Pro1 review posted on DCResource

Ramblin · Mar 4, 2004

Hmm f2.8 lens on the A1. Not sure about the low light statement.

Ramblin said:
I'm still considering an Minolta A1 - 28mm for wide angle, good low
light shooting, nice EFV, 7x anti-shake. Just not yet willing to
pull the trigger for $600.

Ramblin said:

interesting group of cameras. what type shots do you use the
C5050 for?

Karen

Click to expand...

--
Olympus C5050, Panasonic FZ1, FZ10K, Oly Tcon 1.7
http://www.pbase.com/ramblin_mo/galleries

--
Olympus C5050, Panasonic FZ1, FZ10K, Oly Tcon 1.7
http://www.pbase.com/ramblin_mo/galleries

Phredd · Mar 4, 2004

Mike Hunt said:
Phredd said:

Compared to the 10D with 28-135 lens, the A2 is miniscule.

Click to expand...

But the 10d (or digityal rebel) can become quite compact with a
normal or wide angle fixed focal length lens.
Also, the new Olympus 4/3 DSLR system is quite compact.

Even with a small lens, the 10D body alone is huge compared to the A2 or Pro 1. And so is the E-1, which is just as large as the 10D, just a tad lighter.

Pro1 4.6 x 2.8 x 3.5 in 545 g
A2 4.5 x 3.4 x 4.5 in 565 g
10D 5.9 x 4.2 x 3 in 875 g
E-1 5.6 x 4.1 x 3.2 in 735 g

Mike Hunt said:
All I know is that I now have zero interest in Canon. They lost me
as a customer. Let them profit from the masses of newbie consumers
who buy on specs and not real-life performance.

I'm not sure what Canon did that upset you more than Sony (which has worse performance), Nikon and Minolta, but that's your choice. I still think Canon makes great cameras. I just wouldn't choose the Pro 1.

Fred

AMomcil · Mar 4, 2004

Ramblin said:
I'm still considering an Minolta A1 - 28mm for wide angle, good low
light shooting, nice EFV, 7x anti-shake. Just not yet willing to
pull the trigger for $600.

Ahhhh, I'd shell $600 immediately if I could.. Here, in Norway, you need at least $1.200 for A1, and that's a very good deal with recent price cut..

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

sandyaugy · Mar 4, 2004

Why is everyone discounting the Nikon 8700. He said it was better than the Sony?

alexeig · Mar 4, 2004

Mike Hunt said:
I'll pass. And considering Canon's last G5, I don't think they
deserve a chance at a third strike. They're out in my book.

Too bad for you. The question is whether you are interested in all in one camera or want to go DSLR. If you are interested in DSLR this is perfectly reasonable choice. If you are interested in all in one than Pro1 is equally reasonable choice.

What I do not understand is why wine over the known issues of small sensors. It is like expecting performance of Mercedes car from a cheap Ford model. Kind of lame.

Cheers

alexeig

Oh, here are some examples of low light from my G5. All ISO400 without noise removal. Show us what your G3 is capable of

http://www.pbase.com/alexeig/low_light_shots_with_canon_g5

AMomcil · Mar 4, 2004

Mike Hunt said:
For me it is. I'm looking for the smallest possible full featured
camera - something I feel confortable taking anywhere. Also, the A2
has an even slower lens and still no AF assist lamp.

But it has AS, which follows the slower lens and raises for a stop or two.

Mike Hunt said:
With the 8mp sensor, I expect to see high noise and pf as well.

Only if you "must" have 8mp. I see no need for it whatsoever.
Higher resolution was nowhere on my wish list.

I will not switch from my D30. At least not this year. But I don't think those 8MP would look much worse than mine D30's 3MP when rescaled down to 3MP. I don't need more pixels. But they are here. Today's 4MP cameras has less noise per pixel than couple of years back 2MP models. 10D has less noise than mine D30 on ISO 800 & ISO1600 even though it has twice more pixels. There is a progress going on. And if 5MP and 8MP cameras would be of the same price I'd grab the 8MP one. I can always downscale if I have to, but I'd have more crop possibilities.

Mike Hunt said:
Without AF assist and without nightshot capability, any EVF is
useless in low light. An OVF is essential.

Well, A1 users reported very good AF in low-light and a good AF speed. Phil did that too and measured -1.2 EV:

Despite not having an AF assist lamp the DiMAGE A1 manages to focus in extremely low light situations thanks to its high gain B&W live view mode which also appears to enhance auto focus

I tried A1's EVF and I was able to focus better manually using it's BW EVF than on my D30 & slow F3.5-5.6 Sigma lens. I can't afford expensive and fast lenses.

