new Ixus 400 :( - are these pics good?

andru123 · Nov 29, 2003

Hi,
I just bought Ixus 400 and ...

I really thought that the quality would be better. But...

Well, inside or low-light fotos are ... hmm terrible. The only more or less good fotos are produced outside with bright sky. But.. even the photos with a lot of light do not have quality one would expect from 499 euro equipement.

Or are my expectations too high for the digital cameras?

Well, if you please take a look at the pictures of a flower, made on a very white foggy day (a lot of light from the window), tell me if it's a ugly picture, or digital cameras produce ALL pictures like these?

http://community.webshots.com/user/andru123

album "Flowers" has 3 pics.

Ron_in_TN · Nov 29, 2003

andru123 said:
Hi,
I just bought Ixus 400 and ...

I really thought that the quality would be better. But...

Well, inside or low-light fotos are ... hmm terrible. The only more
or less good fotos are produced outside with bright sky. But.. even
the photos with a lot of light do not have quality one would expect
from 499 euro equipement.

Or are my expectations too high for the digital cameras?

Well, if you please take a look at the pictures of a flower, made
on a very white foggy day (a lot of light from the window), tell me
if it's a ugly picture, or digital cameras produce ALL pictures
like these?

http://community.webshots.com/user/andru123

album "Flowers" has 3 pics.

Indoor pictures with bright window light in the background typically turn out sub-par. But, there are ways to work around it. What settings did you use? Auto?
http://www.pbase.com/ron_in_tn

wlachan · Nov 29, 2003

Looks like poor technique to me. Judging from the samples on dpreview. S400 is a lot more capable than this.
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan/canon_a80

andru123 said:
Hi,
I just bought Ixus 400 and ...

I really thought that the quality would be better. But...

Well, inside or low-light fotos are ... hmm terrible. The only more
or less good fotos are produced outside with bright sky. But.. even
the photos with a lot of light do not have quality one would expect
from 499 euro equipement.

Or are my expectations too high for the digital cameras?

Well, if you please take a look at the pictures of a flower, made
on a very white foggy day (a lot of light from the window), tell me
if it's a ugly picture, or digital cameras produce ALL pictures
like these?

http://community.webshots.com/user/andru123

album "Flowers" has 3 pics.

buckchoi · Nov 29, 2003

The first two are OK. But the last one i think the metering was put off by the bright sunlight coming through the window so therefore the flowers did not come out so good.

andru123 said:
Hi,
I just bought Ixus 400 and ...

I really thought that the quality would be better. But...

Well, inside or low-light fotos are ... hmm terrible. The only more
or less good fotos are produced outside with bright sky. But.. even
the photos with a lot of light do not have quality one would expect
from 499 euro equipement.

Or are my expectations too high for the digital cameras?

Well, if you please take a look at the pictures of a flower, made
on a very white foggy day (a lot of light from the window), tell me
if it's a ugly picture, or digital cameras produce ALL pictures
like these?

http://community.webshots.com/user/andru123

album "Flowers" has 3 pics.

andru123 · Nov 30, 2003

It was taken in Automatic mode, with all default settings (right out the package). Is the ANY way manual/no flash/no autofocus would be better, what do you think?

Blake Cook · Nov 30, 2003

It's technique, not the camera.

I would suggest that you try a variety of settings and display them on your pc. Just make sure you note the settings of each photo. It's amazing what you can learn from this. And if that doesn't do it for you, read the manual. That was the last thing I did too.

andru123 said:
It was taken in Automatic mode, with all default settings (right
out the package). Is the ANY way manual/no flash/no autofocus would
be better, what do you think?

Catherine Jo Morgan · Nov 30, 2003

andru123 said:
It was taken in Automatic mode, with all default settings (right
out the package). Is the ANY way manual/no flash/no autofocus would
be better, what do you think?

You can easily set it to NO FLASH even in Auto mode. I often do this. Just be aware that the shutter speed will usually be slower so you have to hold the camera very still or put it on a tripod to avoid blur from camera shake. The smaller the camera, the more camera shake can be a problem.

You can also experiment with exposure compensation in manual mode. I have an earlier version, s110, and forget what new features the s400 has. You'll get great pictures from the s400 after reading the manual and experimenting.
--
Catherine Jo Morgan

da'vi · Nov 30, 2003

andru123 said:
Hi,
I just bought Ixus 400 and ...

I really thought that the quality would be better. But...

Well, inside or low-light fotos are ... hmm terrible. The only more
or less good fotos are produced outside with bright sky. But.. even
the photos with a lot of light do not have quality one would expect
from 499 euro equipement.

Or are my expectations too high for the digital cameras?

Well, if you please take a look at the pictures of a flower, made
on a very white foggy day (a lot of light from the window), tell me
if it's a ugly picture, or digital cameras produce ALL pictures
like these?

http://community.webshots.com/user/andru123

album "Flowers" has 3 pics.

-- Very bright... but a bit blurry. i have the canon sd100 and i go threw the same shi#t with some of my pics.=( "practice makes perfect"
da'vi

Marco Nero · Nov 30, 2003

For a shot like the ones you took, I'd be inclined to take one in Auto Mode (like you did) and then try one in Manual Mode with the AiAf "off" and the exposure stops down by 1/3. If it's bright sunlight, I'd select "Sunlight" in the White balance and if the zoom was to be used at all, I'd use a tripod or rest the camera against a chair or a wall. 95% of digitals have the same limitations with the exception of any lens that is faster such as a G~series f2.0 lens. Don't worry, you can still get the shots you want. Usually a flash will ruin this kind of a setup.

All the best.

--
Marco Nero.
http://www.pbase.com/nero_design (my s400 pics)

Ron Parr · Nov 30, 2003

Here's a link to some full size shots from my S400:

http://www.pbase.com/parr/more_s400

Indoor shots can be challenging the because the camera has trouble focusing at full tele in low light. Flash shots also tend to be a bit too red. Other than these quibbles, I'm quite happy with the image quality.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

Search

new Ixus 400 :( - are these pics good?

andru123

New member

Ron_in_TN

Active member

wlachan

Guest

buckchoi

Active member

andru123

New member

Blake Cook

Senior Member

Catherine Jo Morgan

Member

da'vi

Active member

Marco Nero

Veteran Member

Ron Parr

Guest

Keyboard shortcuts