New digital camera..not such good photos.
March 1, 2008 5:51 AM Subscribe
Digital camera question...or am I nuts? I have an ancient Canon S10 (2.1 megapixels, slow as molasses). I recently bought a new Canon SD1000 (digital elf 7.1 megapixels). The S10 pictures look better.
I even contacted Canon and sent an image file of both cameras for their analysis. They said that the SD1000 was working fine.
Are these new digital cameras not as good as the ancient ones? (I realize that the SD1000 uses an CCD of 1/2.5 inch, while the S10 uses one that is 1/ inch.) Should I just be content with the tiny portability and speed of the SD1000?
Is there any way I can improve the images I take on the SD1000?
I even contacted Canon and sent an image file of both cameras for their analysis. They said that the SD1000 was working fine.
Are these new digital cameras not as good as the ancient ones? (I realize that the SD1000 uses an CCD of 1/2.5 inch, while the S10 uses one that is 1/ inch.) Should I just be content with the tiny portability and speed of the SD1000?
Is there any way I can improve the images I take on the SD1000?
Incidentally, my 5 megapixel camera takes much better photos than my old 2 megapixel camera. When I print out images of the latter (4x6), its pretty obvious that the source is a digital camera.
mbarryf, what problems are you finding with the images from your new camera compared to those from the old one? (other than one is "better" than the other).
posted by Atreides at 6:19 AM on March 1, 2008
mbarryf, what problems are you finding with the images from your new camera compared to those from the old one? (other than one is "better" than the other).
posted by Atreides at 6:19 AM on March 1, 2008
It would help a lot to see two comparison images. My first guess was that the S10 had bigger optics and therefore more light and less depth of field, but I see the two cameras are roughly the same size, so that's probably not it. My second guess is that the S10 processed sharpness / colour in some way that you prefer. If that's the case, then you can probably fiddle with the SD1000 images so they look similarly pleasing to you.
The CCD surface area probably isn't significant in this case. It would be, normally, but the SD1000 is so much newer that I'm guessing CCD sensitivty has improved.
posted by Nelson at 6:33 AM on March 1, 2008
The CCD surface area probably isn't significant in this case. It would be, normally, but the SD1000 is so much newer that I'm guessing CCD sensitivty has improved.
posted by Nelson at 6:33 AM on March 1, 2008
Yes, you'll have to be content with the speed and portability of the SD1000. This should explain why.
posted by dehowell at 6:37 AM on March 1, 2008
posted by dehowell at 6:37 AM on March 1, 2008
According to DP Review, the CCD of the S10 is 1/2 inch. (Looks like you mis-fingered in your post.) So, the sensor sizes are essentially the same.
It would really help to link to some examples, especially if you can take identical shots for comparison.
Meanwhile, keep in mind that there are gobs of settings that can make a difference: jpg compression, ISO (sensitivity), sharpening, saturation, etc. might be set differently on each camera, resulting in a difference in the images. Keep in mind that sometimes the default setting may not be the best for your usage.
But, as said above, it would really help to know what you consider "better."
posted by The Deej at 6:43 AM on March 1, 2008
It would really help to link to some examples, especially if you can take identical shots for comparison.
Meanwhile, keep in mind that there are gobs of settings that can make a difference: jpg compression, ISO (sensitivity), sharpening, saturation, etc. might be set differently on each camera, resulting in a difference in the images. Keep in mind that sometimes the default setting may not be the best for your usage.
But, as said above, it would really help to know what you consider "better."
posted by The Deej at 6:43 AM on March 1, 2008
I had similar issues with that camera. There are a lot of settings to play with. I was able to get pictures happier with post-processing. I also think that a DIY tension tripod helped reduce it's shake-blur problems.
posted by a robot made out of meat at 6:59 AM on March 1, 2008
posted by a robot made out of meat at 6:59 AM on March 1, 2008
I guess I'll say for everyone who's asking, my experience with the camera is that it is extremely sensitive to shaking and results in a lot of blur.
posted by a robot made out of meat at 7:00 AM on March 1, 2008
posted by a robot made out of meat at 7:00 AM on March 1, 2008
I say this without an ounce of snark: Have you sat down with the manual for the SD1000? I owned mine for at least six months before I came across the manual stuffed in a drawer and sat down with it.
I was actually pretty happy with the camera before I read the manual, but I definitely learned quite a bit from reading the manual and can now fine-tune it better.
posted by veggieboy at 7:30 AM on March 1, 2008
I was actually pretty happy with the camera before I read the manual, but I definitely learned quite a bit from reading the manual and can now fine-tune it better.
posted by veggieboy at 7:30 AM on March 1, 2008
I recently bought a Canon A570IS, which is almost exactly the same camera as the SD1000 in a slightly bigger case with more features (including image stability) for less money ($150 on sale), and I love it. It's an amazing camera even for $200. I'd recommend returning the very cute SD1000 and getting the more practical A570IS.
