S45 -- I decided on it, but the feel!!..........

Of course, remember that there are significant compromises to make when you get a small camera. You will miss out on many features and capabilities, not to mention battery life.

A pocket camera is fine for snapshots, but the slow lens and lack of features will render it useless in many conditions, and the 1 hour battery life will greatly limit its use as well...

anak said:

anak said:

at a local (expensive) cam shop. Holy smokes. Love at first
sight, and love at first hold.

Click to expand...

Did you try to look through the viewfinder? )))

Click to expand...

Most people use the LCD viefinder 99% of the time.

Mr. Toy said:

Thank you Steve!!! For the last several days I have also been
dealing with the S45 vs "something a bit smaller" dilemma (in my
case the Sony DSC-P9). I think your wisdom outlined above may have
solved the problem for me.

Click to expand...

I was there too, Mr. Toy...glad I could help...I think you will be happy with the s-45..

Steve

I second that about the Sony. I own the S75 and it hardly ever gets the exposure or focus correct. The menu system sucks, the memory stick sucks, the picture quality is poor compared to the G2. I'm extremely happy with my g2, only use the sony for work pictures now, the g2 is for my more serious photo work. Also the sony has a dedicated flash and does not have TTL flash exposure. The canon 420 ex flash is fantastic but large for the camera. Every camera has it good and bad points, you've got to work around them.
Good luck, Roy.

Mike Hunt said:

Supra92 said:

Altho the S230 Elph has not yet been eliminated, my choices now
are: S230 Elph, G3, Sony DSC-S85, and Olympus C-5050Zoom.

Click to expand...

That's a very eird set of choices. If you ant portability at the
great expense of features, performance, and battery life, then get
an Elph. Otheriwse, get the G3.

I owned a Sony S85 and BELIEVE ME, you don't want that camera if
you can afford a G3. Defective command dial, crappy waranty and
service from Sony, terrible autofocus, ridiculous Memory Stick
limitations.

The Olympus is very interesting, but I simply dont think it's as
good as the G3. Battery life is half as long, and requires use of 4
AA batteries and external charger. Zoom only 3x. Controls and menus
confusing. Reports of excessive chromatic aberrations.

Mike Hunt said:

My only concerns right now re: the G3 are: price,
sharp pic quality, heft.

Click to expand...

Price? Same suggested retail as Olympus. I bought mine from B&H
Photo for $729, including FedEx shipping and no tax.

Sharp Picture quality? Compared to what? Image quality is better
than Olympus, in spite of slightly lower resolution, and far better
than anything you'll ever get from a compacgt model or a Sony S85.
The only camera in this price range that competes favorably with
the G3 is the Sony 717.

Heft? Again, compared to what? It's no larger or heavier than the
Olympus (though the Olympus does have a nicer body design). It is
much larger and heavier than a compact camera, but the fifference
in capabilities is immense.

Click to expand...

--
panard

SOL said:

... G3 will never be a pocketable camera and it will stay at home
most of the time, you will only take it with you on some "special"
occasions, s45 on the other hand can be easily put in the pocket in
your jacket... I've had so many moments I wish I had ANY camera
with me...

Click to expand...

The G3 may be less portable, but it is far more versatile. What good is a tiny, go anywhere camera if its poor battery life, slow lens, and limited features severely limit what you can photograph?

I find any camera with a 1 hour battery to be virtually useless. I also find that a camera with a slow lens is unusable indoors or in dim light, severly restricting its usefulness.

Each camera has its place, but it's a mistake to assume that you'll get more use out of a smaller camera simply because it's more portable. You have to consider all the pros and cons and match them to your intended uses.

The Elph is strictly a point and shoot camera. Little or no creative control and very slo lens and short battery life.

Todd L said:

From my experience, my first choices are usually the best.

Click to expand...

I disagree when it comes to something as complex as a camera. My first choice would have been a Nikon CP5000, based on the great body design and long list of features. Only after studying it carefully did I realize that this was perhaps the last camera I would ever want to own.

It's a mistake to select a digital camera based primarily on looks and feel.

Roy Martin said:

I second that about the Sony. I own the S75 and it hardly ever gets
the exposure or focus correct. The menu system sucks, the memory
stick sucks, the picture quality is poor compared to the G2. I'm
extremely happy with my g2, only use the sony for work pictures
now, the g2 is for my more serious photo work. Also the sony has a
dedicated flash and does not have TTL flash exposure. The canon 420
ex flash is fantastic but large for the camera. Every camera has it
good and bad points, you've got to work around them.

