Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Attn: Panasonic FZ5 Users and Canon S1-IS Users

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 4:06:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Are you all happy with your choice?

What are some of the things you do not like other than the EVF?

Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you get?

How is the noise level when compared to other 5MP point and shoots you
have used?
May 26, 2005 5:24:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Sp8le.1649$rY6.1546@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> Are you all happy with your choice?

No.

> What are some of the things you do not like other than the EVF?

On the S1 IS, cruddy image quality, no AF lamp.

> Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you get?

No. Noise and CA are bad enough at ISO 100. Any higher
and it's truly ugly.

> How is the noise level when compared to other 5MP point and shoots you
> have used?

See above. If noise levels are your first concern seek out a
used Sony F717. Its sensor is huge (2/3").
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 11:43:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

measekite wrote:
> Are you all happy with your choice?

With the Panasonic FZ5 - yes. My wife also has the Panasonic FZ20 and is
happy with it.

> What are some of the things you do not like other than the EVF?

Lack of a swivel LCD. The EVF is quite usable, but not as good as the
Minolta A2 (which is much more expensive).

> Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you
> get?

Only for night scenes, where the added noise adds to the atmosphere of the
picture. You can use software to reduce the noise - if you want.

> How is the noise level when compared to other 5MP point and shoots you
> have used?

Perhaps slightly higher than in the Nikon Coolpix 5700 which has the
larger 8.8 x 6.6mm sensor ("2/3 inch"). Not enough to bother an A4-sized
print (297 x 210mm).

Cheers,
David
Related resources
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 1:25:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

measekite wrote:
>
> Are you all happy with your choice?

I'm completely happy with my S1, it's exactly what I wanted it to be.

>
> What are some of the things you do not like other than the EVF?

I wish it had an AF light, I wish I could turn off the info display on
the EVF.

>
> Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you get?

I often shoot at 400, when shooting indoors. It's a bit noisy (or maybe
more than a bit..) but I expect that from a small sensor snapshot
camera.

>
> How is the noise level when compared to other 5MP point and shoots you
> have used?

I haven't and don't' really intend to use any high MP P&S cameras. I
have DSLR's for high quality, the S1 is for snapshots. It's small size
& light weight make it perfect to carry along, it's 10X IS zoom and full
manual controls & overrides make it a useful photographic tool.

It's my "other" camera, and in that role, it's exactly right.

Lisa
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 1:55:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 26 May 2005 01:24:13 GMT, "Rick" <nospam@earthlink.net> wrote:

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Sp8le.1649$rY6.1546@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>> Are you all happy with your choice?
>

>> Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you get?
>
>No. Noise and CA are bad enough at ISO 100. Any higher
>and it's truly ugly.

FYE .. CA is ISO independent .. it is a lens imperfection aka purely
optical ..
May 26, 2005 1:55:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"imbsysop" <imbsysop@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:e40b91151f1mpncvhhe0c59dn0l77n48vn@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 26 May 2005 01:24:13 GMT, "Rick" <nospam@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:Sp8le.1649$rY6.1546@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> >> Are you all happy with your choice?
> >
>
> >> Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you get?
> >
> >No. Noise and CA are bad enough at ISO 100. Any higher
> >and it's truly ugly.
>
> FYE .. CA is ISO independent .. it is a lens imperfection aka purely
> optical ..

Sorry, I thought the parentheses around 'and CA' were implied.
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 1:55:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

imbsysop wrote:
[]
>> No. Noise and CA are bad enough at ISO 100. Any higher
>> and it's truly ugly. [on the Canon S1]
>
> FYE .. CA is ISO independent .. it is a lens imperfection aka purely
> optical ..

But the poster may mean "purple fringing", which is not a lens issue and
not CA (chromatic aberration), because it is a sensor defect. PF looks
similar, and is therefore easily mistaken for CA. As a sensor defect, it
could well be affected by how the sensor is operated at different ISO
values.

David
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 2:46:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I like my S1 IS. It takes pictures that would otherwise be missed. The 10X
zoom and IS work well. I've gotten used to the EVF. It's important to
remember it's always a perfect 100% view at any zoom. I shoot a lot at
ISO400 and use Noise Ninja to clean it up. Again, it takes shots that would
otherwise not be there at all. It's great for kids in action, and I have
many active grandchildren.

That said, I intend to replace it soon with an S2 IS. It should be even
better.

Bye.

"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Sp8le.1649$rY6.1546@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> Are you all happy with your choice?
>
> What are some of the things you do not like other than the EVF?
> Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you get?
> How is the noise level when compared to other 5MP point and shoots you
> have used?
>
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 5:55:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 26 May 2005 08:14:26 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote:

>imbsysop wrote:
>[]
>>> No. Noise and CA are bad enough at ISO 100. Any higher
>>> and it's truly ugly. [on the Canon S1]
>>
>> FYE .. CA is ISO independent .. it is a lens imperfection aka purely
>> optical ..
>
>But the poster may mean "purple fringing", which is not a lens issue and
>not CA (chromatic aberration), because it is a sensor defect. ..

exactly .. why doen't he say PF then ? so at least we know what he
means ?
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 5:55:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

imbsysop wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2005 08:14:26 GMT, "David J Taylor"
> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote:
>
>> imbsysop wrote:
>> []
>>>> No. Noise and CA are bad enough at ISO 100. Any higher
>>>> and it's truly ugly. [on the Canon S1]
>>>
>>> FYE .. CA is ISO independent .. it is a lens imperfection aka purely
>>> optical ..
>>
>> But the poster may mean "purple fringing", which is not a lens issue
>> and not CA (chromatic aberration), because it is a sensor defect. ..
>
> exactly .. why doen't he say PF then ? so at least we know what he
> means ?

