# Digital Camera - Canon S70



## UnknownVT (Jun 12, 2005)

I had to buy a new digicam - 

my previous Canon A70 (3mp) was worn out after 21 months and putting some 60K shots through it - it became unreliable I often missed shots because of its bad bahavior. 

However I stuck and survived with the "devil you know" for my 3 weeks trip in China (photo links at bottom of post) and ordered my new digicam as soon as I got back.

It's a Canon PowerShot S70 (7mp) a little on the more expensive side - but I do a lot of photography - eg: I retrieved the thing last Tuesday (June/7/2005) evening from FedEx - charged the battery - went out that night to 3 venues and took 97 shots - by Thursday June/9 - I had accumulated a shot count of 371.







While the digicam is still new to me and the battery duration unknown - I carry a spare.

Of course it's hard to do comparisons since my most recent digicam the A70 was malfunctioning. However the operation of my new S70 seems smoother - perhaps a bit faster and more positive.

Like the A70 the Spot auto focus would often indicate it was not focussing in darker environments especially if the lens was zoomed even slightly - and it's exasperated by the fact P, Tv, Av modes can NOT be set to the multi-point AiAF, and can only be set on Spot focus. 

However when the focus indicator flashes to show bad focus - I just point the thing at the same spot and pre-focus again - and even if the indicator light flashes I force the shot (because otherwise I can't take the shot and will miss a great deal) 
and so far (touch wood) all of those shots which had the indicator say bad focus, all seem to be well focussed - at least to my satisfaction.........

The photo quality of the S70 - the much larger pixel count aside - seems much higher than I had experienced with the 3mp A70. I have taken some shots which I know would be pretty low in possibility of coming out well on the A70 - that have surprised me with the S70 quality.

Please take a look at this album all taken on my new S70

Swamp Cabbage 2005 

and this album where there are A70 shots, and last 10 photos marked 050607 are on the S70

Electromatics 2005 


in particular this telephoto shot (bad focus indicated) which I know would have a very low probablity of success on the A70 - was outstanding in its quality on the S70 (ISO100, Tv, 1/5 sec)

LeeGoodness050607.jpg 

I decided on the S70 because 7Mp had been my target to replace film (ha-ha /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif remember those old arguments?) since it gives 10"x8" at 300ppi - 
of course my previous 3mp A70 basically surplanted any film photography, because of its satisfactory quality up to 10x8, and mostly due to economy...... even my previous 2mp Digital ELPH S100 eventually displaced film too.....

However the reason for the S70 was that I needed a camera that I could literally carry everyday (I'm NOT kidding - I did this with the A70 and previous to that the S100 - in excess of 5 years now)

Much as I covet and desire a DSLR and was VERY tempted with the dropping prices of the original Canon Digital Rebel 6mp - the 7mp S70 with better tested resolution would curb that temptation - whereas if I bought the other digicam under consideration the Canon A95 some $150+ cheaper - that temptation would still very much be open .....

I might still consider the new Canon Digital Rebel XT 8mp - but I think for now the S70 is satisfactory - since it has the zoom range of (equivalent) 28-100mm probably ideal for my type of photography.......


FWIW - My China photos [all taken on an intermittently faulty Canon A70 (3mp) ] - 

Beijing  

Shanghai  

WeiHai


----------



## Emilion (Jun 12, 2005)

The image quality is a little bit better on Rebel than Rebel XT. S70 is a good DC with quality image output, just a little bit large to carry around daily. My EDC is a Casio EX50, not bad for its price.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 13, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*Emilion said:*The image quality is a little bit better on Rebel than Rebel XT. S70 is a good DC with quality image output, just a little bit large to carry around daily. My EDC is a Casio EX50, not bad for its price. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks Emilion.

A DSLR would be just too big to carry on a daily basis.

I first started EDC'ing a digicam way back with the original (2mp) Canon Digital ELPH/IXUS S100 over 5 years ago - mainly because it was one of the smallest digicams available then. 

After over 3 years of use the S100 got worn out, and I replaced it with a 3mp Canon A70 - a budget model - but the A70 had more exposure controls like shutter priority etc. which I eventually used a lot.