Click to expand...

The S85's autofocus doesn't have a specific AF zone. It locks on to whatever is easiest to focus on anyhere in the frame! Useless!

Picture quality is good with good lighting, but lots of noise and chromatic aberration in dim light, and no noise reduction.

Sony doesn't have a Flash white balance setting, but when camera is in Manual mode, white balance can only be set manually. Result: Can't use flash in Manual camera mode!

I figuire that I should have 2 cameras... one compact... mostly to carry anywhere and 2nd one for indoor...

Mike Hunt said:

SOL said:

... G3 will never be a pocketable camera and it will stay at home
most of the time, you will only take it with you on some "special"
occasions, s45 on the other hand can be easily put in the pocket in
your jacket... I've had so many moments I wish I had ANY camera
with me...

Click to expand...

The G3 may be less portable, but it is far more versatile. What
good is a tiny, go anywhere camera if its poor battery life, slow
lens, and limited features severely limit what you can photograph?

I find any camera with a 1 hour battery to be virtually useless. I
also find that a camera with a slow lens is unusable indoors or in
dim light, severly restricting its usefulness.

Each camera has its place, but it's a mistake to assume that you'll
get more use out of a smaller camera simply because it's more
portable. You have to consider all the pros and cons and match them
to your intended uses.

Click to expand...

I really like s230 size myself, but looking at the pictures (mostly indoor) I am very dissapointed, s45 is far better in this case...

Christina said:

I bet it'll be fine. I hope.

Todd L said:

From my experience, my first choices are usually the best. I think
choices need to be made according to how your going to use the
camera. Example : Do you mind sitting a party with a large camera
around your neck with a bounce flash mounted? Do you mind carrying
a bag full of equiptment? Do you need complete flexibility with
your camera and tools? or do you want to make some compromises and
have something you can easily carry with you always, but with less
flexibility and performance? I'd love to have the G3 or G2, but
unfortunatley it would be left behind too often.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This is a really interesting thread to read. I just wanted to put my two cents in, since I see this now evolving into a discussion of features, etc.

I just think it's important for those of you who are excellent, experienced photographers to realize that there are some of us who don't know what we'd be "missing" on a camera like the Elph because...we have no idea what you're talking about. Nor are we inclined to learn.

I don't mean to be flip about it. But I am just now figuring out (because I felt like checking out some books on photography) what shutter speed and aperture are, and how they play together to make a photo turn out the way it does. And I've been lurking around this site for going on two years now. I have some idea about photo features, but not enough to learn how to manipulate even the few manual functions on my Kodak (mostly because the big, heavy thing was seldom with me)

I'm not stupid. And I'm not trying to say that you guys are stupid, of course you're not. It's just that -- you should look at the pictures I've taken with the digicam I have. You pros would be like, "wow, are these crappy." But to ME, they're not crappy because they're pictures of my friends and I like them and it helps me remember the party or the vacation or the wedding or what have you. I'm looking for something out of my camera that's just as valid as what a pro looks for out of HIS camera.

There's comments on this thread that suggest picking an Elph means you'd be giving up a ton of great stuff. Well, for me I have no idea what all that is. I don't know if I'd ever learn about all these features or not. Maybe I'd grow into it if I got a G3. (Not that THAT camera is on my list; I don't have the money for it.) Maybe I'd never take the camera off "auto." But for me, just having the camera WITH ME is a huge step in the right direction...I don't think pocketability can be underestimated for rank beginners. (and just an aside, for me both cameras are probably equally "pocketable" because I carry a backpack or a purse)

We'll see how things go with my S45. Maybe I'll be inspired to take a class or something.

Mike Hunt said:

Todd L said:

From my experience, my first choices are usually the best.

Click to expand...

I disagree when it comes to something as complex as a camera. My
first choice would have been a Nikon CP5000, based on the great
body design and long list of features. Only after studying it
carefully did I realize that this was perhaps the last camera I
would ever want to own.

It's a mistake to select a digital camera based primarily on looks
and feel.

Click to expand...

I agree with you. I also was at first tempted by the CP5000. Then I read some reviews, thougt about it one more time - and bought a G3 finally. I've not regretted it yet, although I would certainly have loved an 28mm equivalent wide end...

Then again, it's certainly a mistake to buy a camera only because it feels good. But OTOH, I would never buy a camera which DOESN'T feel good in my hands, just because it's a great camera otherwise. If it doesn't feel good, I don't feel good when taking pictures. And if I don't feel good, my pictures suck! Even more than they do anyway ;-)

Thomas Bantel

Mike Hunt said:

Keith Schmidt said:

I picked up the S45 from Dell for $450, and a
256 Mb cf card for another $60,

Click to expand...

