Canon S20

Thanks for your time.

I have been shopping for a digital camera now for 1 year, waiting for the quality to rise and the price to fall.

I have noticed that here in Vancouver Canada the S20 is now only $599 canadian, and I was expecting to pay more for a 3 megapixel camera, which is the type we are shopping for.

My question goes out to those who have or have had this model (over 1 year old now)

Is this a good enough price for this camera, knowing that I could afford a little more, don't really have need for the movie mode, and is the picture quality what you expected?

Thanks for your time.

Corey

Considering how quickly improvements are made to digital over time, the S20 can still hold its own for most general uses, see below. it takes time to see how the camera works best though....

When it was introduced, it's image functions were more automatic then the newer models available now, for manual you set wb to the predominate light source, adjust exposure based on your lcd preview and fire away everything else is taken care of.

The new S models offer more film type control, they offer more manual control to your exposures with shorter/longer exposure times as well as noise reduction. You will experience hot pixels with night shots, the S20 has no NR. Hot pixels area fact of digital cameras as they age. Shooting indoors handheld without adequate light is not easy.

If you can swing it, I would look at the newer models with more features to offer. For general use the S20 is quite capable, at a cheaper price.









http://image2.pbase.com/u4/vct_va/medium/794386.Fastshutter2.jpg--hardcore Canon S20 user

I've had the S-20 for quite some time and have taken 1000's of pictures with it. I really like the camera. It's small, compact and can be carried virtually everywhere. The 3 megapixel is really nice. No question it is a great little camera.

Having said that, it also has it's limitations, the most noticable being the pictures tend to have a bluish cast (tend to be on the cool side). Also it has a fairly limited zoom and not a lot of manual adjustments. The image quality isn't remotely comparable to my G-2 (nor do I expect it to be). I've kept the camera because it's a great point and shoot.

$600 sounds way to high a price at this point though.

Hope this helps a little. Let me know if you have any more specific questions.

... Jim

Jimmer said:

Having said that, it also has it's limitations, the most noticable
being the pictures tend to have a bluish cast (tend to be on the
cool side).

$600 sounds way to high a price at this point though.

... Jim

Click to expand...

Just wondering Jim,

How blueish are we talking here? As an fairly inexperienced photographer, and being a little color blind (not to blue) I may not notice as much as others, but is it very noticeable?

I intend to make linen bound albums with this camera, with shots as large as 8by10.
I will be getting the photos proffessionally developed.

Will it cause very minor or noticeable color change?

Thanks

PS I have found this camera @ London Drugs for 749.00 and at other stores for higher but I have not been able to find it lower than $599 do you have another recommendation?

Corey

My father-in-law has the S20 and I have a Casio3500. He's had his since it first came out (about 2 years?) and likes it overall.

Here's a few things he doesn't like about it:

1) Battery life. This is his biggest complaint. He has 2 batteries and needs them both to take 150 pictures. If he never uses the LCD he might get 100+ pics with one battery, but overall he's getting less than 50 pics per battery. This isn't too impressive. By contrast, I can can easily take 300 pics with my Casio on 4 AA NiMh batteries, and they cost less. We both use the microdrive.

2) 2x Zoom. This is a trade off due to the smaller size -- he loves being able to put the camera in his pocket, but really wishes the zoom was better.

3) Flesh tones are off with flash. He's tried a lot of different settings but colors, especially fresh tones, seem to be off when using flash. I have similiar problems with my Casio...

Overall, he gets nice photos and the camera serves him well. If he were to get another one today it would probaly be the S30 or S40, because he really likes the compact size and believes in at least 3 MP or more.

He has dropped the camera a few times and once had to disassumble it a bit to straighten out the metal case, but the camera still worked fine once he was done.

I noticed the best non-tiff resolution from the S20 produced 2-2.3 meg pics on average for him, while my Casio uses a bit more compression at about 1.2-1.5 meg per pic for its fine jpg setting. I don't know all the compressions available for the S20, but I tend to think my pics are as clear and detailed as his with less compression, and that might be addressed with newer models. He fills his 340M drive with 140+ pictures while I get 250+.

Last July, while I was shopping and comparing the S20, I saw the S20 for about $400 USD. Other competetor cameras were/are the Casio 3000/3500, both 3.3mp cameras in a similiar price range. The Casio 3000 is also discontinued and has appeared on eBay and other auction sites for good prices, while a quick check on the newer Casio 3500 at Focus camera revealed $409 USD. All these cameras produce pics very similiar in quality, though the Casios are larger in size, have more plastic parts and have more functions overall. The S20 focuses better in lower light than the Casios thanks to the focus assist light.