My new Canon S70 is still eminently portable in a belt pouch - which is my prefered mode of carry (even with the tiny S100 Digital ELPH).

The S70's handling like the A70 is a lot better than the S100 Digital ELPH, since they are both a bit bigger - but not too big to be easily portable - for me literally on a daily basis.

In terms of image quality - and putting aside the obvious pixel count differences - the A70 images at ISO50 & 100 was better than the S100, similarly my new S70 images are visibly better to my eyes than those of the A70 under similar circumstances - I have taken some good S70 shots that I know the A70 may have in all likelihood failed on.

Thanks,


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 13, 2005)

I mentioned that my new Canon S70 seemed to give better images than the A70 - discounting the obvious fact the S70 has many more pixels.

What did I mean?

Well, although I said it subjectively - even I wasn't too sure how to show this quantitatively.

I tried an ad-hoc experiment - taking the following photos -

Canon S70 (7mp)
7mp with SuperFine JPG
7mp with Fine JPG
3mp with SuperFine JPG
3mp with Fine JPG

Canon A70 (3mp)
3mp with SuperFine JPG
3mp with Fine JPG

With both cameras I zoomed to the maximum telephoto (S70 = 100mm, A70 = 105mm equivalents - so the A70 lens is some 5% longer - resulting in a full-frame which is linearly 5% larger - everything else being equal) and took all the photos within minutes of each other:






I then cropped the tiny area marked in red - to get:

100% crops compared - top row SuperFine JPG, lower row Fine JPG -




The 3mp images from the S70 seem better than those from the A70 -
Notice I can see very little material difference between the SuperFine and Fine JPGs in any of the pairs.

The 7mp crop was DownSampled to get approx the same size as the 3mp image crop -




Here the downsampled 7mp image does seem better than those from the A70.
They should in theory be the same as the 3mp images from the S70......

3mp images from both the S70 and A70 were UpSampled to the same size as the full 7mp crop - and sharpened to bring out the details -




This is the most telling image since one can see better. 
The Upsampled 3mp image from the S70 is not quite on par as the original 7mp crop - 
but in practice printed, one probably would not see that much difference.
Any of the S70 images seem to me to be better than those from the A70.

What do you think?

Comments please?


----------



## Wutda (Jun 13, 2005)

UnknownVT,

I know your previous camera was an A70. Did you also look at the Canon A95 before buying the S70? If so, what made you choose the S70?

I'm kinda looking at both the S70 & A95 and leaning towards the A95 since it can use AA batteries and I can use the Compactflash card from my old Kodak.

Thanks!


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 13, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*Wutda said:* I know your previous camera was an A70. Did you also look at the Canon A95 before buying the S70? If so, what made you choose the S70?

I'm kinda looking at both the S70 & A95 and leaning towards the A95 since it can use AA batteries and I can use the Compactflash card from my old Kodak.

[/ QUOTE ]
The A95 was also a very serious consideration - especially since I already have the rechargable AA NiMH and compact flash cards from the A70 ....

This is what I said in my opening post in this thread -

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:* I decided on the S70 because 7Mp had been my target to replace film (ha-ha remember those old arguments?) since it gives 10"x8" at 300ppi - 
of course my previous 3mp A70 basically surplanted any film photography, because of its satisfactory quality up to 10x8, and mostly due to economy...... even my previous 2mp Digital ELPH S100 eventually displaced film too.....

However the reason for the S70 was that I needed a camera that I could literally carry everyday (I'm NOT kidding - I did this with the A70 and previous to that the S100 - in excess of 5 years now)

Much as I covet and desire a DSLR and was VERY tempted with the dropping prices of the original Canon Digital Rebel 6mp - the 7mp S70 with better tested resolution would curb that temptation - whereas if I bought the other digicam under consideration the Canon A95 some $150+ cheaper - that temptation would still very much be open .....


[/ QUOTE ]

The S70 comes with a rechargable Li-ion battery and charger.

and one can buy a replacement Li-ion rechargable battery for the S70 (NB-2LH) for about $15 which is rated at 1500mAh (vs. the 720mAh of the Canon branded one)


----------



## KevinL (Jun 13, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:*

and one can buy a replacement Li-ion rechargable battery for the S70 (NB-2LH) for about $15 which is rated at 1500mAh (vs. the 720mAh of the Canon branded one) 

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa.. where? Have you tried them and are they good batteries? I have some of the old Canon ones (540mAH). 

