Canon SD 800.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Morton Linder, Oct 25, 2006.

  1. Hi,

    I'm posting this item to ask a question, not to be a troll.

    I've been using a Canon SD 550 for almost a year, with excellent
    results. I ordered a new Canon SD-800, as its specs looked great,
    including a 28mm equivalent w/a end, 215K pixel screen, optical
    stabilizer, and ISO to 1600. After ordering but before it arrived, I
    read some reviews which mentioned severe corners softness at the w/a
    setting. Well, I tried the new camera out and was severely disappointed.
    The softness at 4 corners at w/a setting is totally unacceptable, as is
    its flash coverage. Taking flash pictures at only 6 feet distance
    indoors, the medium and full tele pix were hopelessly underexposed. I'm
    an advanced amateur, and can assure you that it was not operator error.

    I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has an SD-800. The softness
    is apparently in all these SD-800s, but I don't know if the flash
    problem is too. Even with a slow tele end, the pix should not be almost
    black at 6 feet.

    I returned the camera to the dealer.

    Thanks.

    Morton Linder
     
    Morton Linder, Oct 25, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Morton Linder

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    I've read similar comments about the SD800. I
    have the SD700IS and really like it.

    But the ISO 1600 claim for the SD800 is a joke.
    Good up to 200, OK at 400 in a pinch (and maybe
    some post processing).

    Phil

    Morton Linder wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > I'm posting this item to ask a question, not to be a troll.
    >
    > I've been using a Canon SD 550 for almost a year, with excellent
    > results. I ordered a new Canon SD-800, as its specs looked great,
    > including a 28mm equivalent w/a end, 215K pixel screen, optical
    > stabilizer, and ISO to 1600. After ordering but before it arrived, I
    > read some reviews which mentioned severe corners softness at the w/a
    > setting. Well, I tried the new camera out and was severely disappointed.
    > The softness at 4 corners at w/a setting is totally unacceptable, as is
    > its flash coverage. Taking flash pictures at only 6 feet distance
    > indoors, the medium and full tele pix were hopelessly underexposed. I'm
    > an advanced amateur, and can assure you that it was not operator error.
    >
    > I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has an SD-800. The softness
    > is apparently in all these SD-800s, but I don't know if the flash
    > problem is too. Even with a slow tele end, the pix should not be almost
    > black at 6 feet.
    >
    > I returned the camera to the dealer.
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Morton Linder
     
    Phil Wheeler, Oct 25, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Morton Linder

    Charles Guest

    In article <7AQ%g.31$>, Morton Linder
    <> wrote:

    > I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has an SD-800. The softness
    > is apparently in all these SD-800s, but I don't know if the flash
    > problem is too. Even with a slow tele end, the pix should not be almost
    > black at 6 feet.


    I don't have the reported corner softness on my SD-800 at 28mm, nor do
    I have any problem with the flash. Only had it a few days but I am
    happy with the camera so far.

    --
    Charles
     
    Charles, Oct 25, 2006
    #3
  4. Charles wrote:
    > In article <7AQ%g.31$>, Morton Linder
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has an SD-800. The softness
    >>is apparently in all these SD-800s, but I don't know if the flash
    >>problem is too. Even with a slow tele end, the pix should not be almost
    >>black at 6 feet.

    >
    >
    > I don't have the reported corner softness on my SD-800 at 28mm, nor do
    > I have any problem with the flash. Only had it a few days but I am
    > happy with the camera so far.
    >

    Your post makes me happy. Perhaps I just had a bad camera. I'll try again.

    Thanks.

    Morton
     
    Morton Linder, Oct 26, 2006
    #4
  5. I disagree in part. Yes, the ISO 1600 is a stretch. However, with Noise
    Ninja, ISO 800 is useable. It comes done to this, by setting for HI ISO on
    the SD800 IS, I can get useable shots where my SD700 IS had to struggle too
    much. I shoot a lot of family events in available light and no flash, so
    it's get the shot or not. With usable ISO 800, I get more.

    Bye.

    "Phil Wheeler" <> wrote in message
    news:fJQ%g.12553$...
    > I've read similar comments about the SD800. I have the SD700IS and really
    > like it.
    >
    > But the ISO 1600 claim for the SD800 is a joke. Good up to 200, OK at 400
    > in a pinch (and maybe some post processing).
    >
    > Phil
    >

    [............]
    >>
    >> Thanks.
    >>
    >> Morton Linder
     
    David Sommers, Oct 27, 2006
    #5
  6. Charles wrote:
    > In article <7AQ%g.31$>, Morton Linder
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has an SD-800. The softness
    >>is apparently in all these SD-800s, but I don't know if the flash
    >>problem is too. Even with a slow tele end, the pix should not be almost
    >>black at 6 feet.

    >
    >
    > I don't have the reported corner softness on my SD-800 at 28mm, nor do
    > I have any problem with the flash. Only had it a few days but I am
    > happy with the camera so far.
    >

    Hi Charles and Group,

    Thanks to your post, I purchased an SD-800 at a different dealer, and
    what a difference. This one has minimal corner softness, and the flash
    exposures are excellent. I suppose that my first SD-800 was defective. I
    am surprised that Canon allowed a bad camera like that to get through.

    Thanks again.

    Morton
     
    Morton Linder, Oct 28, 2006
    #6
  7. Morton Linder

    Charles Guest

    In article <Owy0h.115$>, Morton Linder
    <> wrote:

    > Thanks to your post, I purchased an SD-800 at a different dealer, and
    > what a difference. This one has minimal corner softness, and the flash
    > exposures are excellent. I suppose that my first SD-800 was defective. I
    > am surprised that Canon allowed a bad camera like that to get through.


    I am glad to hear you have a good one now. It should not happen, but I
    am not surprised that some defective cameras get through. Particularly
    in the initial batches. These point and shoots cameras are mass
    produced. That is why it is a good idea to purchase from retailers that
    take have good return policies.

    --
    Charles
     
    Charles, Oct 28, 2006
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. David J. Littleboy

    Re: Canon 10D baby pic at ISO 800

    David J. Littleboy, Aug 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    403
    Albert Wiersch
    Aug 25, 2003
  2. [BnH]
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    659
    Walter Hofmann
    Sep 24, 2005
  3. restlessbaby

    CANON 600mm f/4L IS USM Telephoto Lens for 800.00

    restlessbaby, Apr 6, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    807
    Paul J Gans
    Apr 8, 2006
  4. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    327
  5. .....

    Canon SD 800 vs. 700?

    ....., Oct 28, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    319
    Charles
    Oct 28, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page