W1/P100 blurred poll: please tell your story!

Keith,

You're a more qualified engineer-guy than I am, but I don't see how it's totally mechanical. Don't these gizmos have some smarts (Artificial Intelligence kinda) that has to randomly make "decisions?

I know you can put a Canon Drebel on a tripod and it will at time change what 1, 2 or 3 of the the 3 focus points it will choose to use with identical subject/lighting. (I set it to always just use the center point so I don't have to deal with the cameras "opinion.")

These auto focus cameras have to guess how far away the subject is. Is that such a cut and dried prcess in the real world? Suppose my camera randomly misguesses how far away the subject is? Too bad that's not in the EXIF data . .

keith1200rs said:

keith1200rs said:

There are too many people like Keith who say that their models have
nothing wrong with them - yet he doesn't tamper with the settings
to get a clear picture. Mine is mostly okay - but when it isn't
what is it doing different?

Click to expand...

Being mainly an electronic device, you would think it would work or
not. I cannot see how focusing could be intermittent (although
some obviously are). Even a faulty focus mechanism should not
cause an intermittent problem because the camera decides on focus
by looking at the picture. A focus mechanism that moves just as
the picture is taken would be one possibility (e.g. something
mechanically loose).

If you do try taking loads of shots with a tripod, try alternating
with two subjects at different distances.

What we really need is someone who doesn't have a problem to meet
up with someone who does and see if the cameras really are the
problem.

(sharp) Keith

Click to expand...

--

• Bob Redrock

http://www.pbase.com/plasma

Redrock said:

Keith,
You're a more qualified engineer-guy than I am, but I don't see how
it's totally mechanical. Don't these gizmos have some smarts
(Artificial Intelligence kinda) that has to randomly make
"decisions?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't expect there to be any randomness in the decision making process, but there will be randomness from the picture. Even on a tripod, noise will alter the value of every pixel. It could also depend on where the focus was before it started focusing - e.g. which side of the correct focus point and how far away from correct focus. While I know a fair amount about CCDs, I have never got involved in focus mechanisms much (I worked on laparoscopes which are manually focussed, if at all).

Keith.

hobobobo said:

1. Sony P100
2. Between 65 and 85 degrees F
3. Close range ... 0.5 - 2 meters (due to indoor closeness)
4. wide or tele ... no difference really
5. maybe 10% in poor lighting when I shoot sans-flash. I really
only get blurring when I push the camera beyond what it is capable
of in low lighting such as nighttime and indoors.

I've been exceptionally pleased with the pictures from my P100. I
also own a Canon S500 now and when I have to choose one, I
generally take the P100 with me because it's much faster with a lot
more options. The one advantage to the S500 is that it tends to
choose faster shutter speeds (and higher ISO) indoors when compared
to the P100; indoor shots are therefore less likely to blur when
I'm using the S500. As far as detail goes, similar shots have
more/clearer detail at 1:1 viewing on the P100 despite being as
much as 30% smaller than the S500.

Click to expand...

Hobobobo, just curious, what prompted you to purchase the Canon S500?

adnil said:

I do not have blurry pics with my W1. Is it possible that some W1's
are defective? Could this be a hardware issue? I also own a 717
and the pics are equal in every way. My only problem with the W1 is
not having more manual controls.

Click to expand...

Might be!. My W1 takes beautiful photos with very good color. I feel I get better quality in P mode.

There were several reasons for the S500 actually.

1. The wife wanted a camera and she needed a truly "point-N-shoot" unit as she's not a camera/technology person. While I like my Sony better thanks to the P and M mode options (and generally better pics), the Canon tends to pick settings better in its auto mode than the Sony does. Additionally, since I've had the digital elphs in the past, she's already somewhat familiar with the controls / layout.

2. The canon also gives me a little more flexibility in low-light unless I want to underexpose with the Sony in manual mode and later adjust levels in post-processing. If I know I'm going to be shooting a lot of indoor shots or low-light shots where I don't want to use a flash, having the option of choosing the Canon instead of the Sony is nice. I think a big part of this is making sure the Sony is at a higher ISO though (which I've forgotten to do as of late) ... I've only had the S500 for a brief time now, so I'll have to play with it more and compare. I will say that despite the rumors, the indoor shot coloring of the Canon is MUCH warmer (read: too warm) when compared to the sony. I have to significantly adjust the Canon's red channel in post processing when shooting indoors without a flash.