I have an S40 and a Rebel XT, both of them share the same batteries. The S40, and I believe its successor the S70, are good compact cameras. As I learned from my XT, lenses do make a big difference, so it's likely your S70 has a better lens and improved processor over your old camera, hence the better images.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 14, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:*
[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:* and one can buy a replacement Li-ion rechargable battery for the S70 (NB-2LH) for about $15 which is rated at 1500mAh (vs. the 720mAh of the Canon branded one) 

[/ QUOTE ]
Whoa.. where? Have you tried them and are they good batteries? I have some of the old Canon ones (540mAH). 

I have an S40 and a Rebel XT, both of them share the same batteries. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I bought two spare generic NB-2LH replacement batteries from SterlingTEK - found via Pricegrabber.com 

Listing at SterlingTEK for their NB-2LH batteries rate them at 1200mAh -

BUT the two I received are both marked 1500mAh.





I can't say for sure if these are more than double the capacity of the Canon original NB-2LH - as I've only had them for a few days and I think Li-ion batteries like NiMH need a few cycles to attain full capacity (please correct me if I'm wrong) - but SterlingTEK seems to have a good rep.

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:*The S40, and I believe its successor the S70, are good compact cameras. As I learned from my XT, lenses do make a big difference, so it's likely your S70 has a better lens and improved processor over your old camera, hence the better images. 

[/ QUOTE ]

The S60 (5mp) and the S70 (7mp) both use the same lens which is (equivalent) 28-100mm - this was one of the major attractions to me.

Even though the lens on the A70 is no slouch - I do think the one on the S70 is better - as most of the thorough reviews seem to bear out -

Review Sample Images on Imaging-Resource.com 

and 

dpReview.com on the Canon S70 

But there are also improvements to the sensor and overall image processing.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 14, 2005)

Here's another set of photos from the Canon S70 -

Howlin' Wolf Fest - 2005 

You might notice the date of these photos - they were taken on the same night as those of the Swamp Cabbage - at a different venue.........

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many thanks for all your kind comments - 
I do so enjoy being on this forum because of the responses I get - 
y'all seem to encourage me with my obessive complusive behavior! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

More comparison tests - this time of the macro/close up ability - cropped area shown in Red

Dollar bill and coins - 
Flash ON - 7mp Fine JPG





NO Flash - 7mp Fine JPG





Compared to Scanned at 300dpi





100% crops - the Canon S70 image had about 2.75x the magnifcation of the scanned image -




Notice there is some overall softness to the 100% images from the Canon S70 - the Flash ON shot shows lower brightness due to the reflection of the quarter choking down the exposure overall.

Resized Canon S70 crops to match the scanned image - 
this is kind of more realistically what one might see on print -





Here on the resized comparison - although there is a distinct color tint difference between the scanned and the two Canon images - the definition and detail are terrific - there is absolutely NO post processing - other than the resizing. Amazing.......

Ever since I was able to afford cameras - I always longed for a compact/pocketable camera that would match the quality (first), and some of the flexiblity of my SLRs. With 35mm some point & shoots came close - but I always felt some lack of confidence - more so than when I was using the SLRs.

But without being conscious of it - I think with the Canon S70 I may have finally realized that dream of carrying a pocket sized camera that could almost match the quality and everything I can do on an SLR - 
with more confidence - 
since I can review the images immediately after I've taken the shot........

Thanks all your encouragement guys.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 20, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:*
I bought two spare generic NB-2LH replacement batteries from SterlingTEK - found via Pricegrabber.com 

Listing at SterlingTEK for their NB-2LH batteries rate them at 1200mAh -

BUT the two I received are both marked 1500mAh.





