Re: New High-End Canon Cameras Announced

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ASAAR, Sep 17, 2008.

  1. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:58:41 -0400, Stephen Henning wrote:

    > Today Canon announced the G10 and SX10 IS as replacements for the G9,
    > their top end view-finder camera.
    >
    > The SX10 IS is an ultrazoom going from 28 to 560 mm equiv, 10.3 MP, AA's.
    > The G10 has a 28 to 140 mm equiv zoom, 12.4 MP, Li-ion Battery.


    According to DPReview's comment on this news item, the SX10's
    superior sibling, the SX1 (CMOS sensor, 4fps full resolution
    continuous shooting and true 1080p HDTV movies at 30fps) won't be
    available in North America. I wonder how well it handles the
    "rolling shutter" problem.
     
    ASAAR, Sep 17, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ASAAR

    measekite Guest

    On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:03:15 -0400, ASAAR wrote:

    > On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:58:41 -0400, Stephen Henning wrote:
    >
    >> Today Canon announced the G10 and SX10 IS as replacements for the G9,
    >> their top end view-finder camera.
    >>
    >> The SX10 IS is an ultrazoom going from 28 to 560 mm equiv, 10.3 MP, AA's.
    >> The G10 has a 28 to 140 mm equiv zoom, 12.4 MP, Li-ion Battery.

    >
    > According to DPReview's comment on this news item, the SX10's
    > superior sibling, the SX1 (CMOS sensor, 4fps full resolution
    > continuous shooting and true 1080p HDTV movies at 30fps) won't be
    > available in North America. I wonder how well it handles the
    > "rolling shutter" problem.


    Just because it has more features that does not mean it is superior. The
    viewfinder on the SX10 is better and that is a biggie in getting the right
    sort of photo.
     
    measekite, Sep 17, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ASAAR

    dwight Guest

    "Stephen Henning" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > In article <3ofAk.486$>,
    > measekite <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:03:15 -0400, ASAAR wrote:
    >>
    >> > On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:58:41 -0400, Stephen Henning wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> Today Canon announced the G10 and SX10 IS as replacements for the G9,
    >> >> their top end view-finder camera.
    >> >>
    >> >> The SX10 IS is an ultrazoom going from 28 to 560 mm equiv, 10.3 MP,
    >> >> AA's.
    >> >> The G10 has a 28 to 140 mm equiv zoom, 12.4 MP, Li-ion Battery.
    >> >
    >> > According to DPReview's comment on this news item, the SX10's
    >> > superior sibling, the SX1 (CMOS sensor, 4fps full resolution
    >> > continuous shooting and true 1080p HDTV movies at 30fps) won't be
    >> > available in North America. I wonder how well it handles the
    >> > "rolling shutter" problem.

    >>
    >> Just because it has more features that does not mean it is superior. The
    >> viewfinder on the SX10 is better and that is a biggie in getting the
    >> right
    >> sort of photo.

    >
    > The LCD Monitor is bigger, 2.5inches (was 2 inches). I haven't seen any
    > information about the Electronic TFT Viewfinder being bigger.


    The S5 viewfiinder is listed at .33" (canonusa.com), while the SX10 is .44"
    (dpreview). I haven't found the pixel count on the S5, but the SX10 is
    235,000... Sounds like it might be a bit bigger.

    dwight
    www.tfrog.com
     
    dwight, Sep 20, 2008
    #3
  4. ASAAR

    measekite Guest

    On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:34:21 -0400, Stephen Henning wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > ASAAR <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:58:41 -0400, Stephen Henning wrote:
    >>
    >> > Today Canon announced the G10 and SX10 IS as replacements for the G9,
    >> > their top end view-finder camera.
    >> >
    >> > The SX10 IS is an ultrazoom going from 28 to 560 mm equiv, 10.3 MP, AA's.
    >> > The G10 has a 28 to 140 mm equiv zoom, 12.4 MP, Li-ion Battery.

    >>
    >> According to DPReview's comment on this news item, the SX10's
    >> superior sibling, the SX1 (CMOS sensor, 4fps full resolution
    >> continuous shooting and true 1080p HDTV movies at 30fps) won't be
    >> available in North America.