3. While the Sony build quality is perfectably acceptable to me, the Canon is built like a titanium tank - truly a sturdy camera. My wife is notorious for destroying small personal items (watches, sunglasses, remotes, cell phones etc), and having the tougher casing and smaller LCD is a good "insurance policy" for her.

4. I have had Canon digital Elphs for years ... basically all of them now that I have the S500. As a result, I have a plethora of compact flash cards, spare batteries and various chargers. Buying a second Sony would have been a lot more costly in the end due to having to purchase memory sticks etc. So, fiscially it made more sense to go with the Canon in this case (although money wasn't much of a consideration to be honest).

5. I secretly wanted both cameras for their various strong points when I set out to update my digital cameras. Since I had the go-ahead from my wife to pick out a camera for her, I was able to fulfill this dream. I'm also still considering getting a Fuji F610 just for the heck of it, but realistically I should be looking at a prosumer or DSLR for my next camera. We'll see ...

JimMc said:

Hobobobo, just curious, what prompted you to purchase the Canon S500?

Click to expand...

Redrock said:

BTW, when I get an out of focus picture, it is nothing that a
little sharpening will help, the shot is ruined.

Click to expand...

I know, I have have seen this on mine but only on about 2% of my pictures. I think sharpening will satisfy me for the rest.

Redrock said:

As far as film vs. digital, I got back into picture taking (I'm too
much of a hack to call it photgraphy), when I bought a Digital
Rebel last fall. I love it and have seen some awesome phots when
the camera is in capable hands.

Click to expand...

I have been looking, and yes it does seem like a nice camera. I may choose to update, but for the moment the inconvenience of film does has not made me fall out of love with our 35mm Canon SLR. I remember the day I got rid of my first SLR - the EOS 600 - to pay for my rent at university. Even though my fiancée arrived on the scene 4 years ago with an EOS Elan II, I still regret selling it. Although, I presume that the lenses slot straight onto the DRebel... is this true (ideas are forming in my head)...

It could be that there are no faulty parts, but maybe a problem of alignment only noticeable under certain circumstances. We may never identify those circumstance if they appear in a fashion random to us.

I am not taking mine apart to find out if this is possible!

keith1200rs said:

keith1200rs said:

There are too many people like Keith who say that their models have
nothing wrong with them - yet he doesn't tamper with the settings
to get a clear picture. Mine is mostly okay - but when it isn't
what is it doing different?

Click to expand...

Being mainly an electronic device, you would think it would work or
not. I cannot see how focusing could be intermittent (although
some obviously are). Even a faulty focus mechanism should not
cause an intermittent problem because the camera decides on focus
by looking at the picture. A focus mechanism that moves just as
the picture is taken would be one possibility (e.g. something
mechanically loose).

If you do try taking loads of shots with a tripod, try alternating
with two subjects at different distances.

What we really need is someone who doesn't have a problem to meet
up with someone who does and see if the cameras really are the
problem.

(sharp) Keith

Click to expand...

I bought a Canon Drebel cause I had two medium good lenses lying around from my Africa photo safari honeymoon. I got to use them again with the Drebel. (I had stopped using them with my film Rebel G when I got a small Sony Dsc P5.)

If I didn't own the Canon lenses and buying now I'd have to also look at the Nikon D70. Your old EOS lenses should work on the Drebel with no problem. Rumors around that new products might be introduced at Photokina trade show in the fall.

-Beppe- said:

Redrock said:

BTW, when I get an out of focus picture, it is nothing that a
little sharpening will help, the shot is ruined.

Click to expand...

I know, I have have seen this on mine but only on about 2% of my
pictures. I think sharpening will satisfy me for the rest.

-Beppe- said:

As far as film vs. digital, I got back into picture taking (I'm too
much of a hack to call it photgraphy), when I bought a Digital
Rebel last fall. I love it and have seen some awesome phots when
the camera is in capable hands.

Click to expand...

I have been looking, and yes it does seem like a nice camera. I may
choose to update, but for the moment the inconvenience of film does
has not made me fall out of love with our 35mm Canon SLR. I
remember the day I got rid of my first SLR - the EOS 600 - to pay
for my rent at university. Even though my fiancée arrived on the
scene 4 years ago with an EOS Elan II, I still regret selling it.
Although, I presume that the lenses slot straight onto the
DRebel... is this true (ideas are forming in my head)...

