Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Ok, so I understand that this isn't supposed to be an end-all-be-all review, but this is pretty lacking. What about the function of the macro setting on this camera? Does that function well underwater and out? How about the flash? Is it powerful enough underwater to give proper color more than a foot or two? Are there any nasty shadows caused by the flash on the bulbous case - like other canon SD cameras in their underwater cases
The photos you guys included are, with the greatest respect, appear to be very hastily done and don't appear to scratch the capabilities of a camera like this. In the future, when you do reviews, please do a little more than just walking into the ocean and sticking your hand a foot away from the lens.
It doesn't take much tinkering, and you can really get a lot of image out of these little point and shoots. My example:
@lpranal: the shots were taken along side the other cameras in the future roundup, so you can see the photos side by side. more valuable than shots undrwater in murky water. Water quality is a bigger factor in underwater shots, so to judge the shots themselves, you have to be a) somewhere tropical b) take them above water. make sense now?
I picked this camera up in Phuket, Thailand last month after my Olympus 8000 busted during a dive. I took it to Bali and Borneo for diving and snorkeling and its underwater capabilities really blew me away. I have previously used the Olympus tough 8000 and 1050sw, and it is a much better camera then both of those. Here are some underwater pictures that I took with this canon:
@Brian Lam: Nice, theres more? Thanks for the heads up. I'm looking for something durable and splash/sink/crud resistant for my girlfriend who is in culinary school. It's a miracle her iPhone hasn't been ruined yet.
@itchytooth: The TS1 is a much more appropriate camera for those times when you're away from water. It looks time a pretty standard point and shoot and slips into a pocket easily. It's doesn't go as deep though, so it depends on your needs.
Say Blam, wasn't this covered some time ago along with the Panasonic cam? Or was that more of a preview?
EDIT: Oops my bad, you mentioned the previous coverage too. Sorry.
@Nintenboy01: yes. this is just another look. I'm actually going through all the waterproof cameras together now, but writing them up one by one. I'll do a roundup at the end.
OK, I'm fed up. SO tired of hearing Pro in relation to ANY camera that you can't change the lens on, that has such tiny aperture ranges. I've played with my friend's G10 in depth, and it's a fine pocket camera, but without the creative range of depth of field provided by SLR's I really don't see the point. Yes, I want one, but there will always be a huge gap between these and SLR's with apertures ranging from 1.8 to 22 (for example).
For me the control of depth of field is enormously important, and I think a lot of people are missing how powerfully it can be used because they can't explore it with point and shoots.
@ohjohnsmall: Speaking of missing the point... This camera wsa designed to "co-exist" with your DSLR. Not replace it. Not be a substitute for f1.4 portrait lens. Not be the camera that the professional portratist reaches for to shoot his high end glam. This is the camera the professional grabs when he goes out the door scouting, or with his family, or anywhere the bulk of an SLR would be unwelcome.
People need to wise up, and realize these cameras are not designed to one camera, all purposes.
First, I don't know where this idea ever came from that pro camera stuff is always black. No actual pro thinks this. Many pro-level cameras throughout the years (including now) have been a combination of black with silver (as in steel/titanium) accents, and even Canon's own pro lenses are white.
I don't like this sort of styling because to me it's saying *not* "look how professional I am", but instead "look how professional I am to people who aren't professionals". (Obviously I know a point and shoot is not trying to replace an SLR, but pros do carry around point and shoots too, and most of them that I know have cameras a little more stylish than this.) It's more of an idea of what non-professionals think professional stuff looks like - boring and black. The truth is most pro stuff is beautiful in form and is rarely a single slab of non-color like this.
I'm sure it is a very fine camera, though, and the styling isn't enough to put me off from buying one. I just wish it were a little nicer and I don't generally appreciate the self-conscious trying-way-too-hard-to-look-professional thing that some manufacturers do these days.
@badasscat: All of Canon's professional (1D/1Ds) bodies are black. Most of the L lenses are black. The telephoto L's are white ostensibly to reduce heat absorption, but this coincidentally makes them stand out at sporting events.
Personally, i've felt that the silver consumer slr bodies look like toys, but probably because they're silver-colored plastic, rather than polished metal (which would be kind of bad-ass). Then again, a mirror-finish slr body would accomplish two things: become an annoying bright spot in reflective surfaces and scream "SHINY! STEAL ME!".