Which brand CF card did you get, and where did you find that price?

Click to expand...

The CF card is a Simpletech. It's normally priced at $85.50, but you get 10% off right now from Dell, plus there's a $20 mail in rebate on it, so the net price is $56.95 plus shipping. Here's the link:

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?Sku=250571&category_id=4325&customer_id=19&c=us&l=en&cs=19

I haven't used a Simpletech card before, so I can't speak to its capabilities/reliability, but at that price, I couldn't pass it up.

Keith
--
Canon Powershot S45
http://www.pbase.com/themitty

This is the very reason I don't like s230 or why I like S30/40/45. In low light(indoor), the s230 becomes a very limited device, not so for S45. grab a flash and a slave, the problem is solved. As for the battery, it is a matter of personal style, I never encounter one occasion I have run out of battery, and I don't even carry a spare, nor the charger. I can in general take 80-100 shoots for a fully charged battery which is more than I need.

I wish my S30 has a faster lens(like f2.8 full range) but given the fact that its ISO 400 is more like ISO 800 comparing with film and after some practice, I have finally regained my ability to shoot at 1/8 to 1/15 with quite satisfactory result, it is not a such a limiting factor at all.

Mike Hunt said:

The G3 may be less portable, but it is far more versatile. What
good is a tiny, go anywhere camera if its poor battery life, slow
lens, and limited features severely limit what you can photograph?

I find any camera with a 1 hour battery to be virtually useless. I
also find that a camera with a slow lens is unusable indoors or in
dim light, severly restricting its usefulness.

Each camera has its place, but it's a mistake to assume that you'll
get more use out of a smaller camera simply because it's more
portable. You have to consider all the pros and cons and match them
to your intended uses.

Click to expand...

Christina said:

I just think it's important for those of you who are excellent,
experienced photographers to realize that there are some of us who
don't know what we'd be "missing" on a camera like the Elph
because...we have no idea what you're talking about. Nor are we
inclined to learn.

Click to expand...

Christina: Even for people who understand a little bit about how cameras work, these tradeoffs are still relevant. Just before my daughter was born last year, we bought an S300 Elph (2MP, 3x zoom). I already had a nice SLR setup, but we wanted something digital to send to grandparents, etc. The Elph series is great for taking snapshots like you describe---I just put it in my pocket with no case or anything or stick it in a pocket of the diaper bag. One of the best things about it is the very quick startup time---the lens extends and is ready to shoot almost immediately. With these advantages, our Elph has been the camera of choice since our daughter was born---we've taken several thousand pictures with it and just 2 or 3 rolls of film with the SLR. For snapshots, it's great.

On the other hand, with 1.5 years of experience with the Elph, I can also tell you that there are significant disadvantages as well---disadvantages that don't have much to do with "pro" manual adjustibility. For example: because the camera is smaller, you will get a lot more redeye. Also: because the lens is slower (lets in less light) it is harder to take casual pictures at parties or other situations with low light. Finally, because the camera is so small, sometimes its pretty hard to keep it still enough, especially when zoomed to telephoto (can lead to blurry pics).

For some of these reasons, I am seriously considering a G3. I'd like to have the Elph for convenience and the G3 for taking nice family portraits or indoor pics. This is a long-winded way of saying that all these cameras include compromises. Play around with the S45 for awhile and see if you like it---if not, send it back and get the S230. From your posts, it sounds like convenience is more important to you right now.

I am buying this camera. I borrowed a friend's S30 (same exact body) for a day. In addition to taking some pictures and exploring the menus and settings, I spent a good deal of time with it in my front pants pocket - standing, sitting, walking around. Unless you are wearing very tight pants, you can almost forget the camera is in there. I was very happy with its pocketability. Its length is a non issue; the narrow width is great, and the depth is just fine. I wouldn't hesitate to bring this thing anywhere.

I won't argue your points about holding the camera to take a picture, because that's up to you and your hands. I thought it was fine. Also, there is a ridge on the sliding cover that provides some front grip.

But as far as fitting in a pocket, I will argue that, because it really does. I don't even feel the need for a belt holster.
-Jack

People were teasing me whenever I said I can slide it into my front jeans pocket, as if they know my jeans more than I do

However, for the jeans pocket, I would use a soft velvet case that I borrowed from my mom's olympus as otherwise, it is possible that the front sliding cover may accidentally open when I pull it out.