Click to expand...

--

• Bob Redrock

http://www.pbase.com/plasma

This is a great thread, very informative and helpful to me as someone trying to decide on this camera. So, first, thanks!

Question: Has anyone found differences in pic quality -- blurring issue or other -- between the W1 and P100?

And, I read some thoughts that people are perhaps expecting too much in terms of sharpness and detail from these cameras due to the ability to easily enlarge on screen, etc. that is the large the blow up the less detail.

Has anyone that thinks their pics are soft tried to simply printout at the kodak station at their local discount store straight from their MS. Seems like it could be a good comparison to a point n shoot film cameras. I don't expect slr quality from these shots, are my expectations too low?

french_dream said:

Hello dear STF members

Since I read a lot about blurred pics with W1/P100, I would like to
try and better understand under which circumstances this mostly
occurs. Doing statistics in other words.

If you are a lucky W1/P100 owner getting blurred pics that you are
pretty sure to be lens or AF related (not due to shake/long
exposure), would you be so nice and give a short reply to this post
answering these few questions:

-Type of camera: DSC-W1/12 or DSC-P100/120

-Estimated camera temperature when blurred pictures occur: cold
(30°C), in between, or any temperature?

-Subject's distance when most blurred pics happen: near (
far, any?

-Zoom setting to get blurr: wide, tele, any?

-Finally, estimated percentage of blurred pics you get under the
above described worst conditions: 20, 50, 80%?

Thank you for spending a minute telling your observations!

fr
--
DSC-V1, long exposures (night/astro), remote control by computer
(RM-VD1 modified)

Click to expand...

algmc said:

And, I read some thoughts that people are perhaps expecting too
much in terms of sharpness and detail from these cameras due to the
ability to easily enlarge on screen, etc. that is the large the
blow up the less detail.

Click to expand...

I certainly think this is an issue, and have said so on another thread.

algmc said:

Has anyone that thinks their pics are soft tried to simply printout
at the kodak station at their local discount store straight from
their MS. Seems like it could be a good comparison to a point n
shoot film cameras. I don't expect slr quality from these shots,
are my expectations too low?

Click to expand...

I don't think your expections should be low, but if you want a pin sharp 30" print it maybe takes a little more effort/care than what is required to get a good 6"x4".

Keith.

I bought my P120 (P100) after reading the forum first. I have had it for just over a week, and I think it's a really nice camera.

Blurred issues:

• I really believed that this was down to the users, and that maybe the camera needed a little thought rather than a clumsy P&S attitude. Since then I have had one picture - and only one - where the focus lock was made in the right area but no part of the exposure was focused. There was no evidence of camera shake. Be aware that other people in this forum experience this more often.
• I have found that taking moving subjects with the flash difficult because the camera seems to rely on a slow shutter. Higher ISO and shutter speeds help this, but it's still tetchy sometimes. I haven't much daytime experience with it yet, but have found circumstances where I have to manually increase the shutter.
• The other 98% of my shots are fine.

Clarity:

• The shots are very soft, which gives me the impression of being out of focus. I tried using the + setting for sharpness, and now I like the pictures I am getting. The clarity was close to the far more expensive Nikon 5700 when we tried some comparisons at work in the week.
• The only time I noticed obvious artifacts (with +1 sharpness) was when I took an image of the network hub at work, with it's many different cables and other objects. I think that to get so much detail into one picture and expect to zoom in as close as I did for the test is, as you say, expecting too much from any compact 5mp camera.
• I am yet to make a print to compare, but my on screen shots (when they are not blurred) seem very clear when at screen size. I expect that 6x4 prints will come out very well in comparison to my old 35mm Pentax Epsio, and I look forward to finding out!

Expectations - if you are not going to freak out at the odd blurred shot, don't mind playing with the settings and are not expecting SLR quality shots then this is probably a good camera. The pictures and colours are decent, especially for the size. Occasionally I find my night pictures with flash do not come out as I want, but often recomposing the multizone metering and focus can help. If not, changing the flash power and/or ISO makes a difference.

This is my experience as a newbie to digital cameras.

algmc said:

This is a great thread, very informative and helpful to me as
someone trying to decide on this camera. So, first, thanks!