I can't say for sure if these are more than double the capacity of the Canon original NB-2LH - as I've only had them for a few days and I think Li-ion batteries like NiMH need a few cycles to attain full capacity (please correct me if I'm wrong) - but SterlingTEK seems to have a good rep.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I've had some time now to try out the batteries - 
the two I got come NO where near their labelled capacity -

I received the batteries on Wednesday June/8 they were labelled with SterlingTEK.com and at *1500mAh*! which I thought was amazing - needless to say I was very pleased. 

BUT having used these batteries over the last week or two compared to the original 720mAh Canon NB-2LH (also new) - 

I found that on average the SterlingTEK LN63 (NB-2LH equivalents) labelled at *1500mAh* - gave 181 shots on my Canon S70 for my typical usage. 

BUT the orignal Canon NB-2LH battery supplied with the camera (also new) rated 720mAh gives on average 222 shots. 

I was expecting about DOUBLE the capacity from the SterlingTEK 1500mAh LN63 - 
instead I am currently getting *20% LESS capacity* - 
in other words these LN63 1500mAh batteries seem to be closer to *590mAh capacity* 
(which is significantly lower than the original Canon NB-2LH capacity of 720mAh). 

[Note: both the SterlingTEK LN63 labelled 1500mAh batteries have been fully charged, and have had more than one charge/discharge cycle before I took my shot counts] 

It would seem fairly unlikely that these two LN63 batteries are BOTH FAULTY?? 

I have just written to SterlingTEK with these results and am awaiting a response.


----------



## geepondy (Jun 20, 2005)

Absolutely the S70 is superior in every aspect to the A70, no argument there. The S70 is a good compromise for a lot of people. The 7 megpixel G6 is superior in many aspects but is bigger and more expensive. Yet the S70 has much more features then the smaller 7 megpixel SD500. Don't forget the S70 has RAW which although tedious can be very useful, particularly for adjusting the white balance after the shot was taken.

The A95 represents a good value for the money as it can be had for under $300 in many places now. 

Congratulations I'm sure you'll enjoy your camera. I own a Digital Rebel 300D and a S400 myself.


----------



## KevinL (Jun 20, 2005)

Thanks for the honest assessment of their capacity /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

For a moment I was surprised by figures of 1500mAH. I believe the NB-2L/LH use none other than the famous rechargeable CR123s as their power source, bundled together with a protection circuit and control electronics. To date we haven't been able to get more than 800mAH out of those yet. 

There's a reputable battery vendor in town selling NB-2LH equivalents (third party), but they maxed out at 800mAH. The official Canon-issued NB-2LH that came with my Rebel XT is 720mAH, as you have noted. 

I kinda did the opposite from you, I traded up to a digital SLR from a P&S camera. Agreed the size is one thing, but I love the power and control.. and the ability to fire off more than 400 shots on a single battery pack /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/drool.gif recently, (before I got my XT) I had the chance to learn two things: 1. you can never have enough CF 2. you can never have enough battery and, as to how the lesson was delivered to me: I ran out of BOTH. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/twakfl.gif


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 20, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:*For a moment I was surprised by figures of 1500mAH. I believe the NB-2L/LH use none other than the famous rechargeable CR123s as their power source, bundled together with a protection circuit and control electronics. To date we haven't been able to get more than 800mAH out of those yet. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Many thanks for that informative response Kevin.
Interesting that the NB-2LH may be based on the RCR123's - in which case I can't realistically expect much more than about 720-800mAh capacity out of them - so the original Canon NB-2LH would seem pretty much near the max.

Yes, I was amazed at the 1200mAh rating in the ad - and then to receive those batteries with a label marked 1500mAh - was like almost too good to be true . /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/huh.gif

The $14 I paid for each battery even at my estimated much lower rating of 590mAh would still seem fairly "good value" - 
but I probably would not have bought them if they listed at only 590mAh.....

But to be fair, I think I should reserve any judgement or further comments until I hear back from SterlingTEK on this huge discreprency in battery capacity.


----------



## CNTSTPDRMN (Jun 20, 2005)

I bought the S70 for Christmas, but returned it in March for the 20D, I wasn't happy with the focusing capabilities and it has low light issues too, I bought the SD500 for the pocket camera and the 20D for the serious stuff, overall I really enjoyed the S70, but it's shortfalls led me back to the SLR--- I'm so happy I did it, it's a lot of money, but the difference in speed, focusing, and ease of use (no fumbling with small controls) make it well worth the upgrade.


