Canon S2 IS review just posted at dcresource

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

Rick wrote:
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ [...] hp?cam=718
>
> Great work, Jeff.

Thanks for posting that, Rick. Much as I expected - some good points,
some bad points, and some gimmicks.

David

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

"Rick" <nospam@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:J5Tqe.3178$jX6.2001@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ [...] hp?cam=718
>
> Great work, Jeff.
>
>

The pricegrabber link from that site lists it as $499 with a $70 off coupon
code at Dell = $429.

But when I went to the Dell site using the link, it said the product cannot
be found. If anyone is interested in trying to purchase it at this price, a
phone call to Dell is advised.

The coupon code expires in a coupon of days. Here's the pricegrabber
details:

Merchant: Dell

Starts:9-Jun-05
Expires:14-Jun-05
Type:cash
Amount:70.00
Minimum Order Amount:450.00
Description:

Take $70 off an Electronics and Accessories purchase of $450 or more. Only
valid on orders up to $1000. Expires 6/14 at 5:59 AM CST or after the first
3000 uses.
Code: 1VWL8GL8PSGGVK

PriceGrabber has no control over merchant promotions and it can not
guarantee that any promotion is valid even when it may still be displayed in
the PriceGrabber site.

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

OK, technically, there are a few S1 features that were lost in the S2. The
automatic pop-up flash and the IR remote control. Since I never liked the
automatic pop-up flash - I prefer to open it when I want to use it, it's no
great loss to me. The IR remote is something I did use a few times and found
it handy. Of course, using the self-timer, available with both models, is a
decent substitute.

All in all, I like the S2 over the S1. It takes better pictures for me under
the conditions I use it most. So, I'm happy.

Bye.

"SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote in message
news6%qe.12665$F6.2705804@news.siol.net...
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Rick wrote:
>>> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ [...] hp?cam=718
>>>
>>> Great work, Jeff.
>>
>> Thanks for posting that, Rick. Much as I expected - some good points,
>> some bad points, and some gimmicks.
>>
>> David
>
> I must say i'm relieved, since i have it ordered and i'm getting it in a
> week or two...
> Basically, none of the S1 features are lost, and since i've had S1, it's
> only a gain for me.
>

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

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 06:20:11 GMT, measekite <inkystinky@oem.com>
wrote:

>Read the review. One nice thing over the Fz5 is low light gain up on
>the EVF and LCD and the swivel LCD. The FZ5 comes in black.
>
>It appears that overall I do not see a clear advantage of (compared to
>FZ5) one over the other unless I am missing something.
>
>Does anyone out there see much difference between the two?

The FZ5 is smaller, but it doesn't have the swivelling
viewfinder.

Hans-Georg

--
No mail, please.

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

David Sommers wrote:

>OK, technically, there are a few S1 features that were lost in the S2. The
>automatic pop-up flash and the IR remote control. Since I never liked the
>automatic pop-up flash - I prefer to open it when I want to use it, it's no
>great loss to me. The IR remote is something I did use a few times and found
>it handy. Of course, using the self-timer, available with both models, is a
>decent substitute.
>
>All in all, I like the S2 over the S1. It takes better pictures for me under
>the conditions I use it most. So, I'm happy.
>
>Bye.
>
>
>

If you considered the Pan FZ5 then why did you choose the S2?

>"SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote in message
>news6%qe.12665$F6.2705804@news.siol.net...
>
>
>>David J Taylor wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Rick wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/cameraDetail.php?cam=718
>>>>
>>>>Great work, Jeff.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Thanks for posting that, Rick. Much as I expected - some good points,
>>>some bad points, and some gimmicks.
>>>
>>>David
>>>
>>>
>>I must say i'm relieved, since i have it ordered and i'm getting it in a
>>week or two...
>>Basically, none of the S1 features are lost, and since i've had S1, it's
>>only a gain for me.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

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

measekite wrote:
> Read the review. One nice thing over the Fz5 is low light gain up on
> the EVF and LCD and the swivel LCD. The FZ5 comes in black.
>
> It appears that overall I do not see a clear advantage of (compared to
> FZ5) one over the other unless I am missing something.
>
> Does anyone out there see much difference between the two?

