Digital Cameras

[markopolo]

My Canon PowerShot S110 (purchased in 2001) is just starting to have some minor problems so I started looking for a replacement with a better zoom and decided on a Canon PowerShot SX110 IS. I took some photos of the moon tonight:

Wide angle:


10x optical zoom:


10x optical + 4x digital zoom:


I'd need to adjust the settings for the second photo but am pleased with the 10x optical + 4x digital zoom photo. The Canon PowerShot SX110 IS won't fit in your shirt pocket but it will be easy enough to carry in a case on your belt.

[renrut]

The one thing that is a must for any camera is the optical zoom. Digital is basically useless if you have good photo editing software. Optical zooms in without loosing any of the picture size or quality. Digital just crops off unwanted stuff and shrinks the picture size.

What is the resolution of that camera Mark? Looks quite high. That last picture is really clear.

[markopolo]

It is 9 megapixel.

You're right about digital zoom being basically a crop but they've improved it over my 2001 model. I never used the digital zoom on my previous camera because it looked "pixelated". The last photo above was 10x optical plus full digital zoom on. It looks pretty good on the web but would probably still look like it was taken with digital zoom if you made a large print.

I learned that 8x or 10x optical zoom means different things for different cameras.

The 10x Canon SX110 IS has the 35mm equivalent of a 36-360mm lens.

The 10x Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5 has the 35mm equivalent of a 28-280mm lens.

[Davydd]

No moon shots yet but I opted to go DSLR this past month. I bought an Olympus E-520 camera that came with a 14-42mm (35mm equiv to 28-84mm) lens and then I bought a fixed 25mm (50mm) "pancake" lens and a 70-300mm (140-600mm). This is what the camera looks like with the three lenses.



The pancake lens is for my restaurant food photography that I like to do a lot of. The telephoto is for nature and birds.

BTW, you are better off not using digital zoom. If you have a photo editing program with a crop photo feature you can get the exact same equivalent as digital zoom but better quality. All digital zoom is doing is cropping your pixels the same as photo editing software but with less stability shooting in the field. Also, shooting with a higher megapixel camera will give you more pixels to work with.

[markopolo]

Looks like a fantastic camera Davydd.

The digital zoom enabled photo #3 of the moon above. Photo #2 was 10x optical zoom (360mm 35mm equivalent). It's overexposed. Cropping photo #2 results in this:

[Davydd]

That was obvious. It looks like your original photo. You have to have the same exposure and detail you got with your digital zoom photo. It can be done. Here is a 4X optical photo taken with a hand held Canon SD850 point and shoot camera. I then cropped the photo down to this. The original would have been about midway between your first two shots in comparison.

[markopolo]

I better read through the book I haven't even removed the plastic wrap on the manual !

[Photog]

The point & shoot the Pros like to have in their bag is the G-Series Canon cameras. Full control, RAW, and they can use the external flash.

The newest one will be very nice. The G11. The Pros complained about too many mega-pixels for such a small sensor. The G11 has been pulled back to 10 Mp from 14.7 Mp in the G10. This should make for some high quality images, at least up to 16" x 20". They also returned the flip/swivel screen.

The G11 is another P&S that is not a pocket camera. It looks more like a Leica Rangefinder.

I may trade my current G9 in for one of these.

Here is one link of many:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09081908canong11.asp

[Mike]

Oh, digital camera gurus, I'm looking for a new P&S camera with some functional bells/whistles, if possible.
I know there are at least a few of you on here who I would consider photo-"sensei"tives.

Currently, I have an older Olympus (circa 2004) which sucks batteries dry in a few minutes, and is
becoming more work to keep functional than it's worth.
So, after a bit of thought,
I was wondering if you had any recommendations for a simple, digital camera, with the following
features....
1) longer battery life, preferably LI rechargeable. The Olympus came with crappy NiCad batteries
and I've replaced them with better crappy NiCad batteries. If the LI's are charging, it would be nice
to be able to use non-rechargeable AA/AAA store boughts, in a pinch.
2) an optical viewfinder that's useful, not an afterthought. I'm tired of the tiny LCD display.
3) a power/digital/optical zoom combo of some sort.
4) easy pic review and transfer to my laptop - cam port to laptop USB port cable works for me.
if there's newer technology available, like Bluetooth transfer, I'm all ears.
5) decent storage capacity built in. It would be nice not to have to add micro storage cards. My Olympus
has huge capacity but i had to add a 2 GB micro card (can't remember which type) to get it.
6) compact. the smaller the better, within reason. I'm neither James Bond, nor Atlas.
7) I can read a manual, but simple (select some modes/features as necessary) then P&S would be nicer.
However, I can probably remember to make some quick adjustments for shutter speed/light/flash/pic quality etc. first.
a camcorder function to take short movies (15-20 seconds) with sound would be a nice feature, but not essential.
9) price - less is more in my budgetary world. < $300 would certainly get my attention. More would still work
if the value was truly there.
10) If you bought another camera to use as a compact P&S for yourself, with these features, what would you buy?
To fill in for your first choice main camera, say, when it's being repaired or serviced, or unavailable and you
just need something to fill in competently?

Please feel free to add anything cool I may have missed or might not be aware of. It's been 7 years since I
last looked at digital cameras.

TY for any comments/suggestions.

[Photog]

To be a back up to my main DSLR, a P&S needs to have a hot-shoe, for an external flash.

It also needs to offer RAW image capture, and manual control.

This narrows the field quickly, to a couple cameras.

My choice would be a Canon Powershot G11, G12. Nikon and Olympus are now trying to compete with the Canon G-Series; so you might check out their latest offerings in this Top-of-the-Line P&S.

