Reading mode: Light Dark

Goodbye Canon Talk :-(

Go to last post
No thanks, toys not needed any longer.
--

The choices you've made in the past and the ones you make today create your tomorrow.

See Cuba & NYC at http://www.jonrp.smugmug.com
 
really, a 2.5 sensor with that long of a zoom?? C'mon, its not a serious camera; a toy for newbies is what it looks like.
--

The choices you've made in the past and the ones you make today create your tomorrow.

See Cuba & NYC at http://www.jonrp.smugmug.com
 
Hi Hisham,

I understand the excitement. I too hope that the S5IS is an excellent camera. I might buy one too if the professional and user reviews are high. But I hope Canon doesn't produce one just to keep up with marketing races of zoom and MP. The S5IS, if it goes above 8 MP, should have a first class sensor, no smaller than 2/3". They should keep the zoom at 12x and make the image quality of the lense and sensor combination better, with less CA and PF.

When I saw your first post of this thread, I thought it was interesting, but did not think it would produce such interest and controversy to the tune of 96 posts now. And now I have contributed to 2 of those posts. Arggg.

I too am getting more involved in photography as well, day by day and week by week, as a result of these new Canon cameras and this forum. I am now getting more interested in the CTF Challenges, as I came in a tie for 2nd in yesterday's mini-challenge on Flora, my first entry ever. But I think we need to be a bit more reserved in jumping off the boat and into someone else's boat too soon before the boat has been deemed seaworthy. That's all. Keep the G7 photos coming, I think you take great pics. :o)

--
Cheers,

Bryan P.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/29386469@N00/
 
Still happy about the 18x but not as much. I have never used a tripod for

stills and don't want to start. I get enough hand shake at 12 x. image stabilization can only do so much, but then the SP550 is also a wide 28mm. Here is a heavy cropped hand held shot 12x. Think how much closer the little birdy would have been with an 18x.
Dave

 
sircarl said:
The EVF alone is enough to disqualify it for me. But others
obviously feel different.
Click to expand...
Hmmm ... I'd like to see an optical viewfinder accurate with an 18x zoom ...

The big issue I have with Oly is their continued use of xD media. If they took a hint from Fuji and started making cameras with both xD and SD slots, they might find their market share rocketing up (with Fuji's recent decision to do this, they're now the only company forcing users to buy xD cards, AFAIK).

It's a nice camera on paper, though :)
 
RoyGBiv said:
A lens assembly that starts at 28mm/f2.8 and goes to f4.5@504mm vs.
an assembly that starts at 36mm/f2.7 and goes to f3.5@432mm...

I dunno...it doesn't sound like you've bought much speed, and
you've sacrificed versatility both in your loss of wide-angle and
tele.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is a big loss between 36mm and 28mm. But the difference at the long end of 2/3 of a stop is quite significant and it's where you need it most.
RoyGBiv said:
Your max fstop@36mm is almost identical to the oly's@28mm.
Personally, I'd rather have the versatility of the 28mm, matching
speed on the S3's 36m.
Click to expand...
I'd rather have wider too and the difference between f2.7 and f2.8 is not significant.
RoyGBiv said:
I guess I have a bit of skepticism on how good the 18x IQ is going
to be, through the range That's a heck of alot of bending going on
there. This thing would be a giant if they tried it on a 1/1.8"
sensor or bigger.
Click to expand...
But then the lens would either be 2/3 of a stop slower yet, or something like 50% larger.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
From the specs on Olympus's site, they still left out

1. Interval timer for time lapse

or, failing that,

2. Remote shutter-release jack
 
Just use SD and be done with it, Olympus. How many damned formats and card readers do we want to lug around?

If CF is too big, use SD. It's that simple.
 
Seb74 said:
Maybe no issue for people that never used one, but as soon as you
had such a camera for just a few days you really dont want to leave
it.
Click to expand...
Actually, after having a swivel screen on the S3, I was glad the G7 didn't have one as I find I spend too much time on them. I know it's useful but I find it's gets in the way more times so I'm glad some cameras comes without it.