Because the distinction between CA and PF has become clouded by shoddy
analysis and common usage?

David
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 6:17:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk>
wrote in message news:HEjle.40163$G8.29746@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> imbsysop wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 May 2005 08:14:26 GMT, "David J Taylor"
>> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> imbsysop wrote:
>>> []
>>>>> No. Noise and CA are bad enough at ISO 100. Any higher
>>>>> and it's truly ugly. [on the Canon S1]
>>>>
>>>> FYE .. CA is ISO independent .. it is a lens imperfection aka purely
>>>> optical ..
>>>
>>> But the poster may mean "purple fringing", which is not a lens issue
>>> and not CA (chromatic aberration), because it is a sensor defect. ..
>>
>> exactly .. why doen't he say PF then ? so at least we know what he
>> means ?
>
> Because the distinction between CA and PF has become clouded by shoddy
> analysis and common usage?

Like the silly term "crop factor" where multiplier is meant.

N.
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 8:04:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 26 May 2005 12:52:55 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote:

>imbsysop wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 May 2005 08:14:26 GMT, "David J Taylor"
>> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> imbsysop wrote:
>>> []
>>>>> No. Noise and CA are bad enough at ISO 100. Any higher
>>>>> and it's truly ugly. [on the Canon S1]
>>>>
>>>> FYE .. CA is ISO independent .. it is a lens imperfection aka purely
>>>> optical ..
>>>
>>> But the poster may mean "purple fringing", which is not a lens issue
>>> and not CA (chromatic aberration), because it is a sensor defect. ..
>>
>> exactly .. why doen't he say PF then ? so at least we know what he
>> means ?
>
>Because the distinction between CA and PF has become clouded by shoddy
>analysis and common usage?

I know, but to me that is very poor excuse certainly in a somewhat
tech discussion :-)
Anonymous
May 26, 2005 11:25:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David Sommers wrote:

>I like my S1 IS. It takes pictures that would otherwise be missed. The 10X
>zoom and IS work well. I've gotten used to the EVF. It's important to
>remember it's always a perfect 100% view at any zoom. I shoot a lot at
>ISO400 and use Noise Ninja to clean it up. Again, it takes shots that would
>otherwise not be there at all. It's great for kids in action, and I have
>many active grandchildren.
>
>That said, I intend to replace it soon with an S2 IS. It should be even
>better.
>
>Bye.
>
>
>

Why wouldn't you consider a Panasonic FZ5 with a Leica Lens?

>"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:Sp8le.1649$rY6.1546@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
>>Are you all happy with your choice?
>>
>>What are some of the things you do not like other than the EVF?
>>Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you get?
>>How is the noise level when compared to other 5MP point and shoots you
>>have used?
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
May 27, 2005 2:00:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 26 May 2005 00:06:10 GMT, measekite <measekite@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Are you all happy with your choice?
>
>What are some of the things you do not like other than the EVF?
>
>Do you shoot much at ISO 200 or ISO 400? What kind of results do you get?
>
>How is the noise level when compared to other 5MP point and shoots you
>have used?

It'a a bit early to say. I have only had my FZ5 for 2 days!

First impressions are good and the image quality is superb - but
probably not as good as the Canon if you judge by the test shots on
the review sites. But it's good enough for me.

The stabilised zoom is *magnificent*. Hand held shots at 1/100th using
the full 432mm are superb. I am *very* impressed.

So far I have only used IS0 100.

I have only used 4mpix cameras before, so I cannot compare noise
levels for you.

An important factor for me is how it feels in my hand(s). It is just
right and all the knobs and dials are well placed.

The EVF is excellent especially if, like me, you have poor eyesight. I
can view all the info that is normally displayed on the LCD.

The only fault I have found so far is that if you fail to open the
flip up flash when shooting in poor light, the result will be very
dark mud!

Go for it!

Phil
Anonymous
May 27, 2005 2:15:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The S1 IS is a little low in resolution for a modern digi-cam. However,
it takes nice pictures:

http://www.fototime.com/inv/65681DD78AA764D
http://www.fototime.com/inv/9209B89E7E5F1E6
http://www.fototime.com/795653426169181/standard.jpg

Canon seemed to need to compromise on the megapixels to get the 10X
zoom and other features at their price point. The new S2 IS gets past
some of that with more megapixels and zoom.

Bye.
May 27, 2005 7:21:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I've owned a Canon S1 IS for a little over a year. The camera takes good
pictures, as long as the ISO remains
below 100, anything above that and the noise is awful. Sometimes even at ISO
100 you can see the noise. The
autofocus hunts when the light levels go down, but you can go around that by
using manual focusing or hyperfocal.

Don't get me wrong, I love my camera but is time to upgrade to something
with higher resolution and less noise. I have
some pictures posted in my website. www.flickr.com/photos/crossguy72

ATM
www.flickr.com/photos/crossguy72


<CrunchyDoodle@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117214152.676511.168840@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> The S1 IS is a little low in resolution for a modern digi-cam. However,
> it takes nice pictures:
>
> http://www.fototime.com/inv/65681DD78AA764D
> http://www.fototime.com/inv/9209B89E7E5F1E6
> http://www.fototime.com/795653426169181/standard.jpg
>
> Canon seemed to need to compromise on the megapixels to get the 10X
> zoom and other features at their price point. The new S2 IS gets past
> some of that with more megapixels and zoom.
>
> Bye.
>
!