Jack Michaud said:

I am buying this camera. I borrowed a friend's S30 (same exact
body) for a day. In addition to taking some pictures and exploring
the menus and settings, I spent a good deal of time with it in my
front pants pocket - standing, sitting, walking around. Unless you
are wearing very tight pants, you can almost forget the camera is
in there. I was very happy with its pocketability. Its length is
a non issue; the narrow width is great, and the depth is just fine.
I wouldn't hesitate to bring this thing anywhere.
I won't argue your points about holding the camera to take a
picture, because that's up to you and your hands. I thought it was
fine. Also, there is a ridge on the sliding cover that provides
some front grip.
But as far as fitting in a pocket, I will argue that, because it
really does. I don't even feel the need for a belt holster.
-Jack

Click to expand...

Thomas Bantel said:

Thomas Bantel said:

Todd L said:

From my experience, my first choices are usually the best.

Click to expand...

Mike Hunt wrote:
I disagree when it comes to something as complex as a camera.
It's a mistake to select a digital camera based primarily on looks
and feel.
Thomas Bantel wrote:

Click to expand...

I agree with you. I also was at first tempted by the CP5000. Then I
read some reviews, thougt about it one more time - and bought a G3
finally. I've not regretted it yet, although I would certainly have
loved an 28mm equivalent wide end...

Click to expand...

nah, I'm talking about the choice you make with "money in hand" to buy, not all the silly ones we make prior to that!

Mike Hunt said:

SOL said:

... G3 will never be a pocketable camera and it will stay at home
most of the time, you will only take it with you on some "special"
occasions, s45 on the other hand can be easily put in the pocket in
your jacket... I've had so many moments I wish I had ANY camera
with me...

Click to expand...

The G3 may be less portable, but it is far more versatile. What
good is a tiny, go anywhere camera if its poor battery life, slow
lens, and limited features severely limit what you can photograph?

I find any camera with a 1 hour battery to be virtually useless. I
also find that a camera with a slow lens is unusable indoors or in
dim light, severly restricting its usefulness.

Each camera has its place, but it's a mistake to assume that you'll
get more use out of a smaller camera simply because it's more
portable. You have to consider all the pros and cons and match them
to your intended uses.

Click to expand...

Hold the fort here... limited battery life in the S45??? I'm consistently getting 120 shots on a battery and carry a spare in my pocket. One battery lasts me for a whole day of shooting. (I've had to go to the spare just once!)

Limited "slow" lens??? Just when has F:2.8 been considered a slow zoom lens? In Canon's real professional series for Digital SLR cameras, the two best "L" series lenses with price tags in the thousands of dollars, are F:2.8 lenses! These are the absolute highest quality lenses that Canon makes at any price. Tell the pros that F:2.8 is too slow to be of any use?

The difference between the lens speed of the S45 and the G3 is 1 stop at wide angle and 1.4 stop at telephoto. To a skilled photographer that difference in speed is totally a non-issue.

And lastly, Canon makes different cameras for different preferences. Canon puts both the S45 and G3 in the same class, "High End Digital Cameras". Neither one is a professional Digital SLR with interchangeable lenses for "real" flexibility.

I prefer using a smaller camera with the same CCD and the same electronics and the same resolution lens as the G3. In fact, the distortion specs of the S45 lens is better than the G3.

I prefer not having a flash shoe on top of my camera as I much prefer the flexibility and more natural lighting of an off camera slave flash over a flash stuck on top of the camera.

Take a look at my two available light photos taken inside of a dimly lit restaurant and tell me the S45 cannot do dimly lit interiors. One stop of lens speed would have made no difference whatsoever on these two shots.

And lastly, for my preferences, if the S45 and the G3 were exactly the same price, I'd choose the S45.

http://GaryCoombs.com/S45
--
Gary

Since there seems to be many S45 users on this thread, I wanted to pose a question. I am getting ready to bite the bullet on the S45 (Ritzcamera.com for $500, with free shipping). Since I know I will be adding a CF card, probably a 256MB, I have been doing some research on this as well. I have read about the Lexar 4x, 8x, 12x, 24x, and the SanDisk Ultra, etc. I have also read about how an 8x card might be equivalent to a normal SanDisk card, and that it is just a form of marketing gimmick.

Question: Is the S45 going to be the limiting factor on the speed of the CF card? If so, I would assume that at some point, you would be spending add'l $'s for no add'l benefit. What is the optimum CF card/speed for the S45?

Thanks for your input on this topic.....