    >
    > The SX1 is expected in the US in a couple months. It should sell for
    > about $550 based on UK prices.
    >


    I read that only the SX10 will be sold in the US.
     
    measekite, Sep 20, 2008
    #4
  5. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:34:21 -0400, Stephen Henning wrote:

    >> According to DPReview's comment on this news item, the SX10's
    >> superior sibling, the SX1 (CMOS sensor, 4fps full resolution
    >> continuous shooting and true 1080p HDTV movies at 30fps) won't be
    >> available in North America.

    >
    > The SX1 is expected in the US in a couple months. It should sell for
    > about $550 based on UK prices.


    I just noticed in the specs. that the S1 has a 148k 0.40" EVF vs.
    a 235k 0.44" EVF in the S10. Both have 235k LCDs. As nice as both
    seem to be, for this type of camera I don't see any advantages great
    enough for me to want to upgrade my S3 IS, especially at the prices
    they'll probably be going for.
     
    ASAAR, Sep 20, 2008
    #5
  6. ASAAR

    measekite Guest

    On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:39:31 -0400, ASAAR wrote:

    > On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 10:34:21 -0400, Stephen Henning wrote:
    >
    >>> According to DPReview's comment on this news item, the SX10's
    >>> superior sibling, the SX1 (CMOS sensor, 4fps full resolution
    >>> continuous shooting and true 1080p HDTV movies at 30fps) won't be
    >>> available in North America.

    >>
    >> The SX1 is expected in the US in a couple months. It should sell for
    >> about $550 based on UK prices.

    >
    > I just noticed in the specs. that the S1 has a 148k 0.40" EVF vs.
    > a 235k 0.44" EVF in the S10. Both have 235k LCDs. As nice as both
    > seem to be, for this type of camera I don't see any advantages great
    > enough for me to want to upgrade my S3 IS, especially at the prices
    > they'll probably be going for.


    I am thinking of selling my S5 but do not know what the market price is
    for a slightly used mint condition S5. The big thing I like is the
    improved EVF which I value and the width and length of the lens.

    I am waiting for tests on image quality.
     
    measekite, Sep 21, 2008
    #6
  7. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 21:34:31 -0400, Ritter 197 wrote:

    > Apparently you do not care then for the 20X zoom.


    I don't know enough about an as yet unevaluated lens to care one
    way or the other, but the more extreme the FL range the more likely
    the lens will have optical issues. I'd have greater interest if the
    lens was a more modest 24-240mm 10x design and had a better aperture
    range. The S3 IS's range of f/2.7 to f/3.5 is much nicer than the
    SX camera's f/2.8-f/5.7. You know that at 560mm fl the lens will
    have a maximum aperture of f/5.7 and unless you're shooting in very
    bright light, that's likely to cause problems since the 1/2.3"
    sensors are small enough to degrade image quality at high ISOs.

    One of the advantages of these cameras is that they're relatively
    small and can easily go anywhere. A really long lens almost begs
    for a sturdy tripod, negating that advantage.
     
    ASAAR, Sep 21, 2008
    #7
  8. ASAAR

    dwight Guest

    "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 21:34:31 -0400, Ritter 197 wrote:
    >
    >> Apparently you do not care then for the 20X zoom.

    >
    > I don't know enough about an as yet unevaluated lens to care one
    > way or the other, but the more extreme the FL range the more likely
    > the lens will have optical issues. I'd have greater interest if the
    > lens was a more modest 24-240mm 10x design and had a better aperture
    > range. The S3 IS's range of f/2.7 to f/3.5 is much nicer than the
    > SX camera's f/2.8-f/5.7. You know that at 560mm fl the lens will
    > have a maximum aperture of f/5.7 and unless you're shooting in very
    > bright light, that's likely to cause problems since the 1/2.3"
    > sensors are small enough to degrade image quality at high ISOs.
    >
    > One of the advantages of these cameras is that they're relatively
    > small and can easily go anywhere. A really long lens almost begs
    > for a sturdy tripod, negating that advantage.


    It's not an either/or proposition. You can shoot at any factor from 1 to 20.
    If the available light doesn't accommodate the 20X extreme, use something
    less. Having that full 20X optical on a bright sunny day, though... Can't
    argue with that!