For me, I chose not to get the S20, mostly because of the batteries. Short life, plus an extra battery was something like $100 USD. If I were to buy today, I'd skip the previous generation cameras and get my hands on the S30, S40, G2 and Casio 4000 to do a real hands-on experience with each, and then decide. There are pluses and minuses with each, and you have to look at what is most important to you and go from there.

Hope that helps a bit... Good luck!
Dave

Corey Tracey said:

I have been shopping for a digital camera now for 1 year, waiting
for the quality to rise and the price to fall.
I have noticed that here in Vancouver Canada the S20 is now only
$599 canadian, and I was expecting to pay more for a 3 megapixel
camera, which is the type we are shopping for.

My question goes out to those who have or have had this model (over
1 year old now)

Is this a good enough price for this camera, knowing that I could
afford a little more, don't really have need for the movie mode,
and is the picture quality what you expected?

Thanks for your time.

Corey

Click to expand...

I had an S20 and recently sold it to upgrade to a G2. Don't bother with the S30 / S40. I ordered an S30 and sent it back two days later...it just didn't have the build quality of the S20.

The S20 does have a very slight blue cast to some pics, but this os only in pics where there is a lot of sky and/or water.

Check out my gallery and see what you think...
http://www.pbase.com/mattgannon

I liked the S20, if you have more to spend definitely get the G2. It's the best out there. Another choice could be the Sony P5 or the Casio QV-4000. They are both excellent too.

Good luck,
Matt.

Corey Tracey said:

Corey Tracey said:

Having said that, it also has it's limitations, the most noticable
being the pictures tend to have a bluish cast (tend to be on the
cool side).

$600 sounds way to high a price at this point though.

... Jim

Click to expand...

Just wondering Jim,

How blueish are we talking here? As an fairly inexperienced
photographer, and being a little color blind (not to blue) I may
not notice as much as others, but is it very noticeable?

I intend to make linen bound albums with this camera, with shots as
large as 8by10.
I will be getting the photos proffessionally developed.

Will it cause very minor or noticeable color change?

Thanks

PS I have found this camera @ London Drugs for 749.00 and at other
stores for higher but I have not been able to find it lower than
$599 do you have another recommendation?

Corey

Click to expand...

David Menagh said:

My father-in-law has the S20 and I have a Casio3500. He's had his
since it first came out (about 2 years?) and likes it overall.

Click to expand...

I also ran an S20 since it came out (and work has several). I've now got an S40 (and John has my S20...).

David Menagh said:

Here's a few things he doesn't like about it:
1) Battery life. This is his biggest complaint. He has 2 batteries
and needs them both to take 150 pictures. If he never uses the LCD
he might get 100+ pics with one battery, but overall he's getting
less than 50 pics per battery. This isn't too impressive. By
contrast, I can can easily take 300 pics with my Casio on 4 AA NiMh
batteries, and they cost less. We both use the microdrive.

Click to expand...

Wierd! I got about 150 pics per battery using a 340MByte microdrive, with a little use of the LCD - maybe I was using it less than your father, but even so there seems to be a big gap.

David Menagh said:

2) 2x Zoom. This is a trade off due to the smaller size -- he loves
being able to put the camera in his pocket, but really wishes the
zoom was better.

Click to expand...

He'd like the S40, then.

David Menagh said:

3) Flesh tones are off with flash. He's tried a lot of different
settings but colors, especially fresh tones, seem to be off when
using flash. I have similiar problems with my Casio...

Click to expand...

I had no problems with the camera's colours. It might help him to tell the camera what white balance to use?

David Menagh said:

Overall, he gets nice photos and the camera serves him well. If he
were to get another one today it would probaly be the S30 or S40,
because he really likes the compact size and believes in at least 3
MP or more.

He has dropped the camera a few times and once had to disassumble
it a bit to straighten out the metal case, but the camera still
worked fine once he was done.

Click to expand...

I dropped mine too - even onto Cotswold stones, but never had to take it apart.

David Menagh said:

I noticed the best non-tiff resolution from the S20 produced 2-2.3
meg pics on average for him, while my Casio uses a bit more
compression at about 1.2-1.5 meg per pic for its fine jpg setting.
I don't know all the compressions available for the S20, but I tend
to think my pics are as clear and detailed as his with less
compression, and that might be addressed with newer models. He
fills his 340M drive with 140+ pictures while I get 250+.

Click to expand...

Least compression on the S20 is visually not very different until you print a 10x8.

