S2 IS -- Canon still misses the boat

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Rick, Apr 22, 2005.

  1. Rick

    Rick Guest

    Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    bad news:

    -- 1/2.5" sensor instead of 1/1.8" = Image quality will likely
    still be cruddy, similar to S1 IS.

    -- No AF light added

    -- Video mode still arbitrarily limited to 1GB (~9 minutes at
    best quality)

    etc.

    All in all, very disappointing.
     
    Rick, Apr 22, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rick

    ecm Guest

    Rick wrote:
    > Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    > bad news:
    >
    > -- 1/2.5" sensor instead of 1/1.8" = Image quality will likely
    > still be cruddy, similar to S1 IS.
    >
    > -- No AF light added
    >
    > -- Video mode still arbitrarily limited to 1GB (~9 minutes at
    > best quality)
    >
    > etc.
    >
    > All in all, very disappointing.


    What are you disappointed about? It's aimed squarely at a market
    segment who wouldn't know a what CCD sensor is even if it bit them....
    they're going to be ecstatic! It has to be a mass of compromises and
    "good enoughs" to get all those useless bells and whistles in; it won't
    excel at anything. "Stereo sound" - what a laugh! As though
    microphones separated by an inch will give a reasonable stereo effect;
    and as though anyone serious about video would use a still camera to
    capture it anyways.

    ECM
     
    ecm, Apr 22, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rick

    Dizzledorf Guest

    On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:11:20 GMT, "Rick" <> wrote:

    >Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    >bad news:

    To you. There are still a lot of noteworthy improvements. For the
    most part, Canon "listened".

    >-- 1/2.5" sensor instead of 1/1.8" = Image quality will likely
    >still be cruddy, similar to S1 IS.

    1.8" would be nice, and this sensor is a waste of the Digic II, but
    the samples I've seen -- while not as excellent as the G6, e.g. --
    still look very good.

    >-- No AF light added

    Umm what? Check the release again and look for the giant bulb on the
    right of the camera face.

    >-- Video mode still arbitrarily limited to 1GB (~9 minutes at
    >best quality)

    True, but I rarely shoot for more than a few minutes at a clip to keep
    my movies interesting. YMMV, of course, but this isn't a deal
    breaker.

    Give me 2 million more pixels to play with, a more workable sized
    tilt/swivel screen, "0cm" Super Macro, etc. and you still have a
    pretty lusty digicam.

    >All in all, very disappointing.

    Then, the Lumix is calling...


    DIZZLE
     
    Dizzledorf, Apr 22, 2005
    #3
  4. Rick

    Rick Guest

    "ecm" <> wrote in message news:...
    >
    > Rick wrote:
    > > Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    > > bad news:
    > >
    > > -- 1/2.5" sensor instead of 1/1.8" = Image quality will likely
    > > still be cruddy, similar to S1 IS.
    > >
    > > -- No AF light added
    > >
    > > -- Video mode still arbitrarily limited to 1GB (~9 minutes at
    > > best quality)
    > >
    > > etc.
    > >
    > > All in all, very disappointing.

    >
    > What are you disappointed about? It's aimed squarely at a market
    > segment who wouldn't know a what CCD sensor is even if it bit them....
    > they're going to be ecstatic! It has to be a mass of compromises and
    > "good enoughs" to get all those useless bells and whistles in; it won't
    > excel at anything. "Stereo sound" - what a laugh! As though
    > microphones separated by an inch will give a reasonable stereo effect;
    > and as though anyone serious about video would use a still camera to
    > capture it anyways.


    I disagree. Canon has the A- and S- series for such people.
    At their price points the S1/S2 are _not_ entry level cameras.

    And your comment about video is also off the mark. No one
    claimed S1 owners are "serious about video". The point is,
    it has the best video mode of any digital still camera, and
    Canon had the opportunity to make it even better on the S2
    by removing their silly 1GB limitation. They chose not to.

    And the two major issues still remain unresolved: the lack of
    an AF lamp and the horrible (at least relative to Canon's
    other models) chromatic aberration.
     
    Rick, Apr 22, 2005
    #4
  5. Rick

    Rick Guest

    "Rick" <> wrote in message news:7scae.10513$...
    > "ecm" <> wrote in message news:...
    > >
    > > Rick wrote:
    > > > Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    > > > bad news:
    > > >
    > > > -- 1/2.5" sensor instead of 1/1.8" = Image quality will likely
    > > > still be cruddy, similar to S1 IS.
    > > >
    > > > -- No AF light added
    > > >
    > > > -- Video mode still arbitrarily limited to 1GB (~9 minutes at
    > > > best quality)
    > > >
    > > > etc.
    > > >
    > > > All in all, very disappointing.

    > >
    > > What are you disappointed about? It's aimed squarely at a market
    > > segment who wouldn't know a what CCD sensor is even if it bit them....
    > > they're going to be ecstatic! It has to be a mass of compromises and
    > > "good enoughs" to get all those useless bells and whistles in; it won't
    > > excel at anything. "Stereo sound" - what a laugh! As though
    > > microphones separated by an inch will give a reasonable stereo effect;
    > > and as though anyone serious about video would use a still camera to
    > > capture it anyways.