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

AMomcil · Mar 4, 2004

sandyaugy said:
Why is everyone discounting the Nikon 8700. He said it was better
than the Sony?

Nikon 8700 is in the same league, but it's the only 8MP model with lens starting at 35mm. It is of personal preferences, but I like 28-200mm way better than 35-280mm.

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

Snapshot7 · Mar 4, 2004

Mike Hunt said:
Also, A1 (and A2?) still lack an AF assist lamp and have relatively
slow f2.8/f3.5 lens.

--
Canon T70, AE1, Rebel2000 G1, G2, G5

koo22 · Mar 4, 2004

Do you have an A2? Everything I've read says it does NOT have an AF assist......can you please clarify? K.

Snapshot7 said:
Mike Hunt said:

Also, A1 (and A2?) still lack an AF assist lamp and have relatively
slow f2.8/f3.5 lens.

Click to expand...

--
Canon T70, AE1, Rebel2000 G1, G2, G5

--
Galleries: http://www.koo22photos.com/-/koo22photos/default.asp

sandyaugy · Mar 4, 2004

AMomcil said:
sandyaugy said:

Why is everyone discounting the Nikon 8700. He said it was better
than the Sony?

Click to expand...

Nikon 8700 is in the same league, but it's the only 8MP model with
lens starting at 35mm. It is of personal preferences, but I like
28-200mm way better than 35-280mm.

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

I agree but with the adaptor it goes to 28. The question is how does it compare regarding noise and CA. If it is better I will go with the Nikon and an adaptor. Looks like there is no magic bullet out there with this lot of cameras.

urban75 · Mar 4, 2004

sandyaugy said:
Why is everyone discounting the Nikon 8700. He said it was better
than the Sony?

That's easy: no 28mm zoom.

That rules it right out for me.

KRDV · Mar 4, 2004

AMomcil said:
Jeff just posted Pro1 final review:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_pro1-review/index.shtml

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

Vignetting - I understand the concept (and see it in those specified pics) but why is it occurring in some and not all? Is it only at max wideangle or at certain f-stops? I want to figure out if this would occur in most of the shots I might take, or just on isolated ones. Thanks.

Steve110587 · Mar 4, 2004

right !!!. the price you pay to carry around a small package.

sandyaugy said:
AMomcil said:

sandyaugy said:

Why is everyone discounting the Nikon 8700. He said it was better
than the Sony?

Click to expand...

Nikon 8700 is in the same league, but it's the only 8MP model with
lens starting at 35mm. It is of personal preferences, but I like
28-200mm way better than 35-280mm.

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

Click to expand...

I agree but with the adaptor it goes to 28. The question is how
does it compare regarding noise and CA. If it is better I will go
with the Nikon and an adaptor. Looks like there is no magic bullet
out there with this lot of cameras.

Giordano Biondani · Mar 4, 2004

Mike Hunt said:
My G3 can run rings around this overpriced and overhyped loser.
Much lower noise, much lower purple fringing, smaller, cheaper,
lighter, and immensely more usable in low light and for tracking
moving subjects. This misleadingly named Pro1 is nothign but a
crippled point and shoot camera pretendiong to be a compact SLR
alternative.

This camera is worthless unless you're willing to limit yourself to
bright, outdoor conditions, and refrain from shooting any moving
subjects, especially while using zoom.

I know that you don't like the Pro1, and I don't want to make you change your mind.

I even share some of your concerns, even though low light photography is not as important to me as it clearly is to you.

However, what you are saying is not accurate. I also have a G3, and from the test shots that I have seen so far it seems clear that the Pro1 has less PF and the same amount of noise as the G3, not much more like you say.

--
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=124997

JohnNYC · Mar 4, 2004

First and foremost, prosumer CCD will always have noise at ISO 200 > , this is an obvious fact. If you want less noise then you go buy yourself a DSLR.

CA/PF is a common phenomena in the digital arena but you can avoid it (shoot less high contrast area or use a small aperture value).

THe pro-1 looks good in paper (L glass and all) but is limited by the same sensor used in all prosumer digital camera in that class.

So.........

Feature wise it packs in the punch and under normal circumstances it'll be the perfect companion. If you long for nothing more then this will be perfect.

But.........

If you want low light shooting capabilities, low noise at higher ISO, faster auto-focus............I guarantee that not one of even the higher end prosumer level camera can give you this.

