a little
edge, both cams seems to hold detail well. But the purple fringing
in the Fuji-pic is quite ugly. The grass (well, it always looks
greener on the other side of the fence - doesn't it? ;-) seems more
detailed in the IXUS-pic as well.

Thanks for the comparision, btw!

Greez

Flo

Click to expand...

At the ISO's tested, the hands-down winner is the Canon.

The reason:

My vision is a fair bit red/green deficient ("color blind"), and the "pop" and slightly over-saturated/vivid color of the Canon pleases me much more. If I had normal color vision, I might think differently.

Next up: Panny FX07/FX50 or Ricoh R5.

I like the Canon colors better. But I have always loved Canon's color rendition, so nothing new here (for me).

I'd like see a low light comparison of these two cameras. Personally I'm a bit surprised that people (though only slightly) seem to prefer the performance of the Canon model. I know Fuji F30 has been praised namely for its low light ability but beyond that my view of things was that on the whole people think Fuji F30 is the best ultracompact (or small compact) in the market performancewise. I know Canon has a talent of making these great performing jack-of-all-trades cams and SD800IS with OIS and 28mm lens is certainly appealing but are we really saying that SD800IS is better than F30? On the whole, I mean.

And yes, I know RetroBlader offered us just one shooting situation but still...

I am well aware of which pictures are from the canon and which are coming from the fuji. And yes, I looked at the fullsize-crops - my opinion stands: Canon looks better. Fuji got wrong WB (much too cool) and there is - as stated before with the exception of the lower left corner- not much more detail. Just my opinion...;-)