The Canon has better video and the swivel LCD finder, but it doesn't have
the Li-ion battery, nor does it come in black. Were I buying today, I
would want to check very carefully between the two, and compare handling
in the shop.

What we have not yet seen are comparisons of the basic image quality from
the sensor and any processing, nor reports of the lens performance (which
was poor on the Canon S1, but better on the S2).

Cheers,
David

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

tramoman wrote:
> I am buying a camera like that tomorrow.
> Would you prefer the Z20 or this canon??

Handle them both and see which you prefer - I would probably still get the
Panasonic FZ5 because it is lighter, and weight means a lot to me.

David

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

David J Taylor wrote:

>measekite wrote:
>
>
>>Read the review. One nice thing over the Fz5 is low light gain up on
>>the EVF and LCD and the swivel LCD. The FZ5 comes in black.
>>
>>It appears that overall I do not see a clear advantage of (compared to
>>FZ5) one over the other unless I am missing something.
>>
>>Does anyone out there see much difference between the two?
>>
>>
>
>The Canon has better video and the swivel LCD finder, but it doesn't have
>the Li-ion battery, nor does it come in black.
>

I prefer black also but that is not a reason to buy the Fz5 unless
everything else is the same. But the battery is a different matter. I
have read reviews that buying Rayovac 15min rechargeable is better and
cheaper in the long run. Then others have stated that one battery ie
FZ5 is better. Nobody has really stated any reason other than personal
preference. What is your take on this?

> Were I buying today, I
>would want to check very carefully between the two, and compare handling
>in the shop.
>
>What we have not yet seen are comparisons of the basic image quality from
>the sensor and any processing, nor reports of the lens performance (which
>was poor on the Canon S1, but better on the S2).
>
>

I too am waiting for comparative results. Most of any camera
comparisons I have read have been on side by side features. I do not
need pro sources for doing that as I can do that myself. As an example
I can determine that the Canon S2 has a swiveling lcd and the FZ5 does
not. And I know the advantages of having one. However, if one did not
know the advantages then just the info by itself that one has the
feature and the other does not means nothing unless the review states
why that feature is either important or unimportant and to what degree.

>Cheers,
>David
>
>
>
>

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

measekite wrote:
[]
> I prefer black also but that is not a reason to buy the Fz5 unless
> everything else is the same. But the battery is a different matter. I
> have read reviews that buying Rayovac 15min rechargeable is better
> and cheaper in the long run. Then others have stated that one
> battery ie FZ5 is better. Nobody has really stated any reason other
> than personal preference. What is your take on this?

My take?

If you have a camera like the S2 IS which takes 4 AA cells, at the point
of changing batteries you need to prepare 4 cells ready to put in the
camera, perhaps putting those 4 cells into your right-hand pocket and
being jolly sure they don't short out! Then you sit down somewhere, open
the camera, turn it upside down and hope you can catch the four cells
before they start rolling about on the floor or, if you stopped on a hill,
rolling away completely. You then need to put those four cells in your
left pocket, again ensuring that they don't short out. Next comes putting
the four new AA cells in the camera. Better get them the right way up or
else! Do you have your reading glasses with you?

Get the idea?

FZ5, undo the battery catch, single cell to remove. If it does drop on
the floor it won't roll. There's only one cell, so much less chance of
shorting out. You can't put the replacement cell in the wrong way round.
Doing this "on the hoof" (while standing up) is no problem.

Of course, what you can't yet do is to pop into the corner shop and buy a
replacement primary battery should you have been foolish enough to let all
your batteries run flat.

Cheers,
David

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

Larry wrote:
[]
> MY TAKE:
>
> If you are so clumsy/stupid that you cant change a set of 4 batteries
> without screwing it up, you probably managed to get through chilhood
> without any battery powered toys.

I am neither clumsy nor stupid.

If you have the chance to change batteries with timing and circumstances
which are under your control - that's fine. Of course changing 4 x AAs is
then no problem.

However, in real life I have found that batteries require changing at the
most awkward times - on a funicular railway when trying to take the ever
changing views, on a rolling ship, inside an Egyptian pyramid, when others
are rushing to catch a bus and so forth. Under such circumstances,
anything which causes the least bit of unnecessary inconvenience is
unwelcome.

Cheers,
David