s330 problem with sharpness

[fuh]

now i'm really confused,

i've read just great reviews about the s330. and for me the only disadvantage was the poor auto WB.
well, i want sharp images since my dimagex wasnt able to take some.

could someone please explain if your discussion is "the S330 compared to bigger cam's" or does it really have a sharping "problem"

i guess, now i have to think about getting a s30, since not that much is wrong with that.

 

[Arvin Chang]

now i'm really confused,
i've read just great reviews about the s330. and for me the only
disadvantage was the poor auto WB.
well, i want sharp images since my dimagex wasnt able to take some.

could someone please explain if your discussion is "the S330
compared to bigger cam's" or does it really have a sharping
"problem"

i guess, now i have to think about getting a s30, since not that
much is wrong with that.

Unfortunately, this discussion is comparing the S200 and S330 versus their immediate predescessors the S110 and the S300. People believe that Canon tweaked the lens and the image processing algorithms in a bad way that leads to poor image quality.

You are right though... image quality will almost always be better with larger cameras. This is just sort of a given. The S30 has a much better lens (the 330 lens yields soft corners) AND is 3MP. I'm going to be bold and say that the older S30 will/would outperform the S230 and whatever 3MP camera replaces the S330 in terms of image quality (AF is another story).

Check out http://www.imaging-resource.com and use their image comparometer to see side-by-side photos fo the S330 and the S20. Despite being over a year older, you can see the S20 yields nicer photos.

--arvin

 

[w3]

Check out http://www.imaging-resource.com and use their image comparometer
to see side-by-side photos fo the S330 and the S20. Despite being
over a year older, you can see the S20 yields nicer photos.

Please don't forget to check out the Indoor Flash images. Please tell me if S330 doesn't have the WORST Auto White Balance. Can't say for sure since I haven't checked all the digicams. It seems so among the digicams that I checked though.

Now what does Ultra-Compact Size have to do with poor Auto White Balance?

 

[Arvin Chang]

Check out http://www.imaging-resource.com and use their image comparometer
to see side-by-side photos fo the S330 and the S20. Despite being
over a year older, you can see the S20 yields nicer photos.

Please don't forget to check out the Indoor Flash images. Please
tell me if S330 doesn't have the WORST Auto White Balance. Can't
say for sure since I haven't checked all the digicams. It seems so
among the digicams that I checked though.

Now what does Ultra-Compact Size have to do with poor Auto White
Balance?

I can't think of a size vs WB tradeoff since WB should be mainly firmware... but maybe the weak flash (which IS related to size) might be a culprit.

--arvin

 

[w3]

Check out http://www.imaging-resource.com and use their image comparometer
to see side-by-side photos fo the S330 and the S20. Despite being
over a year older, you can see the S20 yields nicer photos.

Please don't forget to check out the Indoor Flash images. Please
tell me if S330 doesn't have the WORST Auto White Balance. Can't
say for sure since I haven't checked all the digicams. It seems so
among the digicams that I checked though.

Now what does Ultra-Compact Size have to do with poor Auto White
Balance?

I can't think of a size vs WB tradeoff since WB should be mainly
firmware... but maybe the weak flash (which IS related to size)
might be a culprit.

As you can see from Imaging-resource's image comparometer, S330's Auto WB for indoor flash shot seems worse than S300 or S110's, which in turn looks worse than S100's, in my opinion. Getting worse and worse, why? They all have the similarly small Flash. So size is not an excuse here.

 

[Raist3d]

I have to echo W3's comments here.

The S110v had better auto white balance than the S200. To me this is OBVIOUS . I just don't understand why Canon had to screw this up- they were clearly doing quite fine.

• Raist

Check out http://www.imaging-resource.com and use their image comparometer
to see side-by-side photos fo the S330 and the S20. Despite being
over a year older, you can see the S20 yields nicer photos.

Please don't forget to check out the Indoor Flash images. Please
tell me if S330 doesn't have the WORST Auto White Balance. Can't
say for sure since I haven't checked all the digicams. It seems so
among the digicams that I checked though.

Now what does Ultra-Compact Size have to do with poor Auto White
Balance?

I can't think of a size vs WB tradeoff since WB should be mainly
firmware... but maybe the weak flash (which IS related to size)
might be a culprit.

As you can see from Imaging-resource's image comparometer, S330's
Auto WB for indoor flash shot seems worse than S300 or S110's,
which in turn looks worse than S100's, in my opinion. Getting
worse and worse, why? They all have the similarly small Flash. So
size is not an excuse here.

 

[Arvin Chang]

Dang... the S200 really sounds like a disappointment ;p Wait... is this WB problem also found in the S330 and S30? I thought they have all the same WB algorithms.