David Menagh said:

Last July, while I was shopping and comparing the S20, I saw the
S20 for about $400 USD. Other competetor cameras were/are the Casio
3000/3500, both 3.3mp cameras in a similiar price range. The Casio
3000 is also discontinued and has appeared on eBay and other
auction sites for good prices, while a quick check on the newer
Casio 3500 at Focus camera revealed $409 USD. All these cameras
produce pics very similiar in quality, though the Casios are larger
in size, have more plastic parts and have more functions overall.
The S20 focuses better in lower light than the Casios thanks to the
focus assist light.

Click to expand...

S20 is quick, too (and S40 quicker).

David Menagh said:

For me, I chose not to get the S20, mostly because of the
batteries. Short life, plus an extra battery was something like
$100 USD. If I were to buy today, I'd skip the previous generation
cameras and get my hands on the S30, S40, G2 and Casio 4000 to do a
real hands-on experience with each, and then decide. There are
pluses and minuses with each, and you have to look at what is most
important to you and go from there.

Click to expand...

The S40 is certainly brilliant - but the old S20 is still putting in a good performance and if you can find a discounted/secondhand one that fits your budget, go for it!

David Menagh said:

Hope that helps a bit... Good luck!
Dave

Click to expand...

--Sophie

From all the comments I think that you got some of the answers regarding the blue cast (nice pics in the gallery by the way!). The bluish cast seems more noticable with the flash. There are other cameras that have a much warmer look to the pictures (in some cases too warm in my opinion) Incidentally, it is easily adjusted for in PhotoShop or other apps. Setting the white balance for outdoor shots really helps as well (this is a very simple procedure). I definitely recommend a second battery. The build quality is excellent - this is one tough little camera.

.... Jim

it's mostly about white balance, underexposure...that's it

--hardcore Canon S20 user

vct said:

it's mostly about white balance, underexposure...that's it

Click to expand...

Victor Taillon said:

hardcore Canon S20 user

Click to expand...

Yes thank you for your info..... Now is it a problem that you are unable to compensate for?

Comparing this camera today @ $599 canadian (350USD / 250UK) is this an acceptable compromise or should I go up in price to avoid spoiling the shots?

I guess I am really wondering if this blueish tinge is something that is going to be noticeable in the final prints, when the digital zoom is not used and the resolution is high.

thanks

Corey

Corey Tracey said:

vct said:

it's mostly about white balance, underexposure...that's it

Click to expand...

Corey Tracey said:

hardcore Canon S20 user

Click to expand...

Yes thank you for your info..... Now is it a problem that you are
unable to compensate for?

Click to expand...

this blue cast issue doesn't occur if you have the correct wb setting and exposure compensation. full auto mode sometimes can be fooled and underexpose your image. if you can afford it try and buy the largest memory card, that way you can store lots of images, you can bracket your shots and pick the best one

Corey Tracey said:

Comparing this camera today @ $599 canadian (350USD / 250UK) is
this an acceptable compromise or should I go up in price to avoid
spoiling the shots?

Click to expand...

like I said earlier you are going to have to learn how digital works, there's more manual adjustsments to the newer models.

Corey Tracey said:

I guess I am really wondering if this blueish tinge is something
that is going to be noticeable in the final prints, when the
digital zoom is not used and the resolution is high.

Click to expand...

only if you have the camera set wrong....you're gonna have to use it and see how the settings work

Corey Tracey said:

thanks

Corey

Click to expand...

--hardcore Canon S20 user

I'm in the market for upgrading to a Pro90, or possibly a Sony 707. I have had my S20 for 2 years (Apr15th, 2000). I would sell you mine, with original box and everything, which includes extra battery and charger kit for $400.00. Just a thought.

Corey Tracey said:

vct said:

it's mostly about white balance, underexposure...that's it

Click to expand...

Corey Tracey said:

hardcore Canon S20 user

Click to expand...

Yes thank you for your info..... Now is it a problem that you are
unable to compensate for?
Comparing this camera today @ $599 canadian (350USD / 250UK) is
this an acceptable compromise or should I go up in price to avoid
spoiling the shots?

I guess I am really wondering if this blueish tinge is something
that is going to be noticeable in the final prints, when the
digital zoom is not used and the resolution is high.

thanks

Corey

Click to expand...

Thanks

I am going to buy this camera, I went to the local camera shop on the corner and I tried it out and reallt liked the feel of the camera.

At first the salesman didn't quit know all of the features that it has, but even he was a little pleased with the pictures in manual mode.

Thanks so much for your help. I will follow up in March to let you know how I enjoy this camera.

(future) hardcore Canon S20 user

Corey

Victor Taillon said:

only if you have the camera set wrong....you're gonna have to use
it and see how the settings work

Click to expand...

Victor Taillon said:

hardcore Canon S20 user

Click to expand...