[Davydd]

A backup camera to a DSLR has to be something entirely different to me and not an imitation. That biggest difference is pocketability in order to carry around all the time. The Canon G series doesn't meet that criteria in my mind. That's why I bought the Canon S95 the functional brother to the G12 but a small subcompact camera. I also bought it for its superior low-light capability and avoid flash with it. If I need a hot shoe then it is time to bring out the DSLR.

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Photog

To be a back up to my main DSLR, a P&S needs to have a hot-shoe, for an external flash.

It also needs to offer RAW image capture, and manual control.

This narrows the field quickly, to a couple cameras.

My choice would be a Canon Powershot G11, G12. Nikon and Olympus are now trying to compete with the Canon G-Series; so you might check out their latest offerings in this Top-of-the-Line P&S.

With raw image format, how much additional effort and processing would be involved in
actually saving the pictures to my laptop or other resting place after shooting? Would there
be an "auto" setting (and other specific conditions) on these cameras which would also
allow me to take decent pictures without too much manual editing or extra modification?
I wonder how hard they are on batteries as that's one of my main reasons for looking.

Thanks for your thoughts Brian. I was hoping you'd spot this thread.

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Davydd

A backup camera to a DSLR has to be something entirely different to me and not an imitation. That biggest difference is pocketability in order to carry around all the time. The Canon G series doesn't meet that criteria in my mind. That's why I bought the Canon S95 the functional brother to the G12 but a small subcompact camera. I also bought it for its superior low-light capability and avoid flash with it. If I need a hot shoe then it is time to bring out the DSLR.

Thanks Davydd. Portability is one of the criteria I'd like to have, as we try to travel light,
and that includes a smallish camera with big features. I understand your reasoning and
I hadn't mentioned low light functionality but since we are often indoors (State Capitols)
where the lighting is often terrible, a good low light capture without flash is something that
would be great to have. So, your Canon S95 might be a good option, too. What's it like on
battery life?

[Photog]

Originally Posted by Mike

With raw image format, how much additional effort and processing would be involved in
actually saving the pictures to my laptop or other resting place after shooting? Would there
be an "auto" setting (and other specific conditions) on these cameras which would also
allow me to take decent pictures without too much manual editing or extra modification?
I wonder how hard they are on batteries as that's one of my main reasons for looking.

Thanks for your thoughts Brian. I was hoping you'd spot this thread.

It is no extra effort to save the RAW format. It does take more space on the hard drive. The G11 & G12 can save a JPEG & RAW at the same time. Use the RAW file at a later date, to squeeze extra quality and light out of your favorite images. Or use the RAW file to correct for poor white-balance or exposure settings, when the image was captured.

The G cameras do have Full Auto and Semi Auto functions, to allow for various shooting conditions. If you have a specific set of adjustments you like (make the digital image look like Velvia film), that is easy to do too.

They are easy on batteries, although I always recommend carrying an extra batter or two, and a charger.

Originally Posted by Davydd

A backup camera to a DSLR has to be something entirely different to me and not an imitation. That biggest difference is pocketability in order to carry around all the time. The Canon G series doesn't meet that criteria in my mind. That's why I bought the Canon S95 the functional brother to the G12 but a small subcompact camera. I also bought it for its superior low-light capability and avoid flash with it. If I need a hot shoe then it is time to bring out the DSLR.

These are excellent points. If you do not need a hot shoe, for a flash, and you must have a fairly compact camera, there are a few others available. We owned an S70 for a while, for those the same reasons you mentioned. It had low light issues and digital noise too. We gifted it to our son's family a few years ago, and they still use it all the time, and love it. The newer S-Series Canons are even more powerful and user friendly.

No viewfinder on the S-Series cameras. You must use the 3" LCD screen on the back of the camera, to see what you are shooting.

The S70 was a great little camera, but we found we needed external flash and other options more than we needed compactness. Compared to our DSLR kit (1D Mk II), the G-Series and a flash, is tiny.

We also like to use a Lensmate http://www.lensmateonline.com/store/G11partB.php with our P&S. This protects the delicate lens, as it protrudes from the body, and allows the use of a polarizing filter. For the S90/95 http://www.lensmateonline.com/store/s90v2.php, it mounts a little differently, does not protect the lens barrel, but still allows the use of a polarizer.

[Mike]

Thanks again, more interesting info.
Now I have something to consider when comparing.
Price might now take the forefront.
I'll have to visit a couple of stores and see what deals are out there.

[Mike]

I finally went with a lesser model than some of those recommended after weighing the pros (advertised
features) versus cons (mostly price) and came up with a Fuji Finepix S1800 digital camera. Not a DSLR.
I like it, and it has most of my basic requirements including EVF, and several manual and some useful and
interesting automatic modes, it's much easier on rechargable NiMh batteries so far, and even resembles a
much more expensive DSLR in look and feel. It has a 12.2 MPixel rating with an 18X power optical zoom and
6.7X digital. It seems really good in low light conditions and has a "museum" mode as well as another dozen
or so special conditions predefined settings. Takes 4 alkaline AA, NiMh rechargables, or Lithium rechargables.
Interfaces similar to other digital cameras with a Windows based PC for photo transfer and storage.
And, it was about 1/5 the price of a decent DSLR at C$179 on mark down as an older model Best Buy wanted
to move.
It has been replaced by slightly newer models like the S2950 here in Canada and some comparables in the
USA, if anyone's interested.

[Photog]

Nice find Mike. And a great price. Post your favorite pic taken with it.

[Mike]

Haven't done much fiddling yet, just some experimental shots here and there.
I'll try to upload 2 but I've had to reduce the quality a bit to comply with board limitations.

[Photog]

Well Mike, it looks like your will have fun using your new camera.

[Mike]

I hope so. I'm going to put together a candid collage/montage of the looks on people's faces as they
pull up to the pumps and see the price this summer. Should be quite amusing.