i have to admit, i was surprised at some of the great reviews i've read as of late....not only does this little sucker take good pictures...but i'll go on a limb, the pictures actually look better than the s400...not slightly better, how about much better! the indoor shots on the s400 suck! sure, no optical zoom might seem like a drag, but the fact is, you're not buying this camera for that purpose! forget about the optio s, s4...casio s3, z3, and z4...this thing takes better pictures...i printed directly from my i960...using pictbride...even trimmed some photos (crop) from it's lcd...let me tell you...the 8X10 looks amazing....!!!! oh...bought the cp-10 with direct connect for $35 this afternoon...the kip-36 wallet size paper was $8 for 36 pack....wow!!! i won't share location for a couple of days...at least until i have time to buy lots more paper!!!! buy it...your wife, girlfriend, mistress, or whoever else, will love it!!!!
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
The sd10....shocked, but actually very good!!!
- Thread starter olyfan
- Start date
Steve Duncan
Member
Well, as a recent SD10 buyer, I'm really glad to see your message. But, I think a lot of folks may take a exception to the idea that the SD10 is better than the universally-praised S400 ;-) I'll just get my sunglasses to read the followup posts in case the flames get bright.
I have to agree on the photo quality though. I have only my old G1 to compare to, but it compares favorably. I have a very large world map on my wall, and I shot it with both cams, and printed the results with no modification. My wife picked the SD10 print as being both clearer and better looking. Not really conclusive, but I was surprised - she's a hard-core scrapbooker, and has a rather critical eye. Of course, the G1 is lower overall resolution, but as I recall it has a larger CCD, and certainly its lens should be sharper than the tiny one in the SD10.
I have to agree on the photo quality though. I have only my old G1 to compare to, but it compares favorably. I have a very large world map on my wall, and I shot it with both cams, and printed the results with no modification. My wife picked the SD10 print as being both clearer and better looking. Not really conclusive, but I was surprised - she's a hard-core scrapbooker, and has a rather critical eye. Of course, the G1 is lower overall resolution, but as I recall it has a larger CCD, and certainly its lens should be sharper than the tiny one in the SD10.
Marco Nero
Veteran Member
Since the s400 takes a picture comparable to a G3 under ideal conditions, you've effectively stated that the SD10 essentially takes a better pic than the G3.
Remember to back up such statements with some examples as required by the charter of this website. Can you post some comparitive images or even some picture's you've taken so we can take a look at them? It might go a long way to selling this new camera to the general public.
Cheers,
--
Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design
SkiManDan2
Member
I for one would not like evidence until I state that you can proceed.. Only because I am experiencing a long enough delay without great proof that this camera is amazing... i will let you know when I get mine, and then you can provide the evidence 
i said no such thing....first of all, although you are entitled to your opinion, to say that the s400 snaps are comparable to a g3 under ideal conditions, is way off base! for most people who read these messages, 99 % of their shots will never be under ideal conditions! let's face it, most people who find themselves under prime conditions, don't know how to use their equipment(g3) to even take advantage of what is staring at them in the face!!! personally, i think the g3 takes better photographs than the g5....the s400 shots that i've seen, at least indoors, have been subpar! all i'm trying to imply is that this camera, for whatever the reason, takes shots that shock the hell out of me! i haven't had one out of focus shot yet! indoors or outdoors...haven't taken any shots at night... please, don't take my word for it...... go look at the samples and review at steve's digicams, or dcresources...i'm too lazy to post pics....with a 56k upload speed, that is....
I'll have to agree with Marco...this sounds a bit far fetched......I'd like to see proof to back up the following statement:
Just post a few examples of this S400 eating machine....I think a lot of us would really like to see them.
CHIA
I own both a G3 & S400, and would like to see proof of this "much better" image quality. When Marco mentions ideal conditions, I think he simply means, non-challenging conditions, like a nice sunny day outside, as opposed to indoor low light pictures.
Just post a few examples of this S400 eating machine....I think a lot of us would really like to see them.