@badasscat: The idea of black came from the studio environment. The theory is that in the studio, where you are maximizing the control of light, you don't want to have the camera becoming another reflector. So if your camera is black, it won't influence your lighting setup.
Never seen the effect of this in the studio (but all my cameras/lenses are black), but I have seen where the photographer was wearing white and it influenced the image.
Also, white + darkroom doesn't mix. I have actually fogged some prints that way...
@andyo: I appreciate your earnestness and I applaud you in your one-man crusade to spread completely misleading half-truths and/or false dis-information. Carry on!
@bosskev: Not to nitpick, but you are both right... He is right in saying that more mega pixels dont equal noise, but when you jam a bunch onto a tiny sensor, as is the case of piont and shoots, yep, it means noise. None of them have big enough sensors to support ginormous pixel counts. Amplification of the light received creates noise. tiny space means tiny amounts of light which equal high amplification. Just like running your stereo up to 11. It will distort a bit.
@sqeakytoy of the apocalypse: I have to disagree with your benefit-of-the-doubt assessment of andyo's comment, squeakytoy. You might have missed it yesterday, but the same andyo character had jumped in on a different story with his rhetoric at the very point I had said essentially exactly what you just said, repeated here (with emphasis) for the convenience of all:
"Assuming a same-sized sensor, the reduction from 15MP to 10 MP is a major improvement, folks, not a downgrade. 15MP is just too damned noisy for small, point'n'shoot-sized sensors."
So, no, I cannot cut andyo any slack in his campaign of misinformation--when he started voicing his opinions yesterday, he knew, or should have known, exactly what the parameters of the discussion were, specifically, given a sensor of the same physical dimensions, lower megapixels (with larger photosites on the sensor) = less noise, higher megapixels (with smaller photosites on the sensor) = more noise. No apples and oranges here.
@Noobs-R-Us: Yes, we've heard you say this before, in almost every Canon-related thread it seems, but what specifically are you talking about? What camera does Panasonic have to compare to the S90?
@badasscat: Did you not read what the Giz said? The S90 is a response to Panny's LX3 which broke ground after years of P&S people telling these idiots that people don't give a rats ass about the pixel race. At least Panny finally got the message and now these buttheads like Canon with their puny attempts at following Panasonic.
It's like MSFT with their puny Zune. Here's a hint to all the idiots out there who wishes to unseat a market leader. YOU NEED TO MAKE A MUCH BETTER PRODUCT IN ORDER TO UNSEAT A MARKET LEADER!!!
@AnnunziataSelene: "Fuji is so much further ahead when it comes to low light :)"
You are right. The Fuji f31FD is an older 6MP camera that is known for its still-unmatched lowlight performance for a point'n'shoot. Discontinued a couple years ago, I bought mine used; they are selling today for as much or more than their original selling price.
The other area where Fuji has been said to excel is in their dynamic range, i.e., the ability to capture more details in both highlights and shadows simultaneously. Their S5, although again a lower megapixel-yet-professional DSLR, is prized by wedding photographers where dynamic range can be at its most demanding--think black tuxedo in shadow next to a white wedding gown in full sun.
The more and more I look at the image, the more I am worried about the quality of glass. I am one of the lucky few that got a hold of the LX3, and the glass on there is pretty amazing, for a point and shoot. I would be curious to see side by sides from both cameras.
@ilovexspin: I just bought a Panasonic LX3 for $500 because of size/ease. I have multiple SLRs (digital and film) and a full range of pro glass, but the SLRs are just too cumbersome and bulky for certain situations. For instance, I traveled to Chicago/Millwaukee by train to go spend time with friends and go to Summerfest. The SLR rig would have been too bulky, but the LX3 was great, and easy to use at a moments notice.
It also is great for shooting in the street if you want candid shots.
Meh, they're a day late and a dollar short. Panasonic has been the leader in this low light, PQ race. Canon should have leaped ahead, instead, they can't even match Panasonic.
@badasscat: It's not a prime. I don't need super zoom. Super zooms have to have either a smaller sensor or a bigger lens, both of which are no nos to P&S people.
Are you kidding me? The G9 is discontinued but is selling for upwards of $600.00 brand new. From my understanding the G10 is wacker than the G9 and now they're releasing a G11 that costs more than a G10 with less pixels. These cameras peaked at G9 Fuck outta here.
