SD870 found in Best Buy today - Purchased!

I was in the store today (Fry's), and tried the SD870, which I really want to love. The 3" LCD is nice, although my thumb rests on the top right corner, so not a great grip.

I framed a picture of a store shelf, and noticed quite a bit of barrel distortion. I would guess 3%. Then I tried the SD800 (also 28mm equiv), and the barrel distortion seemed better in the SD800, maybe 1.5%. Has anyone else seen that? I thought the two used the same lens, but maybe the larger CCD makes the distortion worse?

Also frustrating is that even 3 zoom steps in (tap, tap, tap of the zoom), there was still barrel distortion. I should have checked to see when it disappears -- I had hoped that by the 35mm point, it would be gone. Can anyone confirm this? (The battery went dead before I could do much testing. Remember, this is Fry's.)

Then I tried the Panasonic FX-100 (12 mp), and I didn't notice any barrel distortion. How do they do it? Why can't Canon match Panasonic's Leica lens?

The FX-100 seems like the winner, but I hate the user interface and controls. My last 5 cameras have been Canon, so I want to like the SD870... but I can't. Argh!

I owned a Ricoh R4 for about a year and a half. I found it a fun, easy camera to use and loved having 28mm WA. However, I always felt like the pictures were a bit washed out color and sharpness wise. And upon dropping it once from about two feet, it fell apart and died. So the quality is poor. ALso, note that Ricoh only uses a small 1/2.5 sensor and i think this led to the lower picture quality. My Canon S40 had great picture quality but was difficult to use (tiny hard to manipulate controls).

Only Panasoniz TZ3/2 has the same feature set and that leica lens is incredible, plus the build is great. But every single review cites too ambitious noise reduction and color streaking--apparently the processor is just not very good.

I too was consdidering the SD800 (the extra megapixels from the 870 can only lead to additional noise), but hearing the issues about barrel distortion means the 28mm isn't all that usable. If only we could put a Canon sensor with a leica lens. I'm considering picking up an old Fuji E900 which only goes to 32mm (but that's wider than many) and great images. I too am confused about what to do and am thinking of just sticking with my film camera.

I'm not sure why you posted the same verbatim post in multiple SD870 threads.

I've taken some very nice shots with the SD870 (you can find them by searching on my posts) and don't find the barrel distortion as noticeable as I did when I first started shooting with the camera.

Do certain other cameras like the Panasonic FX33 offer 28mm with less distortion? Possibly they do, but I love the Canon interface/screen and ease of use. That's worth a tiny bit of IQ in my book.

RP_CanonSD700 said:

I was in the store today (Fry's), and tried the SD870, which I really
want to love. The 3" LCD is nice, although my thumb rests on the top
right corner, so not a great grip.

I framed a picture of a store shelf, and noticed quite a bit of
barrel distortion. I would guess 3%. Then I tried the SD800 (also
28mm equiv), and the barrel distortion seemed better in the SD800,
maybe 1.5%. Has anyone else seen that? I thought the two used the
same lens, but maybe the larger CCD makes the distortion worse?

Also frustrating is that even 3 zoom steps in (tap, tap, tap of the
zoom), there was still barrel distortion. I should have checked to
see when it disappears -- I had hoped that by the 35mm point, it
would be gone. Can anyone confirm this? (The battery went dead
before I could do much testing. Remember, this is Fry's.)

Then I tried the Panasonic FX-100 (12 mp), and I didn't notice any
barrel distortion. How do they do it? Why can't Canon match
Panasonic's Leica lens?

The FX-100 seems like the winner, but I hate the user interface and
controls. My last 5 cameras have been Canon, so I want to like the
SD870... but I can't. Argh!

Click to expand...

While I tend to agree that 850 will give sharper picture, what do you guys think of the 950? Will it be even better than the 850 because of the bigger sensor? or more noisy because of more pixels?

Hey jmpage2,

you seem to have some experience with both cameras.

Is the IQ of the WA SD870 a lot poorer than the SD850?

Purely focusing on IQ: what are the main differences between these cameras?

Hope to hear from you! Cheers

Keep in mind the 850 doesnt do 28mm, which is why most people want that camera. The camera line is more like the 800 to the 870 model.