    But, like you, I have no information on this new lens, and I'll wait to see
    some reviews before I jump in. The SX10 sounds like a great upgrade for my
    S3, if the lens pans out.

    dwight
     
    dwight, Sep 21, 2008
    #8
  9. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 23:14:45 -0400, dwight wrote:

    > It's not an either/or proposition. You can shoot at any factor from 1 to 20.


    But it might be, depending on the lens's quality or lack of same.
    If it produces much greater amounts of PF/CA at the extreme wide and
    extreme tele focal lengths and you want to avoid these and other
    aberrations, I suppose you could restrict the lens to the 2x through
    16x positions, but then you're using a lens that provides even less
    than 10x. There's a program I've seen discussed that scans image
    files and gives a histogram-like report of the focal lengths used.
    The S3's lens extends to 432mm and I'd be surprised if most people
    use focal lengths beyond 300mm for more than 1% or 2% of their
    shots. Other than taking test shots, I don't think I've used 300mm
    more than once since I've owned the S3 IS, and that was only for
    about 3 shots of a pair of golfers on a distant green. Those shots
    would have turned out much better had I been closer and not shooting
    from the par 4's tee. :)


    > But, like you, I have no information on this new lens, and I'll wait
    > to see some reviews before I jump in. The SX10 sounds like a great
    > upgrade for my S3, if the lens pans out.


    I hope so, and even though I doubt that I'll be getting an SX10
    (maybe if prices drop drastically in two years or so . . .) it's
    nice that Canon resisted the temptation to give it a 15mp sensor.
     
    ASAAR, Sep 21, 2008
    #9
  10. ASAAR wrote:
    []
    > The S3's lens extends to 432mm and I'd be surprised if most people
    > use focal lengths beyond 300mm for more than 1% or 2% of their
    > shots. Other than taking test shots, I don't think I've used 300mm
    > more than once since I've owned the S3 IS, and that was only for
    > about 3 shots of a pair of golfers on a distant green. Those shots
    > would have turned out much better had I been closer and not shooting
    > from the par 4's tee. :)


    No need to guess about focal lengths. You can use the free Exposure Plot
    (sic) program to see what focal lengths you actually use in your images.

    http://www.wega2.vandel.nl/

    => Menu, => Exposure Plot

    Some time ago, I discovered that the relatively mild wide-angle (36mm eq.)
    was a limit for me, and many of my photos were taken with the widest
    setting. Checking my most recent results shows that the 16mm (Nikon D40
    DSLR = 24mm), and "28mm" (compact Panasonic TZ3) were also my most popular
    focal lengths by quite a margin!

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Sep 21, 2008
    #10
  11. ASAAR

    dwight Guest

    "ASAAR" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 23:14:45 -0400, dwight wrote:
    >
    >> It's not an either/or proposition. You can shoot at any factor from 1 to
    >> 20.

    >
    > But it might be, depending on the lens's quality or lack of same.
    > If it produces much greater amounts of PF/CA at the extreme wide and
    > extreme tele focal lengths and you want to avoid these and other
    > aberrations, I suppose you could restrict the lens to the 2x through
    > 16x positions, but then you're using a lens that provides even less
    > than 10x. There's a program I've seen discussed that scans image
    > files and gives a histogram-like report of the focal lengths used.
    > The S3's lens extends to 432mm and I'd be surprised if most people
    > use focal lengths beyond 300mm for more than 1% or 2% of their
    > shots. Other than taking test shots, I don't think I've used 300mm
    > more than once since I've owned the S3 IS, and that was only for
    > about 3 shots of a pair of golfers on a distant green. Those shots
    > would have turned out much better had I been closer and not shooting
    > from the par 4's tee. :)


    Sure, I agree that the use of the extremes is probably small in comparison
    to the overall use of the camera, but my point was simply that it's
    wonderful to be able to focus at a distance of ZERO -and- at the extreme
    telephoto setting in the same unit. Personally, I use all 432mm quite a bit
    on the S3 for bird shots in the back yard, and my home is right below the
    approach to a local air strip. As an overall percentage of shots taken, yes,
    the 12X focal length is used probably 5% or less of the time, but it's great
    having it.