--arvin

I have to echo W3's comments here.

The S110v had better auto white balance than the S200. To me this
is OBVIOUS . I just don't understand why Canon had to screw this
up- they were clearly doing quite fine.

• Raist

 

[w3]

Dang... the S200 really sounds like a disappointment ;p Wait... is
this WB problem also found in the S330 and S30? I thought they have
all the same WB algorithms.

Yes, Auto WB is really bad on S330 for indoor shots under artificial lights. I have the S330, so I know.

I don't have either the S30 or S40. But you can check them out using imaging-resource's "Comparometer". Look at the Indoor Flash Portraits. S30 and S40's image WB seem better than S330's. whiile S30's looks better than S40's, in my opinion. Please check it out to see for yourself.

--arvin

I have to echo W3's comments here.

The S110v had better auto white balance than the S200. To me this
is OBVIOUS . I just don't understand why Canon had to screw this
up- they were clearly doing quite fine.

• Raist

 

[Raist3d]

Dang... the S200 really sounds like a disappointment ;p Wait... is
this WB problem also found in the S330 and S30? I thought they have
all the same WB algorithms.

The S330 has the same auto-WB problems of the S200, and fares the same vs the S300. Don't know about the S30 (have to check) but I THINK the S30 is like the S110v/S300 and not like the S200/S330.

• Raist

--arvin

I have to echo W3's comments here.

The S110v had better auto white balance than the S200. To me this
is OBVIOUS . I just don't understand why Canon had to screw this
up- they were clearly doing quite fine.

• Raist

 

[w3]

I can understand that for a small digicam, you may have tradeoffs vs bigger digicams, such as having only 2X Optical Zoom but not 3X or 4X, and not having a whole lot of buttons and switches for some extra fancy big digicam features.

The kind of tradeoff that I can NEVER understand is to sacrifice focus, image sharpness and AUTO WB for some pro-like fancy camera features!!!

I can even understand some "pro" may want softer images from a digicam to start with, even from a ultra-subcompact, so that they can do post-camera processing. But the default image setting should actually produce SHARP images, with adjustments for softer images to please those pros or reviewers.

But, I can never understand how Canon can manage to put on a tiny digicam a Focus Assist Lamp that looks just like the bigger fancy digicams' but is actually almost completely useless. The S330's low light focusing ability, even with the Focus Assist Lamp, is worse than some digicams without the Assist Lamp.

I can never understand how Canon can put on a tiny digicam a lousy AUTO WB, but with all the fancy WB Pre-Sets that however, even with the Pre-Sets, the WB performance is not as good as a simpler digicam that has only good AUTO WB but without any fancy Pre-Sets.

I can go on and on.

To me, Focus, Image Sharpness and good AUTO WB are basic and fundamental for digicams, and particularly so for an ultra-subcompact size "convenient" digicam that you may carry everywhere, including lots of indoor use with flash, for quick snap shots.

 

[phlewt]

The following is from Phil's review of the S330:

Unfortunately the IXUS 330's automatic white balance did seem to fall over (quite badly) under both Incandescent and Fluorescent light. However, the news is better if you switch to one of the pre-programmed white balance settings. Pre-selecting white balance before shooting guarantees some of the best artificial light white balance I've seen in any consumer digital camera (check out that Incandescent shot, almost no hue shift). Additionally the IXUS 330 also has manual preset white balance which virtually guarantees perfect white balance. Canon lose one mark for poor Auto White balance but gain at least two for excellent pre-programmed settings!

If you want only point and shoot, the S330 would not be the best choice. But if you are willing to use pre-programmed WB, it might be worthy of consideration.

The kind of tradeoff that I can NEVER understand is to sacrifice
focus, image sharpness and AUTO WB for some pro-like fancy camera
features!!!

--
--
phlewt
http://public.fotki.com/phlewt/myanmar/
Recent pictures from Myanmar

 

[w3]

The following is from Phil's review of the S330:

Unfortunately the IXUS 330's automatic white balance did seem to
fall over (quite badly) under both Incandescent and Fluorescent
light. However, the news is better if you switch to one of the
pre-programmed white balance settings.

That is the point. Sacrificing good AUTO setting so that there can be more manual pre-shot adjustments?

With Canon's design philosophy on ultra-subcompact digicams, it seems that either pre-shot adjustments or post camera processing become mandatory even on these supposedly "convenient" digicams. Isn't it self-defeating?

Pre-selecting white balance
before shooting guarantees some of the best artificial light white
balance I've seen in any consumer digital camera (check out that
Incandescent shot, almost no hue shift).