----------



## paulr (Jun 20, 2005)

How big is the S70 compared with the S100?

What is the ISO range available?

Did you consider the even smaller SD300/400/500?

I still have an S100 and am sort of thinking of upgrading. The S100 isn't really EDC'able. I haven't wish for a really really EDC camera, so I've been thinking I can live with the A510's slightly larger size in order to use AA cells. But a tiny camera is tempting too. I used to EDC a Minox submini film camera and that was lots of fun.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 20, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*paulr said:*How big is the S70 compared with the S100?
What is the ISO range available?
Did you consider the even smaller SD300/400/500?
I still have an S100 and am sort of thinking of upgrading. 
so I've been thinking I can live with the A510's slightly larger size in order to use AA cells. But a tiny camera is tempting too. 

[/ QUOTE ]
The S100 is noticably smaller than the S70 (to me)








BUT the S70 is still eminently portable and fits my hands better.

The S70 definitely handles better than the S100 except I prefer the collar round the shutter zoom control on the S100 and A70 over the thumb operated toggle switch of the S70.
The A70 has better handling because of the battery grip/bulge/handle.
The Canon S70 feels slim in the hand - something like a quality but heavy/dense cell phone.

Operation of the S70 exudes quality - everything feels smooth - try the difference between zooming the lens - the A70 and S100 almost seems to grind. But then that's to be expected the S70 is more expensive than the A70 - otherwise they are very similar in their operation. The S70 may be a bit faster.

The S70 like the A70 has ISO Auto, 50, 100, 200 and 400 
(I think all the Canon Digital ELPH range now have adjustable ISOs).

--------------------------------------------------------
I wanted to see how changing the ISO sensitivity affected the image quality on the S70.

Using the same "Test Tree" and the S70 zoom extended to maximum (ie: 100mm) I took shots at ISO100, 200 and 400 - with Fine ansd SuperFine JPG. Also ISO50 with SuperFine JPG as a control - using the same tiny 105x105 pixel crops (as shown in the previous post) -





I could see very little significant difference between ISO100 and ISO50 SuperFine or Fine JPGs.

ISO200 starts to show some image degradation in terms of loss of detail, quality and noise. But again I could not see a significant difference between Fine and SuperFine JPG versions of the ISO200.

I feel that the ISO400 shots to be marginal - for me - probably for use in emergencies only - there is even more loss of detail, quality and noticable noise. But again I could not see any significant difference between the Fine and SuperFine JPG versions.

For me I'd be happy to shoot my shots on Fine JPG - normally at AutoISO (most probably ISO50) for the Scene Modes and Full Auto (it's the only ISO setting available) and for P, Tv, Av and M modes at ISO100. 

SuperFine is not necessary using more storage space than needed for my typical usage and quality requirements - 
If I really wanted maximum quality - then I would use the RAW format.

I would use ISO200 if needed but understanding there will be noticable degradation. 

I would avoid ISO400 unless absolutely necessary - but I would probably shoot some at ISO200 just for backup.
---------------------------------------------------------

I did look at the SD range - BUT I use the manual controls a lot - one of my standard usage is with Shutter priority (Tv) and those tiny SD series don't have it.....

The A510 the latest 3mp replacement for the A70 and A75 - would seem a very good choice considering the street price.

It's great using only 2AA batteries and it is small seemingly comparable to the S100 - but has lots of manual controls as well as ISO setting - it's a great camera for the price - 

The only real down side is that Canon have switched to SD cards for storage for their smaller p&s type digicams, 
and although 2AA batteries seem very nice. the real downside is the recycle or shot to shot times using flash - the 4AA and better still Li-ion batteries are much quicker -
but those all are minor or even moot points for most people.


----------



## paulr (Jun 20, 2005)

Thanks. I wonder if the high ISO settings work better at lower resolution. You mentioned the S70 has a 3MP setting. Does it go even lower, like 1MP? Can you take an ISO 400 shot at 1MP?