If you stick with the SD1000 you must realize it's all about holding the camera steady. Try using the viewfinder instead of the LCD screen--you'll hold the camera tighter to your body and reduce shake. Hold your left hand as you would in a "thumbs up" sign, with the back of your hand facing your subject, the thumb running up the side of the camera, and your fingers pressing the palm of your right hand. If you make a "unit" of your two hands like this, you can hold the camera steadier. Watch your breathing. Press the shutter slowly. Experiment with the settings to get a higher shutter speed.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 7:50 AM on March 1, 2008
If you stick with the SD1000 you must realize it's all about holding the camera steady. Try using the viewfinder instead of the LCD screen--you'll hold the camera tighter to your body and reduce shake. Hold your left hand as you would in a "thumbs up" sign, with the back of your hand facing your subject, the thumb running up the side of the camera, and your fingers pressing the palm of your right hand. If you make a "unit" of your two hands like this, you can hold the camera steadier. Watch your breathing. Press the shutter slowly. Experiment with the settings to get a higher shutter speed.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 7:50 AM on March 1, 2008
How are you viewing the images? At 7.1 megapixels, you're not looking at the Elph's picture's at full size. Could this just be an artifact of the viewing software compressing your image in a way you don't like?
I don't have an Elph, but I do have a Canon 7.2 megapixel A570IS (mentioned above). I mostly love it, but I have found that I routinely sharpen my pictures just a little in The Gimp to get them right where I want them. And nth'ing steadying the camera as much as possible; if you don't have image stabilization, it's really tough to use any of the slower shutter speeds without a tripod.
posted by solotoro at 8:27 AM on March 1, 2008
I don't have an Elph, but I do have a Canon 7.2 megapixel A570IS (mentioned above). I mostly love it, but I have found that I routinely sharpen my pictures just a little in The Gimp to get them right where I want them. And nth'ing steadying the camera as much as possible; if you don't have image stabilization, it's really tough to use any of the slower shutter speeds without a tripod.
posted by solotoro at 8:27 AM on March 1, 2008
The Sx0 series cameras, I believe, were higher end than their contemporaneous Sxx0 and SDxxx models. They at the very least had better optics. Anecdotally, I got way better pictures out of our old S30 than our newer SD300.
posted by zsazsa at 10:07 AM on March 1, 2008
posted by zsazsa at 10:07 AM on March 1, 2008
Can you define better? Are the S10 pictures sharper? Have more accurate color? Have more vibrant color? Less noisy (the specks of random color)?
Identifying in what way(s) the S10 pictures look better to you, can help us with figuring out what aspect of the camera you could adjust.
posted by junesix at 10:38 AM on March 1, 2008
Identifying in what way(s) the S10 pictures look better to you, can help us with figuring out what aspect of the camera you could adjust.
posted by junesix at 10:38 AM on March 1, 2008
I recently found a photo I took in late 2004 and was impressed by the image quality, in a bar, 100% tungsten light. I know when it was taken because it was a special occasion. back then I had a 4 megapixel Canon Powershot. my newer compact camera, at 6 MP, is not as good. but yes older cameras are usually much slower focussing and with bigegr shutter lag
posted by matteo at 10:45 AM on March 1, 2008
posted by matteo at 10:45 AM on March 1, 2008
When I first got a 'high end' 5MP sony camera, the pictures were all blurry. After a while, I got used to it and I was able to take better pictures. After I got an SD450, I thought the pictures looked like crap. They never got to be as good as the Sony, but they got better. My feeling is that you've got to get used to new cameras, at least that's been my experience.
Flickr, amazingly enough lets you browse photos by camera type. This photo actually does look pretty bad when you zoom in, seems like there was very heavy noise reduction done on it. According to the EXIF data it was taken with a 1/10th of a second shutter at ISO 200. I hardly ever use anything but ISO 50 with my SD450. I'm not seeing too many examples of good daylight shots with the SD1000 on Flickr. My camera takes great pictures in sunlight. Other environments are more challenging, and you get a sort of intuitive feel for what settings to use in order to get a good picture. It's definitely not just 'point 'n' shoot'
posted by delmoi at 8:21 PM on March 1, 2008
Flickr, amazingly enough lets you browse photos by camera type. This photo actually does look pretty bad when you zoom in, seems like there was very heavy noise reduction done on it. According to the EXIF data it was taken with a 1/10th of a second shutter at ISO 200. I hardly ever use anything but ISO 50 with my SD450. I'm not seeing too many examples of good daylight shots with the SD1000 on Flickr. My camera takes great pictures in sunlight. Other environments are more challenging, and you get a sort of intuitive feel for what settings to use in order to get a good picture. It's definitely not just 'point 'n' shoot'
posted by delmoi at 8:21 PM on March 1, 2008
I'm curious to see samples. I've heard adjusting with a dark image can help immensely, & that is doable with certain firmware.
posted by Pronoiac at 8:47 PM on March 1, 2008
posted by Pronoiac at 8:47 PM on March 1, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
In the meantime, read up on the Megapixel Myth.
posted by Dec One at 6:00 AM on March 1, 2008