    The 20X (560mm) capability in the SX10 is one factor among several that
    would get me to part with my money. The question for each of us is simply
    this - what upgrades in the new version are so attractive that we'll buy
    one, even though we are very satisfied with the camera we already own. 10MP
    is great, but I'm not dissatisfied with the S3's 6. 20X optical is a dream,
    although the results I'm getting with the S3's 12X are a bit soft for my
    tastes. A larger LCD and a better viewfinder are plusses, but that new lens
    is the critical element. Given all of the other advances, if that lens is
    well received, it just might tip me over the line to buying the SX10.

    >> But, like you, I have no information on this new lens, and I'll wait
    >> to see some reviews before I jump in. The SX10 sounds like a great
    >> upgrade for my S3, if the lens pans out.

    >
    > I hope so, and even though I doubt that I'll be getting an SX10
    > (maybe if prices drop drastically in two years or so . . .) it's
    > nice that Canon resisted the temptation to give it a 15mp sensor.


    The other factor in this decision (for me) is that the S3 serves as a
    backup. Most of my work is done with a Canon Rebel XT. There would have to
    be a compelling case for the upgrade, but I'm already feeling the itch...

    dwight
     
    dwight, Sep 21, 2008
    #11
  12. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 06:47:27 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

    > No need to guess about focal lengths. You can use the free Exposure Plot
    > (sic) program to see what focal lengths you actually use in your images.
    >
    > http://www.wega2.vandel.nl/


    Thanks. It's a nice little program, but I wish it didn't remind
    me that I took two shots last year using the S3's digital zoom. :)
     
    ASAAR, Sep 22, 2008
    #12
  13. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 09:20:22 -0400, dwight wrote:

    > The other factor in this decision (for me) is that the S3 serves as a backup.
    > Most of my work is done with a Canon Rebel XT. There would have to
    > be a compelling case for the upgrade, but I'm already feeling the itch...


    You're suffering from CAS, a variant of NAS (Nikon Acquisition
    Syndrom). Cash relieves the symptoms, but there's no known cure!
     
    ASAAR, Sep 22, 2008
    #13
  14. ASAAR wrote:

    > On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 06:47:27 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> No need to guess about focal lengths. You can use the free Exposure Plot
    >> (sic) program to see what focal lengths you actually use in your images.
    >>
    >> http://www.wega2.vandel.nl/

    >
    > Thanks. It's a nice little program, but I wish it didn't remind
    > me that I took two shots last year using the S3's digital zoom. :)


    I just installed Wega2, chick includes Exp;osure Plot. What the heck
    is "Thumb Spy"? I don't see anything different when I toggle it on and off
    and hover or click thumbs.

    And according to its Exposure Plot graphs, I've taken some shots af f/0. :)


    --
    Blinky
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
    Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Sep 22, 2008
    #14
  15. Blinky the Shark wrote:
    []
    > I just installed Wega2, chick includes Exp;osure Plot. What the heck
    > is "Thumb Spy"? I don't see anything different when I toggle it on
    > and off and hover or click thumbs.


    No idea - I only used Exposure Plot. It is something which pops-up over
    Wega2, if the comments in the release notes about Z-order imply that.

    > And according to its Exposure Plot graphs, I've taken some shots af
    > f/0. :)


    ... according to the EXIF data in the file, perhaps. What do other EXIF
    viewing program say about those files?

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Sep 22, 2008
    #15
  16. ASAAR wrote:
    > On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 06:47:27 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> No need to guess about focal lengths. You can use the free Exposure
    >> Plot (sic) program to see what focal lengths you actually use in
    >> your images.
    >>
    >> http://www.wega2.vandel.nl/

    >
    > Thanks. It's a nice little program, but I wish it didn't remind
    > me that I took two shots last year using the S3's digital zoom. :)


    There is an option, at least on the Panasonic compacts I've used, to
    disable digital zoom. Perhaps there is something similar on the S3?

    Some time ago I did compare the results from 2:1 digital zoom with
    cropping, and I found that the digital zoom results were a little better
    and suffered a little less from JPEG compression artefacts. I reconciled
    this with fitting less information into the same number of display pixels.
    With a smaller part of the main image to deal with, it's possible that
    focus will be faster with digital zoom, and that exposure metering will be
    more accurate.