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 21, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*paulr said:* I wonder if the high ISO settings work better at lower resolution. You mentioned the S70 has a 3MP setting. Does it go even lower, like 1MP? Can you take an ISO 400 shot at 1MP? 

[/ QUOTE ]
In theory using the smaller sizes or lower resolutions should reduce the noise - as the camera basically still takes the full sized/resolution image and then DownSamples it - thereby reducing the noise (auto-corrolation of random noise).

The Canon S70 does not have a 1mp mode -
These are the S70 image sizes -
L = 7mp
M1 = 5mp
M2 = 3mp
M3 = 2mp
S = 640x480

S is pretty useless except for quick e-mail or web shots.

2mp is what I regard as minimum practical size - being able to print sterling quality 6x4 (at close to 300ppi) and satisfactory 10x8 at about 150ppi.

3mp is really entry level these days - giving good quality 10x8 at about 200ppi - the long held concensus for print quality - although there are many who would argue for the magical 300ppi/dpi or even 400ppi.......

7mp gives the magical 300ppi/dpi on 10x8 prints - and manages 400+ppi on 8x6, or about 15x12 at 200ppi (and at 150ppi it can reach 20x16) - however it is mostly overkill for most people.....

ISO400 smaller size/resolution tests -

Target




Crop area shown in red.

All in SuperFine JPG to eliminate any question of compression degradation.

7mp ISO50 shot as a control/benchmark.

100% crops (no post-processing) -




7mp ISO400 looks pretty noisy - in comparison to the ISO50 shot - detail is lost.
5mp ISO400 - noise a detectable
3mp ISO400 - seems less noisy
2mp ISO400 - hard to see any noise - but image is pretty small for the crop
640x480 ISO400 - just for interest the crop area is too small for any real judgement - BUT

Go back and look at the full frame Test Target -
that's at 7mp ISO400 - which we can see from the crop is pretty noisy - however resizing it down to the web presentable 450x338 - makes all the noise disappear - that photo has adjustment in brightness/contrast and sharpened - which would all emphasize noise.

I then DownSampled every crop to the 2mp size -




All the images are comparable - if one wants to be fussy then - 
5mp looks the worst. 
2mp ISO400 with no resizing looks almost as good as the control 7mp ISO50 downsampled 
7mp ISO400 downsampled is almost as good too 
3mp perhaps just a little inferior........


----------



## greenlight (Jun 21, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:*
Here's another set of photos from the Canon S70 -

More comparison tests - this time of the macro/close up ability - cropped area shown in Red

Dollar bill and coins - 


[/ QUOTE ]

Now we know what Vince has really been doing!


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 22, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:* In theory using the smaller sizes or lower resolutions should reduce the noise - as the camera basically still takes the full sized/resolution image and then DownSamples it - thereby reducing the noise (auto-corrolation of random noise).

[/ QUOTE ]
For those who are still interested....
here's a bit of a leap to some assumptions -

I think by printing out images using something greater than about 300ppi/dpi may significantly reduce the apparent noise in an originally noisy looking image (eg: the 7mp ISO400 shot).

This is due to the visual "merging" of the pixels - which has a similar effect as downsampling - where the random noise cancels itself to a certain extent......

First a long introduction to put things into context - 
if you want to skip this go down to the ** about print quality.

Intro -

In general downsampling (obviously) loses some detail - since the overall picture is smaller with fewer pixels to display the detail - this is loss of resolution (which USM cannot restore - no matter how much is applied.)

Visual "Sharpness" - which is how we normally judge quality - is also dependent on contrast and acutance - 
neither of these two are normally reduced - so a downsampled picture will normally look as sharp as the full size - 
and sometimes apparently sharper (with the understanding there is loss in resolution or detail).

If one looks at that 450x338 downsampled 7mp ISO400 image of the optical target (above) - it is very sharp looking (despite some very obvious loss of resolution/detail) - it looks far sharper than the original full sized image which has very prominent noise - 
in the downsampled image the noise has all but disappeared and I have applied simple "Sharpen" in PhotoImpact 8 to the image - there does NOT appear to be an increase in noise either.......

Now this is a pretty extreme example to shoot at 7mp (3072x2304) to produce a 450x338 image - but that is actually what I do almost all the time - I shoot at 7mp for prints - but produce 480x360 images for the web.