    >
    > I disagree. Canon has the A- and S- series for such people.
    > At their price points the S1/S2 are _not_ entry level cameras.
    >
    > And your comment about video is also off the mark. No one
    > claimed S1 owners are "serious about video". The point is,
    > it has the best video mode of any digital still camera, and
    > Canon had the opportunity to make it even better on the S2
    > by removing their silly 1GB limitation. They chose not to.
    >
    > And the two major issues still remain unresolved: the lack of
    > an AF lamp and the horrible (at least relative to Canon's
    > other models) chromatic aberration.


    Whoops, looks like they did add an AF lamp. Cool.
     
    Rick, Apr 22, 2005
    #5
  6. In article <>,
    (Dizzledorf) wrote:

    > There are still a lot of noteworthy improvements. For the
    > most part, Canon "listened".


    As an S1 owner who's not been entirely happy with its performance, I'd
    agree. The AF lamp should solve the unreliable/slow focus issues I've
    had. USB2 will *certainly* be welcome with a 1Gb card to empty regularly
    (surprised it didn't have it to start with actually). 5Mp is certainly
    enough for me. I never do large prints, and 3Mp has rarely been too few
    pixels.

    That only leaves the EVF, which I still feel has too few pixels for
    comfort. A little more sharpness on that screen and I'd be happy to buy
    an S2 whenever it appears. As it is I'll probably stick with the S1
    until I find the excuse to buy a Pentax dSLR... though then I'll lose
    the stabilised imaging I've grown very fond of indeed!

    I really ought to stop reading this newsgroup. It's bad for my financial
    karma.

    Andrew McP
     
    Andrew MacPherson, Apr 22, 2005
    #6
  7. Rick

    Mark Lauter Guest

    > Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    > bad news:


    It's just a crummy point and shoot anyway. No worries.

    Any idea what the price will be set?

    --
    Mark Lauter

    Photos, Ideas & Opinions
    http://www.marklauter.com
     
    Mark Lauter, Apr 22, 2005
    #7
  8. Rick

    measekite Guest

    ecm wrote:

    >Rick wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    >>bad news:
    >>
    >>-- 1/2.5" sensor instead of 1/1.8" = Image quality will likely
    >>still be cruddy, similar to S1 IS.
    >>
    >>-- No AF light added
    >>
    >>-- Video mode still arbitrarily limited to 1GB (~9 minutes at
    >>best quality)
    >>
    >>etc.
    >>
    >>All in all, very disappointing.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >What are you disappointed about? It's aimed squarely at a market
    >segment who wouldn't know a what CCD sensor is even if it bit them....
    >they're going to be ecstatic! It has to be a mass of compromises and
    >"good enoughs" to get all those useless bells and whistles in; it won't
    >excel at anything. "Stereo sound" - what a laugh! As though
    >microphones separated by an inch will give a reasonable stereo effect;
    >and as though anyone serious about video would use a still camera to
    >capture it anyways.
    >
    >


    I just want to be able to compare this against the Panasonic FZ5 with a
    Leica Lens. I am heavily leaning toward the Panasonic after ruling out
    the S1, but now the S2 is here. The specifications are almost what I
    emailed Canon about a few months ago except for AF illumination.

    I really do not care about stereo sound. I want the best result
    possible when I print an 8x10. I have downloaded samples made with the
    FZ5 and printed them on my Canon IP4000 OEM with Canon Photo Paper Pro
    and Costco/Kirkland paper and the results were very acceptable. I do
    intend on getting a DSLR later but I want something small enough to take
    with me most of the time.

    What is the best way to direct compare both the S2 and the FZ5 in terms
    of results. I want to compare color, contrast, sharpness for both
    landscapes and portraits. I also want to compare usable features and
    how well the features perform. I am also looking for information on
    speed and performance characteristics.

    >ECM
    >
    >
    >
     
    measekite, Apr 23, 2005
    #8
  9. Rick

    measekite Guest

    Rick wrote:

    >"ecm" <> wrote in message news:...
    >
    >
    >>Rick wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    >>>bad news:
    >>>
    >>>-- 1/2.5" sensor instead of 1/1.8" = Image quality will likely
    >>>still be cruddy, similar to S1 IS.
    >>>
    >>>-- No AF light added
    >>>
    >>>-- Video mode still arbitrarily limited to 1GB (~9 minutes at
    >>>best quality)
    >>>
    >>>etc.
    >>>
    >>>All in all, very disappointing.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>What are you disappointed about? It's aimed squarely at a market
    >>segment who wouldn't know a what CCD sensor is even if it bit them....
    >>they're going to be ecstatic! It has to be a mass of compromises and
    >>"good enoughs" to get all those useless bells and whistles in; it won't
    >>excel at anything. "Stereo sound" - what a laugh! As though
    >>microphones separated by an inch will give a reasonable stereo effect;
    >>and as though anyone serious about video would use a still camera to
    >>capture it anyways.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >I disagree. Canon has the A- and S- series for such people.
    >At their price points the S1/S2 are _not_ entry level cameras.
    >
    >And your comment about video is also off the mark. No one
    >claimed S1 owners are "serious about video". The point is,
    >it has the best video mode of any digital still camera, and
    >Canon had the opportunity to make it even better on the S2
    >by removing their silly 1GB limitation. They chose not to.
    >
    >And the two major issues still remain unresolved: the lack of
    >an AF lamp and the horrible (at least relative to Canon's
    >other models) chromatic aberration.
    >
    >


    How do you know? If the camera was just announced then how did you get
    to use it in order to make these statements. I was getting ready to buy
    a Panasonic Lumix FZ5 but now I want to be able to compare the two.