    Nevertheless, the digital zoom on my cameras is set to "disabled".

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Sep 22, 2008
    #16
  17. David J Taylor wrote:

    > Blinky the Shark wrote:
    > []
    >> I just installed Wega2, chick includes Exp;osure Plot. What the heck
    >> is "Thumb Spy"? I don't see anything different when I toggle it on and
    >> off and hover or click thumbs.

    >
    > No idea - I only used Exposure Plot. It is something which pops-up over
    > Wega2, if the comments in the release notes about Z-order imply that.
    >
    >> And according to its Exposure Plot graphs, I've taken some shots af
    >> f/0. :)

    >
    > .. according to the EXIF data in the file, perhaps. What do other EXIF
    > viewing program say about those files?


    Ahah! I found the three shots, and they were all versions of a shot I
    took *holding my lens reversed against the mount* and opening the iris
    with my little finger on the lever. :) I'd forgot all about that
    experiment. I didn't have my reverse mounting ring yet, and I was just
    playing.

    http://www.pbase.com/blinkytheshark/image/98983233/large

    The limited EXIF data there shows f/1. That's a pretty fast kit lens. :)


    --
    Blinky
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
    Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Sep 22, 2008
    #17
  18. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 06:20:25 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

    >> Thanks. It's a nice little program, but I wish it didn't remind
    >> me that I took two shots last year using the S3's digital zoom. :)

    >
    > There is an option, at least on the Panasonic compacts I've used, to
    > disable digital zoom. Perhaps there is something similar on the S3?


    I normally keep the S3 IS's digital zoom feature disabled. These
    were two test shots made just for comparison's sake.
     
    ASAAR, Sep 22, 2008
    #18
  19. ASAAR wrote:
    []
    > I normally keep the S3 IS's digital zoom feature disabled. These
    > were two test shots made just for comparison's sake.


    OK - and what was your conclusion from the comparison?

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Sep 22, 2008
    #19
  20. ASAAR

    ASAAR Guest

    On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:18:54 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

    >> I normally keep the S3 IS's digital zoom feature disabled. These
    >> were two test shots made just for comparison's sake.

    >
    > OK - and what was your conclusion from the comparison?


    The shots were of a house on the other side of a lake. It wasn't
    a pre-planned comparison but a spur of the moment exercise, so care
    wasn't taken to keep as many things as equal as possible, such as
    the exposure. All shots were at f/4.0, but with DG enabled (4x) the
    shutter speed was 1/1,000 sec. and with it disabled, 1/640 sec.
    This caused highlights in a white garage to be seen in the DG
    version, but they were blown out in the other shots. Other than
    that, with the DG shot seen at the default magnification in
    Irfanview (31%) and the other increased to 120% to get a comparable
    view, the DG version seemed murkier and the non-DG version crisper.
    On the other hand when pixel peeping (100% vs. 400%), it was no
    contest. The shots that used the digital zoom looked pretty good
    but the ones taken without the DG enabled were horribly pixellated.

    All shots were taken BTW, on a large Manfrotto tripod. Large by
    P&S standards and more than adequate for my D50 with my lenses, but
    not what you'd want to use with 300mm f/2.8 lenses and larger.
    Also, no post processing was done. My guess is that pp would have
    done more for the shots that didn't use the digital zoom. I'd have
    to say that Canon's implementation of the digital zoom exceeded my
    expectations, but it's not a feature that'll get much use if only
    because it really needs to be used with a tripod.
     
    ASAAR, Sep 22, 2008
    #20
    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. woobles

    Anyone know of any High end NON-SLR digital cameras?

    woobles, Dec 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    432
    John Horner
    Dec 22, 2003
  2. KL234
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    964
    Dave Hau
    Feb 26, 2004
  3. High end P&S or Low end D-SLR

    , Mar 29, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    61
    Views:
    1,420
    J. Clarke
    Apr 6, 2006
  4. ck1224
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    853
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota
    Sep 27, 2006
  5. measekite

    Re: New High-End Canon Cameras Announced

    measekite, Sep 17, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    614
    David Ruether
    Oct 13, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page