Question: Has anyone found differences in pic quality -- blurring
issue or other -- between the W1 and P100?

And, I read some thoughts that people are perhaps expecting too
much in terms of sharpness and detail from these cameras due to the
ability to easily enlarge on screen, etc. that is the large the
blow up the less detail.

Has anyone that thinks their pics are soft tried to simply printout
at the kodak station at their local discount store straight from
their MS. Seems like it could be a good comparison to a point n
shoot film cameras. I don't expect slr quality from these shots,
are my expectations too low?

Click to expand...

algmc said:

This is a great thread, very informative and helpful to me as
someone trying to decide on this camera. So, first, thanks!

Question: Has anyone found differences in pic quality -- blurring
issue or other -- between the W1 and P100?

And, I read some thoughts that people are perhaps expecting too
much in terms of sharpness and detail from these cameras due to the
ability to easily enlarge on screen, etc. that is the large the
blow up the less detail.

Has anyone that thinks their pics are soft tried to simply printout
at the kodak station at their local discount store straight from
their MS. Seems like it could be a good comparison to a point n
shoot film cameras. I don't expect slr quality from these shots,
are my expectations too low?

Click to expand...

The "Picture Stations" from Kodak, Fuji, Pixel Magic, etc. (the get your prints right now kind) are really quite sophisticated processing devices and I'm finding sometimes my prints look better than on the screen. The digital input/silver halide output routine (typical digital one hour shops) certainly rivals whatever I got from film in the past. I don't know that the processing makes them any sharper, though.

algmc said:

french_dream said:

Hello dear STF members

Since I read a lot about blurred pics with W1/P100, I would like to
try and better understand under which circumstances this mostly
occurs. Doing statistics in other words.

If you are a lucky W1/P100 owner getting blurred pics that you are
pretty sure to be lens or AF related (not due to shake/long
exposure), would you be so nice and give a short reply to this post
answering these few questions:

-Type of camera: DSC-W1/12 or DSC-P100/120

-Estimated camera temperature when blurred pictures occur: cold
(30°C), in between, or any temperature?

-Subject's distance when most blurred pics happen: near (
far, any?

-Zoom setting to get blurr: wide, tele, any?

-Finally, estimated percentage of blurred pics you get under the
above described worst conditions: 20, 50, 80%?

Thank you for spending a minute telling your observations!

fr
--
DSC-V1, long exposures (night/astro), remote control by computer
(RM-VD1 modified)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I got my W1 for two weeks now. I agree that at first, the camera is difficult to use and get blurry shots. But I already knew that this will happen from what I've read from this forum. I now shoot mostly on M mode and the blurry shots went away. Maybe my hands shake too much because I can't get clear shots below 1/10s. What is the longest shutter speed can you guys shoot at without a tripod. I now got myself a tripod combined with using the timer, the pics are extreamly clear. Can't complain except with my hands.

algmc said:

Question: Has anyone found differences in pic quality -- blurring
issue or other -- between the W1 and P100?

And, I read some thoughts that people are perhaps expecting too
much in terms of sharpness and detail from these cameras due to the
ability to easily enlarge on screen, etc. that is the large the
blow up the less detail.

Has anyone that thinks their pics are soft tried to simply printout
at the kodak station at their local discount store straight from
their MS. Seems like it could be a good comparison to a point n
shoot film cameras. I don't expect slr quality from these shots,
are my expectations too low?

french_dream said:

Hello dear STF members

Since I read a lot about blurred pics with W1/P100, I would like to
try and better understand under which circumstances this mostly
occurs. Doing statistics in other words.

If you are a lucky W1/P100 owner getting blurred pics that you are
pretty sure to be lens or AF related (not due to shake/long
exposure), would you be so nice and give a short reply to this post
answering these few questions:

-Type of camera: DSC-W1/12 or DSC-P100/120

-Estimated camera temperature when blurred pictures occur: cold
(30°C), in between, or any temperature?

-Subject's distance when most blurred pics happen: near (
far, any?

-Zoom setting to get blurr: wide, tele, any?

-Finally, estimated percentage of blurred pics you get under the
above described worst conditions: 20, 50, 80%?