    >
    >
    >
     
    measekite, Apr 23, 2005
    #9
  10. Rick

    Patzt Guest

    Patzt, Apr 23, 2005
    #10
  11. "Rick" <> writes:

    > Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    > bad news:


    ....

    > -- No AF light added


    The other summary just posted says it *does* have an AF lamp.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 23, 2005
    #11
  12. Rick

    Mark Lauter Guest

    "Patzt" <> wrote in message
    > Mark, just enjoyed some time in your website. Lovely photos in there.


    Thanks Patzt! :)

    --
    Mark Lauter

    Photos, Ideas & Opinions
    http://www.marklauter.com
     
    Mark Lauter, Apr 23, 2005
    #12
  13. Rick

    imbsysop Guest

    "David Dyer-Bennet" <> wrote in message
    news:-b.net...
    > "Rick" <> writes:
    >
    >> Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    >> bad news:

    >
    > ...
    >
    >> -- No AF light added

    >
    > The other summary just posted says it *does* have an AF lamp.


    yeah .. they'd better check the be-bit S2 description pages first before
    making wild assumptions ..
     
    imbsysop, Apr 23, 2005
    #13
  14. Rick

    Joe Miller Guest


    > What are you disappointed about? It's aimed squarely at a market
    > segment who wouldn't know a what CCD sensor is even if it bit them....
    > they're going to be ecstatic! It has to be a mass of compromises and
    > "good enoughs" to get all those useless bells and whistles in; it won't
    > excel at anything. "Stereo sound" - what a laugh! As though
    > microphones separated by an inch will give a reasonable stereo effect;
    > and as though anyone serious about video would use a still camera to
    > capture it anyways.
    >
    > ECM


    What unrelenting cynicism!! I oversee a lab that actually designs and
    manufactures CCDs from the very beginning to installing them in cameras
    that have performances that is in another world from these consumer
    cameras. For example we recently made a camera with 64 Mp, the focal
    plane being roughly 100 mm on a side. I am quite favorably impressed
    with this new Canon camera, at least as described. I am sure that, in
    the hands of a great photographer, it could produce photographs that
    could hang on the walls of any fine art museum in the world. In the
    hands of a reasonably skilled photographer, it could produce photographs
    that would be very impressive. I've never been bit by a CCD, but I've
    held many in my hands, both on wafer and packaged, and I would like to
    have this camera (assuming its performance is what one would expect for
    something like this). I have a Nikon 8800, that has been blasted and
    criticized in this newsgroup a great number of times. It has many bells
    and whistles and "good enoughs." But it does excel at some things,
    including image quality when properly handled. Furthermore, in the
    month I have owned it I have gotten fine shots that I couldn't have
    gotten with any other camera I have owned since my first camera 40 years
    ago, a Zeiss Ikon Contessa. In fact, using some of those "bells and
    whistles," I got some shots I could not have taken with the Canon 20D I
    was also considering at the same time I purchased the Nikon.

    To complain about the video and sound capabilities of a what is
    basically a still camera is really sort of silly. It's an incredibly
    useful thing to have for that odd moment when a short video sequence
    would capture something crucial, but if you want high-quality video, the
    solutions are many and amazing inexpensive.

    Joe
     
    Joe Miller, Apr 23, 2005
    #14
  15. Rick

    Mark² Guest

    "Rick" <> wrote in message
    news:s%bae.12058$...
    > Today Canon finally announced the S2 IS, and it's mostly
    > bad news:
    >
    > -- 1/2.5" sensor instead of 1/1.8" = Image quality will likely
    > still be cruddy, similar to S1 IS.
    >
    > -- No AF light added
    >
    > -- Video mode still arbitrarily limited to 1GB (~9 minutes at
    > best quality)
    >
    > etc.
    >
    > All in all, very disappointing.


    Whatever will you do...
     
    Mark², Apr 24, 2005
    #15
    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. ants
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    3,837
  2. RH tOWNSEND

    Water Well Drilling Accidents or near misses

    RH tOWNSEND, Jul 28, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    561
    RH tOWNSEND
    Jul 28, 2004
  3. Dunf

    Nobody misses guys like Norm

    Dunf, Jan 31, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    183
    Views:
    3,208
    DVDfanatico
    Feb 8, 2004
  4. SMS

    Re: Did the Canon boat sink?

    SMS, Feb 24, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    1,085
    Paul Furman
    Mar 7, 2009
  5. Petri Lopia

    Re: Did the Canon boat sink?

    Petri Lopia, Mar 8, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    298
    David J Taylor
    Mar 8, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page