11/19/09
i wonder if they can do the non RED/BLUE 3D...
but rather the vertical/horizontal polarization
11/19/09
11/19/09
Homemade 3d movies could be sweet...
11/19/09
08/21/09
Ok, so I understand that this isn't supposed to be an end-all-be-all review, but this is pretty lacking. What about the function of the macro setting on this camera? Does that function well underwater and out? How about the flash? Is it powerful enough underwater to give proper color more than a foot or two? Are there any nasty shadows caused by the flash on the bulbous case - like other canon SD cameras in their underwater cases
The photos you guys included are, with the greatest respect, appear to be very hastily done and don't appear to scratch the capabilities of a camera like this. In the future, when you do reviews, please do a little more than just walking into the ocean and sticking your hand a foot away from the lens.
It doesn't take much tinkering, and you can really get a lot of image out of these little point and shoots. My example:
08/21/09
09/08/09
08/21/09
[www.goboogo.com]
[www.goboogo.com]
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
EDIT: Oops my bad, you mentioned the previous coverage too. Sorry.
08/21/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
For me the control of depth of field is enormously important, and I think a lot of people are missing how powerfully it can be used because they can't explore it with point and shoots.
08/19/09
People need to wise up, and realize these cameras are not designed to one camera, all purposes.
08/19/09
08/19/09
I don't like this sort of styling because to me it's saying *not* "look how professional I am", but instead "look how professional I am to people who aren't professionals". (Obviously I know a point and shoot is not trying to replace an SLR, but pros do carry around point and shoots too, and most of them that I know have cameras a little more stylish than this.) It's more of an idea of what non-professionals think professional stuff looks like - boring and black. The truth is most pro stuff is beautiful in form and is rarely a single slab of non-color like this.
I'm sure it is a very fine camera, though, and the styling isn't enough to put me off from buying one. I just wish it were a little nicer and I don't generally appreciate the self-conscious trying-way-too-hard-to-look-professional thing that some manufacturers do these days.
08/19/09
Personally, i've felt that the silver consumer slr bodies look like toys, but probably because they're silver-colored plastic, rather than polished metal (which would be kind of bad-ass). Then again, a mirror-finish slr body would accomplish two things: become an annoying bright spot in reflective surfaces and scream "SHINY! STEAL ME!".
08/19/09
Never seen the effect of this in the studio (but all my cameras/lenses are black), but I have seen where the photographer was wearing white and it influenced the image.
Also, white + darkroom doesn't mix. I have actually fogged some prints that way...
08/19/09
08/19/09
It may not give you more detail, but you lose less resolution when interpolating!
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
"Assuming a same-sized sensor, the reduction from 15MP to 10 MP is a major improvement, folks, not a downgrade. 15MP is just too damned noisy for small, point'n'shoot-sized sensors."
So, no, I cannot cut andyo any slack in his campaign of misinformation--when he started voicing his opinions yesterday, he knew, or should have known, exactly what the parameters of the discussion were, specifically, given a sensor of the same physical dimensions, lower megapixels (with larger photosites on the sensor) = less noise, higher megapixels (with smaller photosites on the sensor) = more noise. No apples and oranges here.
08/19/09
Bailiff, Whack his peepee.
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
It's like MSFT with their puny Zune. Here's a hint to all the idiots out there who wishes to unseat a market leader. YOU NEED TO MAKE A MUCH BETTER PRODUCT IN ORDER TO UNSEAT A MARKET LEADER!!!
Is that clear enough?
08/19/09
And complicated? No, the dials actually make it easier to use. The market this camera is aimed at knows this.
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
Oh, and wonder how it compares with the LX3?
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
You are right. The Fuji f31FD is an older 6MP camera that is known for its still-unmatched lowlight performance for a point'n'shoot. Discontinued a couple years ago, I bought mine used; they are selling today for as much or more than their original selling price.
The other area where Fuji has been said to excel is in their dynamic range, i.e., the ability to capture more details in both highlights and shadows simultaneously. Their S5, although again a lower megapixel-yet-professional DSLR, is prized by wedding photographers where dynamic range can be at its most demanding--think black tuxedo in shadow next to a white wedding gown in full sun.
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
It also is great for shooting in the street if you want candid shots.
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
Unless you're talking about some other camera?
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09
08/19/09