Mimi82 said:

Hey jmpage2,

you seem to have some experience with both cameras.

Is the IQ of the WA SD870 a lot poorer than the SD850?

Purely focusing on IQ: what are the main differences between these
cameras?

Hope to hear from you! Cheers

Click to expand...

Woah, best buy had the fx100?

Hey, yeah I know it the 850 has no WA.. still, if the IQ is a lot better than the SD870, i'd be willing to sacrifice the WA... is it though??

I've seen the FX100 here in stores already (netherlands) it looks fabulous... hadn't had a chance to play with it yet... but I'm going back tomorrow... It seems like a competitor too... although I have no experience with Panny color/IQ/noise etc.

If anyone does know what the advantages of the Canon SDseries are over the Panny FX100 (and FX33/55 for that matter) I'd be thrilled to know!!!

Both cameras seem to have some issues with barrel distortion in the corners. Which is pretty common in small compact cameras.

It's a bit worse in the 870 than it is in the 850.

The FX33 is apparently a bit better than both due to it's better designed lens.

Mimi82 said:

Hey, yeah I know it the 850 has no WA.. still, if the IQ is a lot
better than the SD870, i'd be willing to sacrifice the WA... is it
though??

I've seen the FX100 here in stores already (netherlands) it looks
fabulous... hadn't had a chance to play with it yet... but I'm going
back tomorrow... It seems like a competitor too... although I have no
experience with Panny color/IQ/noise etc.

If anyone does know what the advantages of the Canon SDseries are
over the Panny FX100 (and FX33/55 for that matter) I'd be thrilled to
know!!!

Click to expand...

I had 3 SD850IS (US) cameras. I mentioned my concern about corner sharpness before I purchased so CC waived the 15% restock fee. I ended up returning the camera for a full refund. All samples exhibited softness/distortion in the corners at 35mm. The 28mm cams are a bit worse. I knew Canon had QC issues from my experience with the S400. Those had issues with the AF assist light alignment. I did get a good one finally and it still serves me well after almost 4 years of use. I ended up buying the Fuji F31FD. I have a Nikon D2X as well. Anyway the fuji gives me very nice 12x16 prints and the ability to pull off remarkable available light photos. The SD850IS is of slightly better build quality than the F31FD (IMO) and produced very nice pics as well, but the corner mush is quite apparent at 12x16 size prints. I will also say; if I zoomed in to above 35mm the prints were very sharp edge to edge. Suffice to say; for such a small profile, todays pocket cams are amazing and a great relief from lugging the heavy pro gear around. I am looking forward to seeing what the Canon SD950 has to offer.

Honestly, I don't think too many people are taking compact cameras and doing 12X16 prints from them.

I print 4X6 or if it's a good picture 5X7 on pics taken on my compact camera. Those photos also frequently make their way into my blog, etc.

If I am 'shooting' for real then I break out my SLR.

I realize everyone's needs are different but I think you are probably in a small group of people who will print at those sizes.

nelssen said:

I had 3 SD850IS (US) cameras. I mentioned my concern about corner
sharpness before I purchased so CC waived the 15% restock fee. I
ended up returning the camera for a full refund. All samples
exhibited softness/distortion in the corners at 35mm. The 28mm cams
are a bit worse. I knew Canon had QC issues from my experience with
the S400. Those had issues with the AF assist light alignment. I did
get a good one finally and it still serves me well after almost 4
years of use. I ended up buying the Fuji F31FD. I have a Nikon D2X as
well. Anyway the fuji gives me very nice 12x16 prints and the ability
to pull off remarkable available light photos. The SD850IS is of
slightly better build quality than the F31FD (IMO) and produced very
nice pics as well, but the corner mush is quite apparent at 12x16
size prints. I will also say; if I zoomed in to above 35mm the prints
were very sharp edge to edge. Suffice to say; for such a small
profile, todays pocket cams are amazing and a great relief from
lugging the heavy pro gear around. I am looking forward to seeing
what the Canon SD950 has to offer.

Click to expand...

Hi,

Glad I found your page! I have been debating getting a Canon for some time, and was glad to see the new versions out. I have several questions--

thanks for your info on the 28mm performance. I too like the wide angle option.

