File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
What does /p/ think about the Canon S5/S3/S2 IS? Or just this category of cameras in general?

I'm thinking of getting one as an upgrade to my 4 year old 3.2MP piece of crap.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 20DCamera SoftwareCapture NX 1.1.0 MPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:07:18 11:42:58Exposure Time1 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/16.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width450Image Height412RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
depends on what you use it for........
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
My standard advice: Get a pocketable P&S instead of a sub-SLR like this. It'll still be useful if you ever decide to go all the way to an SLR whereas a camera like this won't.
>> Anonymous
>>95338
Don't get the S5 unless you need the shoe; S3IS great camera, but doesn't shoot RAW unless you hack it. S2IS basically the same as the S3, but the interface isn't quite as good.

They're great cameras in everything but low light. They're also not the best in the category: the various Panasonic and (used, of course, since they're out of business) Konica-Minolta superzooms are better.


Really?

How else are you going to get a fast supertelephoto zoom you can actually use off a tripod? Or for that sort of price?
>> Anonymous
>>95363
"Really" onwards meant to go to AC. Everything before to the OP.

Screwed up the quote clicking.
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
I have an s3 IS. it's my only camera. it does suck balls in low light, although i'm learning how to diffuse the flash with paper that i can keep on hand to make certain shots palatable though not professional quality.

anyway i use my cam for personal shots that i print out and hang on the walls and newspaper photos that get shat out on low-quality printers at small resolutions anyway. I really can't see much reason to upgrade to an SLR other than the added control that a larger aperture and sensor would give me. i still get some noisy goddamn pictures out of this thing.

basically unless you're an expert or a purist you can't get something with a better combination of quality and convenience (and affordability) than the S3 IS. even though the glass isnt fantastic and the manual controls are clumsy, it beats carrying around a gear bag to casual situations to look for nice shots. i already have a water bottle on my back on bikerides, do i really need a 200 lb telephoto lens and tripod in case i see a shot i just can't miss?
>> Anonymous
>>95376
Sub-SLRs definitely have their own advantages.

OP: also check out Canon G-series.
>> Anonymous
>>95376
You don't like the manual controls on the S3IS?

The manual focus is a bit hard to work with, but the way high-end Canon point and shoots (at least the three I've shot with: S2IS, S3IS, and G2) control exposure is actually the best way I've used. I wish they gave you the option of using an aperture ring or the buttons to control aperture, but that's 100% for aesthetic purposes.
>> angrylittleboy !wrJcGUHncE
Get an A650IS instead.
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Wasn't there one of these sub-SLRs with an 'L' designated lens from Canon? that might be interesting.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>95363
>How else are you going to get a fast supertelephoto zoom you can actually use off a tripod? Or for that sort of price?
You're not.

My experience has been that most people don't really need a supertele zoom you can actually use off a tripod, though. Unless your primary usage of your camera is voyeurism, having a huge amount of zoom range can be compensated for by, you know, walking forward a bit.

Of course, your mileage may vary. The OP asked about our opinions of this category of cameras in general, and that's mine. Other people are welcome to their opinions.
>> Anonymous
>>95458My experience has been that most people don't really need a supertele zoom you can actually use off a tripod, though.

Truth. I have a 28mm - 300mm on my camera, but I rarely go over 135mm.
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>95404
i do not like them. the manual focus is miserable. i have lost hundreds of potentially awesome shots because of the slow autofocus and clumsy manual focus. the only time i can really get a shot i'm 100% satisfied with is if whatever i'm shooting is sitting relatively still. i tend to work with the aperture as wide as it goes because i like my high shutter speed, and i have missed some serious opportunities because of focus problems and misplaced DoF. the ability to manual focus quicker using a ring like on SLRs would make this camera perfect for me, but i doubt they can implement that on a fixed-lens camera. they could even have fixed this by making a 2-stage rocking directional thumb pad that would register input for either fast focus or fine focus in manual focus mode, but i can't find anything out there that has anything like that.

in addition to that whole kebab, i don't like the lcd preview because sometimes i can't tell if what i'm shooting is in focus at all on the little screen, the fastest it shoots on continuous shooting mode is often insufficient (less than 3/sec, including very inconvenient lag at the 6 and sometimes 4 MP settings if i'm taking 5 to 20+ shots in a row), and the time between pressing the shutter and the actual shutter release is too long. it's impossible to take one timed snapshot because of this, especially if i'm using the flash or autofocus, because then there's no telling when it's going to decide to actually take the damn picture. i end up using continuous shooting instead of timing shots because i actually have a better chance of hitting it just right if i spray 'n pray so to speak instead of trying to guess what mood it's in. either way, this is a frustrating lack of control.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>95466
>but i doubt they can implement that on a fixed-lens camera.
My old Minolta DiMAGE A200 had a focus ring. Electronically linked rather than physical, but it's still a way Canon could have done it. The Minolta also had a mechanical zoom ring, which was nice (although it zoomed in the opposite orientation as my Canon lenses, which screwed me up for quite some time after I upgraded).
>> slim !yE5LOsLjxQ
>>95498
so is it worth looking into as a replacement for what i've got?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>95626
Nope. If you replace what you've got with anything, get a real SLR.
>> Anonymous
>>95633

And by "real SLR", ac means DSLR.
>> Anonymous
OP here, I can't afford a DSLR, and It's not like I am at all a skilled photographer though I do think I've got everything i can get out of my old p&s, so I think I'll really be able to appreciate what the S# series has to offer. Hm.
>> BlackAdder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
I think these cameras fill in the gap between the more compact P&S and full DSLRs quite nicely. Great for someone who's learning and can't afford or isn't ready for a full DSLR.

They are handy to have even if you have a DSLR. I can stick my old one in a backpack if I'm either in risky terrain or carrying it in similarly bad conditions without worrying too much. I've also got my one wet in the rain, dropped it outside and generally knocked around in my backpack when hiking.

A very slim and compact P&S is also handy for times you can't take your bulky gear somewhere.
>> Anonymous
I considered these and went with the A650 IS instead. I'm very happy with it, but I'm a noob too so take that with a grain of salt. It's just worth looking into if you weren't aware of its existence.
>> Anonymous
>>96008

It's a fine P&S with room to spare for learning more about basic photography.
>> Anonymous
The a650is is quite good. You can also get an A610 - A640 and put the chdk mod on it. No IS, but you get cool features. 10 bit raw files, live histogram, and bracketing.

I bought a a610 for less than $100 used.
>> Anonymous
I'm a photography noob, but want to get into it and really like the flexibility of a high zoom cam.

My question: What do you think about the olympus sp 550? Also, how does the kodak z712 compare to the s3?
>> angrylittleboy !wrJcGUHncE
>>96167

Impressive zoom range, but it seems the image quality isn't that good.
>> Anonymous
bmp
>> Anonymous
i have a ridiculous boner for some of even the low-end SLRs out there, but my powershot S3 is a seriously fine piece of machinery. aside from a little chromatic abberation on the long end of the telephoto and a weak ISO 400 and unusable ISO 800, it's great for everything i do. i cant see spending $1500+ to ugrade to a DSLR with lenses that can do everything this bastard can do. not until i have $1500 to spare anyway.
>> Anonymous
>>96469
I thought the same thing, then bought a D40.