CHIA
Marco Nero
Veteran Member
Point taken, folks. The G3/s400 picture comparison was actually made by Phil during one of his in-depth reviews. I agree that we need to see some more examples from the SD10. The only user review of this camera here gives it 3 out of 5.
Let's see what it can do. Someone post us some samples.
Cheers all.
--
Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design
Let's see what it can do. Someone post us some samples.
Cheers all.
--
Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design
funkyjudge
Member
jimr
Forum Pro
Given a fixed focal length lens on the SD10, just how much digital zooming can you do (any? 2 X? 3 X?) ?
SeanU
Senior Member
It is much harder to make zoom lenses that are sharp from corner to corner with little distortion at all zoom lengths than it is to make a fixed focal length lens sharp and distortion free. As to why night time pictures are better, I'd like to see some examples of what you are talking about. Is it noise, flash, sharpness ? I personally own an S400, and while I enjoy the camera for snapshots, the ISO 200+ images are very noisy, and the flash is dismal. I also hate the focusing system (even when set to the center focus point). Is the SD10 fixed focus, or does it actually require focusing on each shot?
Sean
Sean
Steve Duncan
Member
Up to 5.7x, but anything over about 2.5x is pretty icky in my experience. Really, it depends on whether the destination is print or the web - I think 5.7's ok for the screen.
Steve Duncan
Member
The SD10 has a "quick shot" mode that fixes focus for quick shooting. The subject is supposed to be minimum 1.5m away for this mode. The way it works, with QS on you can just mash the shutter and get a shot. If you hold halfway, it will focus properly. So you can leave it on all the time.
Steve Duncan
Member
Ok, so one shot from each is not exactly conclusive, but it's a start:
http://www.pbase.com/swduncan/g1_sd10
Identical settings were used on both cameras. Largest jpeg, minimum compression, auto white balance, no modification of any kind. I tried to zoom the G1 as close as possible to the SD10's focal length, as its wide end is a bit wider than the SD10.
Looks like it's time for me to upgrade my good/big camera ;-) I hope my wife understands...
http://www.pbase.com/swduncan/g1_sd10
Identical settings were used on both cameras. Largest jpeg, minimum compression, auto white balance, no modification of any kind. I tried to zoom the G1 as close as possible to the SD10's focal length, as its wide end is a bit wider than the SD10.
Looks like it's time for me to upgrade my good/big camera ;-) I hope my wife understands...
Interesting comparison. I always like to compare bookcase shots for detail. I'm impressed with what I perceive as a complete lack of noise in the shadow areas; I noticed that the jagged diagonals are no worse in the SD10 than they are in the G1, after magnifying up to 1000x. The SD10 seems to have the typical red cast issue, but it's easily correctible with software. The sharpness is impressive, also.
Drew
Steve Duncan
Member
And the exposure seems to be a little better. I pretty much always have the G1 set to under expose by either 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop.
As for the red cast, auto WB was used with only tungsten lighting. With the tungsten setting both cameras perform better. I think I might try them both with the tungsten setting.
I just got the SD10, my wife isn't going to let me replace the G1 anytime soon...
As for the red cast, auto WB was used with only tungsten lighting. With the tungsten setting both cameras perform better. I think I might try them both with the tungsten setting.
I just got the SD10, my wife isn't going to let me replace the G1 anytime soon...
Steve Duncan
Member
Ok, I'm not sure that in my original two pics I had the same ISO on the G1 - it was set to Auto. The jpeg doesn't say, and the shutter speeds aren't the same.
So, here we go again, only this time both are ISO 50, with tungsten WB.
http://www.pbase.com/swduncan/g1_sd10
Now the SD10 doesn't fair so well to my eye...at least color wise.
So, here we go again, only this time both are ISO 50, with tungsten WB.
http://www.pbase.com/swduncan/g1_sd10
Now the SD10 doesn't fair so well to my eye...at least color wise.
leicaman
Senior Member
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum