I can't comment on the red eye issue -- no one I know wanted to volunteer as a model when they heard I'm putting the comparison shots on the web for the whole world to see. ;-)
Huh?...you didn't think viewing at 100% is what one would wind up within the end?? Normal viewing on computer and general prints are the equivilent to viewing 50% on screen. So what you have viewed is the usable image for most applications.
That's an image at ISO 1600 ... from a point & shot camera. Did you expect a clean "ISO-100-like" pic at 100% monitor viewing from that little cam? Geez. I would say "Ooooh" if that "water-colory" shot were at ISO 400, or at 50% viewing.
Hey, you are getting me in trouble! ;-)
Something I only realized just now is that if you held these cameras vertically for portrait style photos you could use the OVF perfectly without your nose having to touch the LCD at all. Okay, so maybe many of you knew that... heh-heh!
Thanks for checking the thread! Yeah, they are both the top line, as evidenced by many things including the names like you said. I thought it was weird how Canon went out of its way to make the NON IS, NON wide version into the better camera, though. They want more money for it since it needs the 1/1.8" to handle the 10 MP? Heck, they might as well shove 10 MP on the 1/2.5" and 15 MP on the 1/1.8"! The rate they're going we'll see 12 by next summer.
I agree, the sd500s and the sd700 IS were both disappointing. Pretty soon I'm going to have to bite the bullet, though. Still, if I could have any one camera only, it'd be the s400, and that's what I have. I'd really, REALLY like to see this sd900 be about 5 MP. THEN it'd be a darn good camera! I love the size, speed, and new features. Thinking about it, why DID the sd400 get a 1/1.8" CCD? They didn't have the technology back then? I'm sure they did cuz they had like 3 MP on the 1/2.7!
I think you'd get more sharpness with the Fuji, but I think you saw the reasons I don't like it. I like the sensor, though. It's the same size as the s400 and doesn't look much cooler. I wouldn't feel happy carrying it around. I mean, I don't exactly feel like the s400 is so cool anymore sitting next to some of the new stuff they have out, but that's different: it's old! I give Fuji credit though and hope they sell a lot of cameras!
You said "(All taken at ISO800 -- I find ISO1600 and 3200 too noisy to be of use.)" Therefore if it's too noisy to be of use....then the opposite of being of use....is useless!!....even Miguel, who admittingly doesn't have great english, can interpret this, so it's you who are getting yourself into trouble, not Miguel!!
Why the suspense??... Unless you back tracked or your original post is not true then your preference is quite clear. In your original post above, you said you bought the first camera and was not happy after a few days, so you got the other one. In this recent post below, which I was involved in the thread, you state quite clearly that the first camera you got was the SD700, which should be the one you are sending back...right?
--
Well, I did the flash reach comparison on Sept 18, so that can be Part 6 (even though the photos are really not very exciting, and I can probably sum up the comparison in a couple of lines of text)....