Thank you for spending a minute telling your observations!

fr
--
DSC-V1, long exposures (night/astro), remote control by computer
(RM-VD1 modified)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

-Beppe- said:

I think that to get so much
detail into one picture and expect to zoom in as close as I did for
the test is, as you say, expecting too much from any compact 5mp
camera.

Click to expand...

I disagree - why should a compact 5MP camera not be able to take close detail?

-Beppe- said:

Expectations - if you are not going to freak out at the odd blurred
shot, don't mind playing with the settings and are not expecting
SLR quality shots then this is probably a good camera.

Click to expand...

Again, I disagree. I expect, and get SLR quality shots. An SLR does not have any guarantee of quality. An SLR gives flexibility, but I expect the quailty of my compact shots to be equal to those I would get from an SLR, at least up to a 15" print size. There are limitations of compact cameras but quality shouldn't be one of them. While there will be differences due to CCD sensor size and only recording JPG, they should not have a major impact on the quality of a print even at a reasonable size. You do have to work at it to get the quality, but then that is true of any camera, SLR or compact.

Keith.

Okay. So then perhaps my expectations were low, but you didn't offer the obvious. DO you get slr quality shots with your w1?

keith1200rs said:

keith1200rs said:

I think that to get so much
detail into one picture and expect to zoom in as close as I did for
the test is, as you say, expecting too much from any compact 5mp
camera.

Click to expand...

I disagree - why should a compact 5MP camera not be able to take
close detail?

keith1200rs said:

Expectations - if you are not going to freak out at the odd blurred
shot, don't mind playing with the settings and are not expecting
SLR quality shots then this is probably a good camera.

Click to expand...

Again, I disagree. I expect, and get SLR quality shots. An SLR
does not have any guarantee of quality. An SLR gives flexibility,
but I expect the quailty of my compact shots to be equal to those
I would get from an SLR, at least up to a 15" print size. There
are limitations of compact cameras but quality shouldn't be one of
them. While there will be differences due to CCD sensor size and
only recording JPG, they should not have a major impact on the
quality of a print even at a reasonable size. You do have to work
at it to get the quality, but then that is true of any camera, SLR
or compact.

Keith.

Click to expand...

algmc said:

Okay. So then perhaps my expectations were low, but you didn't
offer the obvious. DO you get slr quality shots with your w1?

Click to expand...

(P120) but yes, I think I do (comparing with the Nikon F801 pictures I have hanging on my wall).

Keith.

Sorry for digging up an old thread, but I was reading the review of the W1 on http://www.megapixel.net and they mentioned this in talking about the camera's response speeds:

"Likewise, the shutter release responds instantly, so fast in fact that the camera can sometimes capture a photo before the auto focus has had a chance to finish its work."

Could that be a reason why some people are seeing out of focus shots then good focus shots?

The only time I have experienced the phantom focus beast was when I was testing for it - and I focus locked before shooting. I think it's a misreading of the focus itself.

Oelph said:

Sorry for digging up an old thread, but I was reading the review of
the W1 on http://www.megapixel.net and they mentioned this in talking
about the camera's response speeds:

"Likewise, the shutter release responds instantly, so fast in fact
that the camera can sometimes capture a photo before the auto focus
has had a chance to finish its work."

Could that be a reason why some people are seeing out of focus
shots then good focus shots?

Click to expand...

This isn't a new issue, The P10/P12 have a similiar problem.

The P12 has what is called a slow lens which means that it doesn't have a low aperture value (large lens opening) throughout the zoom range.

I compared my p12 to the p120 for taking zoom pictures and they are both terrible.

Neil.

keith1200rs said:

keith1200rs said:

I think that to get so much
detail into one picture and expect to zoom in as close as I did for
the test is, as you say, expecting too much from any compact 5mp
camera.

Click to expand...

I disagree - why should a compact 5MP camera not be able to take
close detail?

Click to expand...

I think he was talking about having the luxury to zoom into an area. There will always come a zoom point where detail starts to get lost. I should get my act together and post examples. My test picture had hundreds of wires and information stickers in it, and I had become so accustomed to zooming in on detail that I though I would be able to read everything. I agreed that we get used to such expectations until we reach a physical limit, when we might forget how far we have already gone!

When I said that you will not get SLR quality shots it was due to limitations such as aperture size, and usually the larger lenses let in more light. Of course you will be able to make better pictures with these assets, but only when your picture requires them. Otherwise I agree that you should be able to get similar results.