I have read that these cameras do not have a good battery life indicator, you are alerted just before it dies instead of having a bar graph Also for picture space remaining on the card. I was hoping that maybe they had updated the software to improve this.

Do you think the lack of viewfinder will be a problem at the beach? You say the screen is bright, do you think bright enough for beach use?

Is there a burst mode that works for sports shots--catching hs football and cheerleaders, etc.

Thanks for posting your pics. It helped me to be more comfortable with performance at high ISO and wide angle.

This camera has a three stage battery indicator. I have never run the battery out so don't have any experience in that department. I can tell you that the battery indicator will only show onscreen when you click the 'display' button to get the fully detailed display on the LCD, then the battery indicator is shown in the upper right corner of the display. The camera also clearly shows how many pictures can be taken at current settings before the memory card is full, or how much video can be recorded.

The LCD is very bright and has a great anti-glare coating. I expect that there will always be a few situations when it will be difficult to see an LCD screen, but I haven't run into such a situation with this one. Seems quite good to me.

I don't think cameras like this one are useful for photographing action. focusing isn't fast enough and the lens is not long enough to get close to your subject. Additionally the small sensor means that even if you do put the camera in center focus mode and manage to catch someone moving around you are going to get poor subject isolution (the things behind and in front of the subject are going to be in focus too).

You could always give it a try, but if you are serious about photographing sports, etc, consider getting a used DSLR and decent F4 telephoto lens for it, you will probably get much better results assuming you learn how to shoot with the SLR.

rich904 said:

Hi,

Glad I found your page! I have been debating getting a Canon for some
time, and was glad to see the new versions out. I have several
questions--

thanks for your info on the 28mm performance. I too like the wide
angle option.

I have read that these cameras do not have a good battery life
indicator, you are alerted just before it dies instead of having a
bar graph Also for picture space remaining on the card. I was hoping
that maybe they had updated the software to improve this.

Do you think the lack of viewfinder will be a problem at the beach?
You say the screen is bright, do you think bright enough for beach
use?

Is there a burst mode that works for sports shots--catching hs
football and cheerleaders, etc.

Thanks for posting your pics. It helped me to be more comfortable
with performance at high ISO and wide angle.

Click to expand...

thanks for the insights. I will probably give it a try.

I do understand your comment re using a better camera for moving action. I should probably take a look for a good slr for that purpose--amd you are right on about used. It is no big deal to have a larger camera for those outings, but it is sure nice to have such a compact piece that can take good pics for general use and trips.

Most obliged for the info. I'll continue to read. Very interesting info can be learned from others before buying via sites such as yours.

thx

I think the 3-level battery meter is new for the Canon SD870/SD950. The older ones just had an "I'm about to die" indicator. Even 3 levels is less than my cell phone, which was almost free... kind of sad.

That being, said, both my SD500 and SD700 go forever on a battery. I've filled up a 2 GB memory card without killing the battery (240 outdoor pics + 40 movies (12 minutes)).

These little P&S's are our main source for large images.

We have both the 7mp sd800 and now the FX 100. The quality is "almost" identicle IMO..







My first post so hopefully the pictures show up..

jmpage2 said:

ISO400 performance is good. There's some noise that cleans up very
nicely with Noiseware Professional without noticeable loss of detail.
ISO800 is useable after noise reduction and some sharpening but I
would only consider using it for resized shots or small prints.
ISO1600 is a mess and Canon should be ashamed of themselves for
advertising it on this piece.

Click to expand...

Hello,

I am wondering why you chose Noiseware Professional rather than the free or less expensive standard versions of this product.

Will the free version work well for most situation?

I have purchased Noiseware for use with my Canon 20D and don't have any experience with the free version of the software.

I use the plugin for Adobe CS2.

Marty Too said:

jmpage2 said:

ISO400 performance is good. There's some noise that cleans up very
nicely with Noiseware Professional without noticeable loss of detail.
ISO800 is useable after noise reduction and some sharpening but I
would only consider using it for resized shots or small prints.
ISO1600 is a mess and Canon should be ashamed of themselves for
advertising it on this piece.

Click to expand...

Hello,

I am wondering why you chose Noiseware Professional rather than the
free or less expensive standard versions of this product.

Will the free version work well for most situation?

Click to expand...