I am not sure about that. According to my experience, S330's WB result even with the Pre-Selecting setting, is not as good as some Kodak digicams' AUTO WB.

Canon lose one mark for poor Auto White
balance but gain at least two for excellent pre-programmed settings!

This is what I can't understand. For a convenient digicam like S330, Canon should lose 2 big points for having poor AUTO White Balance, and gain perhaps only 0.5 point for having some Pre-programmed settings.

Why should S330's Pre-Set WB be counted as any PLUS when S330 has such poor AUTO WB, that the user HAS TO use the Pre-Set WB and still can't make it up?

Why should Kodak lose big points on some POINT AND SHOOT digicams for not having Pre-Set WBs, when they have a very good AUTO WB that renders such Pre-Set WB settings unnecessary? Particularly, when you find out that some image results from these Kodak AUTO WB are better than S330's Pre-Set?

You have to design for the product's intended usage or purpose. Otherwise, it will be defeating its own purpose.

If you want only point and shoot, the S330 would not be the best
choice. But if you are willing to use pre-programmed WB, it might
be worthy of consideration.

That is precisely the point. S330 should be a point and shoot digicam. Why evaluate it as anything else? Anyway, Phil has put it in a very nice way to say that the S330's AUTO WB is really bad.

The kind of tradeoff that I can NEVER understand is to sacrifice
focus, image sharpness and AUTO WB for some pro-like fancy camera
features!!!

--
--
phlewt
http://public.fotki.com/phlewt/myanmar/
Recent pictures from Myanmar

 

[Jaji]

I've been watching this line of camera for a while, and am somewhat
close(r) to buying one. However, after seeing posts of poor
focusing on the S330 (and the fact it's 2Mp), I've been in a
waiting pattern. I've been looking for an objective review of this
camera (or better yet, get my hands on one) as I REALLY like it's
combination of size and color fidelity!

I too, am very close to buying a canon S230. For all you canon elph haters, what ultra-compact digital camera would you suggest? I would like the best mix of portability and image quality.

I've looked at the coolpix 2500 (a new model should be coming out soon) and it has very sharp and great pictures. However, it's a little bigger than the elph and the build isn't as sturdy.

The Dimage X is an awesome size, but the image quality suffers.

Also, the Casio seems to have the best size, but from what I've seen, the pictures are not good.

I haven't really looked into fuji film at all.

what do you guys think?...anyone have opinions on the best ultra-compact overall?

 

[Raist3d]

I haven't really looked into fuji film at all.

what do you guys think?...anyone have opinions on the best
ultra-compact overall?

I think the S230 will be one of the best in its class (along with th S200 and S330). My beef with CAnon is that they lowered the quality in many situations over the previous models and looks like the S230 behaves like an S200 picture quality wise.

Check the S230 pictures for yourself and if you like them go for it. I actually like the FujiFine pix 401 too.

• Raist

 

[w3]

I've been watching this line of camera for a while, and am somewhat
close(r) to buying one. However, after seeing posts of poor
focusing on the S330 (and the fact it's 2Mp), I've been in a
waiting pattern. I've been looking for an objective review of this
camera (or better yet, get my hands on one) as I REALLY like it's
combination of size and color fidelity!

I too, am very close to buying a canon S230. For all you canon
elph haters, what ultra-compact digital camera would you suggest?

I don't hate digital elphs. I just feel sorry that S200/330 could have been very close to perfect pocket digicams but fell short probably because of some marketing decisions. Three issues: Low Light Focus Lock Problem, Lousy Auto WB and Soft Images. Could have been done right but was not. What an overall great piece of engineering hardware that got screw up by some firmware (my guess) and/or parts (lens/sensors/CCD?). Pitiful.

Right now, even though S330 seems to be such a wonderful and shining piece of hardware that I can admire from time to time by simply holding it, looking at it and "playing" with it, I am using it only as an emergency digicam.

I would like the best mix of portability and image quality.

I've looked at the coolpix 2500 (a new model should be coming out
soon) and it has very sharp and great pictures. However, it's a
little bigger than the elph and the build isn't as sturdy.

Yes, 3500. I would wait to see how Nikon's new 3MP CoolPix 3500 compared with Canon S230. If the Image quality is better, then I don't care if it is a little bit bigger or less sturdy. At least, I think 2500's WB is better. Now, I can even put up with Nikon's slow but precise AF.

The Dimage X is an awesome size, but the image quality suffers.

Also, the Casio seems to have the best size, but from what I've
seen, the pictures are not good.

I haven't really looked into fuji film at all.

Me either.

what do you guys think?...anyone have opinions on the best
ultra-compact overall?

