«

I`ve just posted an image in the "alt.binaries.photos.original" group taken
with my A70; "Pilot Request by Zol." - this was even taken with some
electronic zoom as well - the only thing I did was make sure the camera was
absolutely steady when it was taken - this shot was taken yesterday ... Zol.

"Rich" <> wrote in message
news:ikhRa.80438$H17.23015@sccrnsc02...
>
> "Zol." <Zol.@End-Of-The-World.com>
>
> > I wish we could get a definitive answer on this `soft image` - To be
> quite
> > honest most of my shots come out sharp & clear
>
> There is soft, there's normal and there's eye-piercing. Some films
> also had the reputation for being soft.
> Mine seem fine to may eye. You could do a little post-processing and
> have an eye-piercing look to the pictures.
>
> > p.s. Has anybody asked anyone in Canon about the so called `soft
> image`
> > matter ? (Z)
>
> Yes. Asked TS at Canon. They guy, who otherwise seemed intelligent,
> said he never heard of it. He added that the one A70 they have in the
> office worked fine.
>
> Take if for what it's worth. Either the TS folks at Canon are stupid,
> or play stupid. At least they could read the comments about their new
> product on the net and have a ready response. Regardless what that
> response would be. Maybe they do read and the _official_ response is
> _never heard about it_ )
>
> Rich
>
>

I posted a response/sample as well. I've only owned it a short while, but
some of my shots have been fantastic.

cheers,
Matt.

"Rich" <> wrote in message
news:ikhRa.80438$H17.23015@sccrnsc02...
>
> "Zol." <Zol.@End-Of-The-World.com>
>
> > I wish we could get a definitive answer on this `soft image` - To be
> quite
> > honest most of my shots come out sharp & clear
>
> There is soft, there's normal and there's eye-piercing. Some films
> also had the reputation for being soft.
> Mine seem fine to may eye. You could do a little post-processing and
> have an eye-piercing look to the pictures.
>
> > p.s. Has anybody asked anyone in Canon about the so called `soft
> image`
> > matter ? (Z)
>
> Yes. Asked TS at Canon. They guy, who otherwise seemed intelligent,
> said he never heard of it. He added that the one A70 they have in the
> office worked fine.
>
> Take if for what it's worth. Either the TS folks at Canon are stupid,
> or play stupid. At least they could read the comments about their new
> product on the net and have a ready response. Regardless what that
> response would be. Maybe they do read and the _official_ response is
> _never heard about it_ )
>
> Rich
>
>

Hi, I`ve checked this out - the only suggestion I have is to set your Image
compression to superfine rather than fine but I love the Image - Zol.

"YeahRight" <> wrote in message
news:iLkRa.3630$...
> I posted a response/sample as well. I've only owned it a short while, but
> some of my shots have been fantastic.
>
> cheers,
> Matt.
>
> "Rich" <> wrote in message
> news:ikhRa.80438$H17.23015@sccrnsc02...
> >
> > "Zol." <Zol.@End-Of-The-World.com>
> >
> > > I wish we could get a definitive answer on this `soft image` - To be
> > quite
> > > honest most of my shots come out sharp & clear
> >
> > There is soft, there's normal and there's eye-piercing. Some films
> > also had the reputation for being soft.
> > Mine seem fine to may eye. You could do a little post-processing and
> > have an eye-piercing look to the pictures.
> >
> > > p.s. Has anybody asked anyone in Canon about the so called `soft
> > image`
> > > matter ? (Z)
> >
> > Yes. Asked TS at Canon. They guy, who otherwise seemed intelligent,
> > said he never heard of it. He added that the one A70 they have in the
> > office worked fine.
> >
> > Take if for what it's worth. Either the TS folks at Canon are stupid,
> > or play stupid. At least they could read the comments about their new
> > product on the net and have a ready response. Regardless what that
> > response would be. Maybe they do read and the _official_ response is
> > _never heard about it_ )
> >
> > Rich
> >
> >
>
>