So just take this camera for what it is..........and the longer zoom w/ the 2 inch LDC is most def a significant upgrade

Ro1

AMomcil said:
Jeff just posted Pro1 final review:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_pro1-review/index.shtml

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

--
'Say CHEESE'

Stefan V · Mar 4, 2004

Mike Hunt said:
AMomcil said:

Bulky? Jeff states:
Canon PowerShot Pro1 4.6 x 2.8 x 3.5 in. 45.1 cu. in. 545 g
Minolta DiMAGE A2 4.5 x 3.4 x 4.5 in. 68.9 cu. in. 565 g

So, A2 is an inch thicker (but I think lens does not protrude so
much when zooming) and half an inch heigher. Is that so much?

Click to expand...

For me it is. I'm looking for the smallest possible full featured
camera - something I feel confortable taking anywhere.

I suggest you to buy an Canon S400 and go outside to take pictures instead of bashing everything else on the market with no valid arguments.

Mike Hunt said:
Also, the A2 has an even slower lens and still no AF assist lamp.

Do you know what you are talking about??? F2.8 vs. F2.4 is 1/3 stop.. neglectable, it is even only at wideangle, tele is the same (F3.5). But the Minolta has AS which will save you at least one stop, now that makes a difference.

Mike Hunt said:
With the 8mp sensor, I expect to see high noise and pf as well.

Then go and buy that S400.. bye!

Mike Hunt said:
Mike Hunt said:

I do have a DSLR (Canon D30), but A2 looks really promising to me.
I haven't seen much of a difference between 8MP cameras so far, so
it goes down to usability, for me at least.

Click to expand...

Only if you "must" have 8mp. I see no need for it whatsoever.
Higher resolution was nowhere on my wish list.

Then please GO!

Mike Hunt said:
Mike Hunt said:

finally a good EVF

Click to expand...

Without AF assist and without nightshot capability, any EVF is
useless in low light. An OVF is essential.

Quote from this sites' A1 review:

"Despite not having an AF assist lamp the DiMAGE A1 manages to focus in extremely low light situations thanks to its high gain B&W live view mode which also appears to enhance auto focus."

So what you say is BULLSH*T.

You'll even see MORE on the EVF of an A1/A2 then with an OVF. OVF's are soon outdated, even DSLR's will go to EVF's soon.

Mike Hunt said:
Mike Hunt said:

good lens

Click to expand...

Way too slow for my needs.

Oh sure, and the F2.4 of the Canon is okay for your needs?

Oh dear... what are you doing here man, please leave this conversation because you are helping nobody with your "personal" arguments.

Indieke1 · Mar 4, 2004

Well its of course a review! But...

I think it's a shame my G 3 has been stolen! It has flaws, yes!!! But it had the right capture for the Mp concerned!

Not the case for the G 5 and now the pro
1! Good!!! I am not considering it no more!!!

At the sizes I print, 4 MP is enough and I don't want extra noise or purple frimming!

The S 45 I bought on e-bay is nice too, but I miss the lens of the G 3!!

Thinking of buying another one, if I do find one!!!l

see my pictures at
http://www.pbase.com/indieke

Stefan V · Mar 4, 2004

Yes, the A1 looks tempting for sure now with its decreasing price.

However features are not the same:

A2 has faster autofocus
A2 has far superiour EVF (4x resolution, higher framerate)
A2 has DOF preview button
A2 has descent movie-mode

mlk said:
if so, then maybe go for A1 - you'll get enough Mpix (IMO), much
less noise and PF (the same size of CCD, but less Mpix), very
similar features to A2

Kasp1 · Mar 4, 2004

The whole idea of a compact prosumer digital camera is that you dont need to carry many lenses and accessories along with it - carry just one camera, and you can shoot in a wide range of situatios. So having to carry an adapter for 28mm range makes it less appealing.

sandyaugy said:
I agree but with the adaptor it goes to 28. The question is how
does it compare regarding noise and CA. If it is better I will go
with the Nikon and an adaptor. Looks like there is no magic bullet
out there with this lot of cameras.

Stefan V · Mar 4, 2004

No it doesn't, but according to fill it does fine without: (A1 review)

"Despite not having an AF assist lamp the DiMAGE A1 manages to focus in extremely low light situations thanks to its high gain B&W live view mode which also appears to enhance auto focus."

Snapshot7 said:
Mike Hunt said:

Also, A1 (and A2?) still lack an AF assist lamp and have relatively
slow f2.8/f3.5 lens.

Click to expand...

Pro1 review posted on DCResource

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Active member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Active member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts