Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Vignetting - I understand the concept (and see it in thoseJeff just posted Pro1 final review:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_pro1-review/index.shtml
--
Greetings, Aleksandar
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.
Not sure about the G3 having 'much lower PF',than Pro 1.Remember when the G3 first came out?That's because all these lousy cameras perform so poorly in lowGo to photo.net ....etc..etc... 95% of all pics are not taken in
low light..
light. I take a lot of photos in low light - which does not mean
total darkness, but virtually any indoor environment. In that sort
of lighting, even f2.0 is marginal. And when shooting at night,
with flash, an AF assist lamp is absolutely necessary.
My G3 can run rings around this overpriced and overhyped loser.
Much lower noise, much lower purple fringing, smaller, cheaper,
Canon is in business to make money,selling camera's and lenses.And that they do very well.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.
Canon continues their decline into marketing BS opver engineering
excellence. They've entirely lost my confidence and loyalty.
low lite evf problems are minor.. anyway... use the LCD
in those situations.. while the lcd is useless in bright light ...
it is great in low lite situations... i agree about the noise, but
unless you go for an SLR ... you wont find a camera without a noise
problem. i use iso 50 or 100 in my s45 and is not a problem in
most of my pics.
Higher ISO speeds are not for long exposure night shots, but forI will use only the iso 50 maybe 100. In iso 50 the noise is not
that bad IMHO. Why would i use iso 400 for, the nightshot in iso 50
is good enough for me
getting higher shutter speeds in handheld low light situations.
The high noise levels makes the higher ISO settings unusable, while
the slower lens, dim EVF, and the now gone AF assist light make
this an utterly inferior camera to the G3 for any sort of candid or
low light shooting.
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.
What?The LCD is already useless in those situations. Too dim and way toolow lite evf problems are minor.. anyway... use the LCD
in those situations..
slow. This is the only reason I ever used my G3's OVF, which is wy
I never complained about the elns obsctruction issue.
No it's not. Any LCD is terible in low light. My eyes can see farwhile the lcd is useless in bright light ...
it is great in low lite situations...
better in low light than any LCD, other than Sony's night vision
system.
My G3 has far less noise, and the faster lens means I don't need toi agree about the noise, but
unless you go for an SLR ... you wont find a camera without a noise
problem.
rely on higher ISO speeds nearly as muich as wit h the Pro1.
Can anyone speculate (based on the DCR review) at how common this will be in everyday shooting and whether it's a major concern. If I thought that 20% of my shots would have this vignetting (even though it's not major) that would concern me a bit.Vignetting - I understand the concept (and see it in thoseJeff just posted Pro1 final review:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_pro1-review/index.shtml
--
Greetings, Aleksandar
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.
Once Canon can find a solution to eliminate PF or CA, they will change their name from Canon to "non-CA".It is a shame,that them(and most every other manufacturer)can't fix
these problems(noise and PF),and make a really excellent
camera....today
OK, I can understand it, but I can't find NEW G3 anywhere in the
stores around, only G5 ...
Bulky? Jeff states:
User photos show AS gains you two stops of exposure with 3 stops in some special situations.Do you know what you are talking about??? F2.8 vs. F2.4 is 1/3Also, the A2 has an even slower lens and still no AF assist lamp.
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.
User photos show pretty much non-existant PF, There have also been some amazing ISO 800 photos that you have to look hard to find noise on. But most of the ISO 800 photos have noise although less than the A1 surprisingly.Then go and buy that S400.. bye!With the 8mp sensor, I expect to see high noise and pf as well.
A2 low light focus has been improved. You will also see better in low light with this particular EVF since it amplifies the brightness over what would come through an OVF.Quote from this sites' A1 review:Without AF assist and without nightshot capability, any EVF isfinally a good EVF
useless in low light. An OVF is essential.
"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."
ANAYV,....SNIP
Not sure about the G3 having 'much lower PF',than Pro 1.Remember
when the G3 first came out?
PF was pretty bad,so much so,that Phil made a special test,which he
now uses on other camera's.(the foil test).Maybe 'a bit more
PF',the Pro 1 will have,than the G3.
SNIP....
If we extrapolate to 2010 we may expect digicams with 100 million
pixels and CA resulting in the left half of a picture being green
and the right half being purple.
Marketing could sell this effect as being a new form of stereo and
include appropriately coloured glasse as an accessory.
Regards,
Guenter
----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
Galleries: http://www.koo22photos.com/-/koo22photos/default.asp
ANAYV,
good of you to bring this G3 test to attention. Phil Asley actually
compared the G3 with the G2 and noted that the G2 was doing better.
Now three digicam generations later people may ask themselves if
this is a trend of unlimited growth.
If we extrapolate to 2010 we may expect digicams with 100 million
pixels and CA resulting in the left half of a picture being green
and the right half being purple.
Marketing could sell this effect as being a new form of stereo and
include appropriately coloured glasse as an accessory.
Regards,
Guenter
http://www.pbase.com/image/26537608
ANAYV,
good of you to bring this G3 test to attention. Phil Asley actually
compared the G3 with the G2 and noted that the G2 was doing better.
Now three digicam generations later people may ask themselves if
this is a trend of unlimited growth.