--
Stephan
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephanecurzi/
http://www.projetsurbain.com/photographie/
 
bdery said:
This is a stupid listing of crippling features. If such lenses were
an good, Canon and Nikon would sell them for their DSLRs, at the
price of a car. And get buyers. I'm guessing the high ISO is only
available at lower res, which means it's not high ISO, it's
downsampling. xD cards have the highest failure rate in the market.
And Olympus's IS is yet unproven.

You have to learn to think beynd the spec sheet. Consider what
influence a specific parameter has on the rest of the camera. And
wonder why no one made a 18X zoom before (it takes about 20 minutes
with a free lens design software to draw the first iteration of
such a lens, it'sno big deal.Making it GOOD and worth anything is
another story).
Click to expand...
Hi,

this is the optical design of that Olmypus 18x zoom.



http://www.digitalkamera.de/Info/Erste_Eindruecke_vom_neuen_Zoom-Rekordhalter_Olympus_SP-550_UZ_3701.asp

14 elements
2x ED glass
4x aspherical lens

quite a compley (and proably not cheap) design. I assume that most of the money on that camera is in the lens.

btw: If someone is interested in the Olympus ccd-shift system: (they claim that it is their own system which uses micro motors instead of piezo elements or magnets)



(sadly its not a good quality picture)

http://www.photoscala.de/node/2595

best regards
 
As mentioned in a couple of threads, how is the menu setup? Olympus cameras use a buried menu hierarchy that is challenging to get used to (for me anyway). I came from Olympus SLRs to Canon digitals, after finding the menu system Olympus used to be less "user-friendly"

--
Bill
Check out some of my favorite shots!!!
http://wpdesigns.smugmug.com/
 
Well clearly "on paper" this looks great. It seems to have a good assortment of what lots of folks are looking for these days. The look of the camera is also quite appealing. However, while so many are suddenly ready to whip out the credit card and jump ship from Canon, I think it might be wise to hold off until some of the cameras actually get out in the field and some of the Pro reviewers peel back the layers. The devil is always in those details and we've seen many a seemingly delicious camera turn out to be something else.

Those of us who've been around a while have seen many a whiz bang camera from other makers get announced, only to later discover that there can be some serious issues in what appears to be a great package.

Personally, I'm a bit suspicious whenever I see a wide angle and a super zoom combined . . . especially on a mediocre CCD . . . and especially when they're stretching things even further out to 3200 & 5000 ISO. There's bound to be a trade-off somewhere in the image quality folks. I too am really hoping it is all it appears to be because if nothing else it will definitely get Canon nervous and rightfully so. I'm just passing on a caution to wait and see what really lurks within this camera before the credit card orders go screaming into the stores.
 
Cephalotus said:
14 elements
2x ED glass
4x aspherical lens

quite a compley (and proably not cheap) design. I assume that most
of the money on that camera is in the lens.
Click to expand...
The more glass, the more CA, PF, aberrations, distorsion, etc. There is no free lunch in lens design, except if someone comes up with a new way to bend the lightpaths. But adding more glass is nothing new, and I'm not holding my breath for the performances of this lens.

--
bdery

Québec city, Canada
C A N O N S 2
C O O L P I X S Q
http://s108.photobucket.com/albums/n13/bdery/
 
bdery said:
bdery said:
7.1mp
Click to expand...
Not useful. 3 MP is more than enough for most users.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree here.

Have you ever use a software like iPhoto to print a photo-book ?
At 3mp, you don't have enough resolution to print a full page on 8x10;
A 4mp, you can't really crop.

More that 3mp IS useful, maybe you don't want to print high quality but almost everyone I know that own Macs do print 8x10 inch book so they do need more that 3mp.

I don't know why people insist it's bad to want more pixels, the 7mp camera these days have as much quality of the older 3mp and way more details in images, then why people insist it's not useful is beyond me?

--
Stephan
http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephanecurzi/
http://www.projetsurbain.com/photographie/
 
bdery said:
Cephalotus said:
14 elements
2x ED glass
4x aspherical lens

quite a compley (and proably not cheap) design. I assume that most
of the money on that camera is in the lens.
Click to expand...
The more glass, the more CA, PF, aberrations, distorsion, etc.
Click to expand...
That is just not true. A simple single lens has horrible CA since it's uncorrected for it. Adding two more elements for a triplet makes things better, not worse. My best lens has 23 elements:



--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top