You may also want to take a look at Kodak's new 4MP LS443. But that is about the same size as Canon's S30/40/45.

 

[Raist3d]

You may also want to take a look at Kodak's new 4MP LS443. But
that is about the same size as Canon's S30/40/45.

Ack, no! Imho of course. The LS443 takes horrible pics! Check the pictures out at http://www.dcresource.com:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/kodak/ls443-review/gallery.html

I was also looking at it as a good alternative until I saw those pictures.

• Raist

At this point believe it or not I think I will buy another S110v, simply because it's the camera that takes the pictures with the quality I find remarkable. I agree with you W3, Canon could have done it as they did with the S300/S110v generation...

 

[Jaji]

I think the S230 will be one of the best in its class (along with
th S200 and S330). My beef with CAnon is that they lowered the
quality in many situations over the previous models and looks like
the S230 behaves like an S200 picture quality wise.

Check the S230 pictures for yourself and if you like them go for
it. I actually like the FujiFine pix 401 too.

• Raist

I guess there is a general agreement that the s200/s330 are better cameras than the s230. If you guys had a choice, would you choose the s200 over the s230? Do you think it possible that the image quality is better on the s230, but we just haven't seen the right pics?

Also, how are the macro capabilities w/ the elph?

 

[Raist3d]

I think the S230 will be one of the best in its class (along with
th S200 and S330). My beef with CAnon is that they lowered the
quality in many situations over the previous models and looks like
the S230 behaves like an S200 picture quality wise.

Check the S230 pictures for yourself and if you like them go for
it. I actually like the FujiFine pix 401 too.

• Raist

I guess there is a general agreement that the s200/s330 are better
cameras than the s230.

Oh, wait... I mean the S110v and the S330, not the S200/S330. I would take the S230 over the S200 or the S330 if I don't need the 3x optical zoom.

In other words, the S200 and S230 picture quality wise behave similarly, bu the S230 does have additional improvements. It's the S110v to me that looks "just right" picture quality wise.

If you guys had a choice, would you choose
the s200 over the s230? Do you think it possible that the image

No, I would definitively choose the S230.

quality is better on the s230, but we just haven't seen the right
pics?

I think the S230 is the better of the two (S200).

Also, how are the macro capabilities w/ the elph?

On the S100/S110v/S200/S230 they are "ok" but fall short to what some competitors do (particularly Nikon). The S300/S330 line has slightly worse macro than the tinier elph.

They really don't do macro, but as some say "a little closer" type photography.

-= Raist

 

[Raist3d]

I think the S230 will be one of the best in its class (along with
th S200 and S330). My beef with CAnon is that they lowered the
quality in many situations over the previous models and looks like
the S230 behaves like an S200 picture quality wise.

Check the S230 pictures for yourself and if you like them go for
it. I actually like the FujiFine pix 401 too.

• Raist

I guess there is a general agreement that the s200/s330 are better
cameras than the s230.

Oh, wait... I mean the S110v and the S330, not the S200/S330. I

ARGH... that should read "I mean the S110v and the S300, not the..."

• Raist

 

[w3]

I think the S230 will be one of the best in its class (along with
th S200 and S330). My beef with CAnon is that they lowered the
quality in many situations over the previous models and looks like
the S230 behaves like an S200 picture quality wise.

Check the S230 pictures for yourself and if you like them go for
it. I actually like the FujiFine pix 401 too.

• Raist

I guess there is a general agreement that the s200/s330 are better
cameras than the s230.

No, I think that we think S200/330 are the worse among the digital elph group (all of them are 2MP with the exception of the new 3MP S230).

If you guys had a choice, would you choose
the s200 over the s230?

No, we would choose S230 over S200 if the prices are close enough.

Do you think it possible that the image
quality is better on the s230, but we just haven't seen the right
pics?

Without looking at any sample pictures, I think that the general image quality from S230 would be better. I think the 3MP S230 will beat most other 2MP digital elphs, even though S230's images may not be as good as other 3MP digicams. And I don't know about S230's White Balance, Sharpness (contrast) or low light Focus Lock ability (which are issues with S200/330. Most Canon CONSUMER digicams have goofy WB performance, in my opinion). Plus, as long as professional reviewers keep singing the praise of Canon consumer digicams while most loyal Canon users, particularly first time digicam or single digicam users, go along, why should Canon change a thing?

I would wait for Nikon's new 3MP CP3500 and compare it with S230 before I make up my mind.

Also, how are the macro capabilities w/ the elph?

Adequate but not as good as Nikon CPs. If Macro is your main interest, then you should really wait to check out Nikon's new 3MP CP3500 first.