If we extrapolate to 2010 we may expect digicams with 100 million
pixels and CA resulting in the left half of a picture being green
and the right half being purple.
Marketing could sell this effect as being a new form of stereo and
include appropriately coloured glasse as an accessory.
Regards,
Guenter
I believe you'd still have the noise. But noise can be significantly reduced with post processing, and frankly isn't my biggest concern. My main beef is with the slower lens and elimination of the AF assist lamp.in your case, you are probably right. i just posted a question.. if
you would choose 4 mp. setting.. would you get less noise than the
8 mp ? ..
Sure, as is a G3. If you take pictures mainly in bright daylight, especially with a tripod and all the time in the world to focus and compose a shot, then this is a great camera. But then, a 300D would be an even better camera for the same price.i have an s45, but the pro1 looks like a nice step up...
You're right, I am. But that's because I find it rather frusrating to put up with Canon's release of the pathetic G5 several months ago, only to wait this long for a camera that takes one step forward and several steps backwards...Well, Mike, we know that you are not going to buy Pro1, but I think
that you are overreacting now,
Prospective buyers should be fully aware of the camera's limitations.insulting maybe the future Pro1
owners.
Why?As things stands right now, I like A2 more than Pro1, but
I'd certainly prefer to have Pro1 than G3.
You'll have higher resolution (completely wasted, unless you're doing some serious cropping or huge prints), more zoom (provided you don't mind the sad vignetting and barrel distortion on wide angle and the inability to use telephoto to track moving subjects), a nicer body, and that's it. On the flip side, you have a sloer lens, a high price tag, pathetic AF, and no AF assist. I could have lived with the same sorry AF of the G3, but with the slower lens and no AF assist, it's far worse.If you downscale from 8MP -> 4MP I think that you will have at
least as good picture as on G3. And with ISO50 probably markedly
better.
I can work around the G3's limitations. AF is perfectly adequate in daylight, and I can use zone focusing and the AF assist lamp to quickly shoot in the dark. I can't work around the Pro1's limitations.I'd prefer to have hybrid focus system then AF lamp, G3 focuses
very, very slow and focus speed is much more important to me then
being able to AF in very low light scenario.
Too slow, unresponsive, and imprecise. And in the dark, without the AF assist, your're shooting totally blind. They might as well have left out the built-in flash.I'd use MF in those
(rare) cases.
You haven't even seen it in action. WHat makes you think you'll like it, considering every person who's used the Pro1 has made derogatory statements regarding AF?Well, C8080 solved that with having both, like F828,
but I still like hybrid focus a lot.
THe F828 has about the same range, plus a much faster lens, plus a great lowlight AF system. I'm not knocking them for the move from buttons to a ring, but for all the other drawbacks.Pro1 has a great lens range and I really hate zooming with
buttons. OK, focusing ring "by-wire" is not as good as real thing
on F828 & A2 but is much better than using buttons, like on Ixus
cameras.
Pros:Don't get me wrong, G3 is an excellent camera (I was using it too),
but Pro1 looks much better, to me at least.
Show me IDENTICAL photos taken with both cameras to illustrate your point.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.
He came up with that test when the G5 came out, not the G3.Not sure about the G3 having 'much lower PF',than Pro 1.RememberMy G3 can run rings around this overpriced and overhyped loser.
Much lower noise, much lower purple fringing, smaller, cheaper,
when the G3 first came out?
PF was pretty bad,so much so,that Phil made a special test,which he
now uses on other camera's.(the foil test).Maybe 'a bit more
PF',the Pro 1 will have,than the G3.
Well now they'll make just a tiny bit less money, since they've lost me, and any people I would normally persuade to buy their products.Canon is in business to make money,selling camera's and lenses.And
that they do very well.
The noise and PF are the least of the problems. The biggest issue by far is AUTOFOCUS PERFORMANCE. THat is the biggest thing they've failed to fix. But what ticks me off is that they came up with a sorry marketing B.S. fix ("hybrid AF"), while removing an essential feature (the AF assit lamp.) Couple that with the slower lens and EVF, and they have seriously crippled this camera's usefulness in low light and for action/candid photos....It is a shame,that them(and most every other manufacturer)can't fix
these problems(noise and PF),and make a really excellent
camera....today
I care more about autofocus and low light performacne than noise and PF. You can fix noise and PF in Photoshop. Try fixing a motion blurred or out of focus image.Seems the Sony is worse than the Pro 1,in regards to noise,and PF.
LOL!!!ANAYV,
good of you to bring this G3 test to attention. Phil Asley actually
compared the G3 with the G2 and noted that the G2 was doing better.
Now three digicam generations later people may ask themselves if
this is a trend of unlimited growth.
If we extrapolate to 2010 we may expect digicams with 100 million
pixels and CA resulting in the left half of a picture being green
and the right half being purple.
Better an outspoken but honest and well-meaning person like Dean than a lying SOB like Bush.I suspect that if anyone doubts that Mike Hunt is the oracle of
digital cams, all one has to do is ask him. His strident criticism
of the Pro 1 and Canon in general is, in my humble opinion, over
the top. His talent would be better utilized in the Howard Dean
camp. It has been said by others in this forum that no one camera
will be the perfect camera for all concerned. I concur. Mike, in
your case silence is golden.
