Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:03 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 499 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 34  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:53 pm 
Hmmmm. I think I have just figured out what I was missing. Probably I forgot to turn off the IS, which killed all the subtle details in my moon shots from tripod. Thanks for the spark ;)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:03 am 
R0Y.1 wrote:
Hmmmm. I think I have just figured out what I was missing. Probably I forgot to turn off the IS, which killed all the subtle details in my moon shots from tripod. Thanks for the spark ;)


Interesting. I didn't know IS could have a negative impact on image quality. Would anyone care to explain what the issue with IS is? I'll give Google a try, but if anyone would like to comment, please do :)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:43 am 
Matt Gerber wrote:
R0Y.1 wrote:
Hmmmm. I think I have just figured out what I was missing. Probably I forgot to turn off the IS, which killed all the subtle details in my moon shots from tripod. Thanks for the spark ;)


Interesting. I didn't know IS could have a negative impact on image quality. Would anyone care to explain what the issue with IS is? I'll give Google a try, but if anyone would like to comment, please do :)


the IS is trying to counteract a vibration/shake that isn't there, actually introducing pseudo-motionblur(loss of details; artifacts)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:34 pm 
Matt Gerber wrote:
R0Y.1 wrote:
Hmmmm. I think I have just figured out what I was missing. Probably I forgot to turn off the IS, which killed all the subtle details in my moon shots from tripod. Thanks for the spark ;)


Interesting. I didn't know IS could have a negative impact on image quality. Would anyone care to explain what the issue with IS is? I'll give Google a try, but if anyone would like to comment, please do :)


I had the same question about IS and a tripod as I have frequently read the warning to turn off IS when using a tripod, and antipropho proffers a plausible explanation that makes sense to me.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:03 pm 
Yep, even the manual tells you to turn it off when on a tripod or steadied correctly.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:12 pm 
MaDMaXX wrote:
Yep, even the manual tells you to turn it off when on a tripod or steadied correctly.


Indeed, it does say that, but does it explain _why_ one should do this? I don't have the manual in front of me, and I can't remember exactly what it says... :?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:28 pm 
It doesn't say why, just says we recommend you turn it off when using a tri-pod.
It also mentions about not tracking with the camera vertically with IS enabled, seems it would be optimised for level operation.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:59 pm 
When I was looking for a "super zoom" I considered waiting for the SX1 to be available in the USA, but I have read a few things now about the SX1 that are making me feel good about getting the SX10.

I still need to read Gordon's review and watch his video, but the picture comparisons I've seen so far (SX1 vs. SX10) give the nod to the SX10 in my eyes. Maybe the capabilities of the CMOS sensor weren't fully utilized/realized? I've not read or seen anything yet that would justify the increased cost to me except for maybe the FPS rate of the SX1, which at 4 FPS is a whole lot better than the SX10.

Anyone else have an opinion so far?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:42 pm 
MaDMaXX wrote:
It doesn't say why, just says we recommend you turn it off when using a tri-pod.
It also mentions about not tracking with the camera vertically with IS enabled, seems it would be optimised for level operation.


the restriction you mention is only true when the IS is set on "panning"



and yes,Thumper26, I too am good with my decision to get the sx10 and not the sx1.It's allot of extra money for not so much of an extra value(FPS).I don't realy care about the HD.And as I said before, my opinion is that the quality of the pictures are better on SX10 and with lesser noise on all ISO settings.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:05 pm 
antipropho wrote:
...and yes,Thumper26, I too am good with my decision to get the sx10 and not the sx1.It's allot of extra money for not so much of an extra value(FPS).I don't realy care about the HD.And as I said before, my opinion is that the quality of the pictures are better on SX10 and with lesser noise on all ISO settings.


Well, either we both have the same visual impairment or the pictures from the SX10 are of better quality - LOL! (I prefer to believe the latter...)

I really would have liked the 4 FPS, but even that's not quite where I want it and it's a key reason why I'm saving now for a DSLR. I originally had my eye on Canon's 40D but the 50D is getting very close in price to it, so I've readjusted my sights. I like the increased sensitivity, the 50% boost in resolution, the boost to a VGA live screen, and the in-camera correction of vignetting. However, I am concerned about the number of reported "99 error" codes, so I will be following the forums closely on that.

As for my "walking around" camera, I don't see my SX10 being replaced anytime soon - it is so versatile and I love it that much!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:33 pm 
Thumper26 wrote:
antipropho wrote:
...and yes,Thumper26, I too am good with my decision to get the sx10 and not the sx1.It's allot of extra money for not so much of an extra value(FPS).I don't realy care about the HD.And as I said before, my opinion is that the quality of the pictures are better on SX10 and with lesser noise on all ISO settings.


Well, either we both have the same visual impairment or the pictures from the SX10 are of better quality - LOL! (I prefer to believe the latter...)


I, too, thought the SX10 demonstrated better image quality.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:59 pm 
Matt Gerber wrote:
I, too, thought the SX10 demonstrated better image quality.


Woohoo! My eyes are still OK! :D


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:28 am 
Yes, the noise was a tad higher on the SX1 until now. Canon has announced that a firmware update will enable RAW on the SX1. So, we (sx10 owners) will be left way behind on image quality. Canon CAN give us this RAW gift if it wants to. But apparently they don't consider us as humans... :cry:


Top
  
 
 Post subject: RAW for SX10
PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:23 am 
R0Y.1 wrote:
Yes, the noise was a tad higher on the SX1 until now. Canon has announced that a firmware update will enable RAW on the SX1. So, we (sx10 owners) will be left way behind on image quality. Canon CAN give us this RAW gift if it wants to. But apparently they don't consider us as humans... :cry:


I am pretty confident that if Canon doesn't put up RAW for SX10, some third party developer will. It's going to be just like the filter mount issue, where Lensmate steped in( lots of thanks for that).So Canon, if you see this, it'll be a lot better for YOUR IMAGE to do it yourself(because in this case, I am sure it's a marketing decision that stands in the way)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:05 am 
What a terrible "marketing" strategy - denying access to a vast majority of potential customers by ALWAYS keeping prices much higher than their competetors', and by deliberately handicapping the otherwise good models in the ridiculous hope of pushing potential buyers towards their even highly priced stuff.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 499 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 34  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group