This S70 at 7mp produced what is to me still a very noisy ISO400 image seems to downsample to a web sized image that appears virtually noise free - withOUT the use of any noise reduction software........

I can only infer from this there has to be a significant enough downsampling for there to be true reduction of noise (to the point of elimination) - as this unscientific ad-hoc experiment has shown - 
5mp ISO400 image (downsampled in camera) seems pretty noisy still.
3mp ISO400 improves on the noise - but it is still visible
2mp ISO400 - which we know used the full pixels and downsampled in the camera - almost looks noise free.

Further experimentation by downsampling all the other 100% crop images to the 2mp ISO400 crop size showed that the original 2mp ISO400 image looks almost as good as the CONTROL 7mp ISO50 image downsampled to the 2mp size........

Sorry to sound so pedantic and picky but in practice I do this downsampling a LOT for my web shots (please check out the links in my sig - in 2005 alone I have already posted about 1,400 shots - my 2004 pages probably has over 2,000 photos) Like I already said - I always shoot at full (resolution) size and archive those images and downsample/resize to get my (much) smaller web images - so without being consciously aware of it - I am very experienced in this stuff.

** Print quality from noisy images -

The main point I wanted to bring out is what sites like Imaging-Resource.com have written about - print quality from higher ISO and apparently noisy images - seems to produce smaller sized prints where the the noise is reduced significantly.

ie: some noise will disappear when the image is printed at higher print resolutions.

A Noisy ISO400 7mp image from the S70 probably would print to about 10x8 without the noise too badly affecting the print - despite the original full sized image being very "Noisy" 
- since the print is at about 300ppi/dpi - and that is like displaying the image on screen at about 31% - 
like resizing the image to about 960x768 on screen - that's less than a 1mp image size....... 
and we've seen from the ad-hoc experiment above that downsampling to about 2mp makes the prominent noise in the full 7mp (ISO400) image all but disappear - with (of course) some loss in detail.

Although printing the full sized image still uses all the pixels (including all the noise) - 
I think the visual "merging" of those pixels printed at a high enough print resolution - like 300ppi/dpi effectly cancels some of the random noise

What do you think?
Your comments please.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 23, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:* I think by printing out images using something greater than about 300ppi/dpi may significantly reduce the apparent noise in an originally noisy looking image (eg: the 7mp ISO400 shot).

Although printing the full sized image still uses all the pixels (including all the noise) - 
I think the visual "merging" of those pixels printed at a high enough print resolution - like 300ppi/dpi effectly cancels some of the random noise.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've made the leap in inference that printing an image at a high enough print resolution like 300ppi may significantly reduce noise present in the original full sized image.

This has turned out to be somewhat true - however it is not quite as good as I had hoped -
BUT then again it is a LOT better than I had thought previously.

I took crops of the test target taken at ISO50 SuperFine JPG and ISO400 (Fine JPG) and printed them at 300ppi - which is like printing the full frame to about 10x8.

I used the (professional) Fuji Film digital printing system at Walgreens.

I then scanned the print at 600dpi and 150 dpi -

ISO50 crop (printed at 300ppi) - 600dpi scan -






ISO400 crop (printed at 300ppi) - 600dpi scan -





Yes, one can clearly see the ISO400 print has significant noise in comparision to the ISO50 control print.

BUT this is at pretty big magnification on the print - at 600dpi - is equivalent to about 40x area magnification (or 6.25x linear magnification)

Realistically I found the noise to be quite well reduced in the ISO400 (300ppi) print - yes, one can see it with the naked eye - but it is NOT as bad as the greatly magnified scan shows - 
in real-life one would probably see more like this scan at 150dpi -




This 150dpi scan would display at about 2.5x area magnification (or about 1.56x linear mag) which I would consider close scrutiny.....

So in conclusion for me - printing at high enough resolution (like better than 300ppi) would seem to reduce the noise visually on the print - 
it does not however "eliminate" the noise - it is still present at great magnifications - but with the naked eye it does not seem as prominent as in the original digital image.

*S70 Resolution Test* -

Just for interest I wanted to see how the Canon S70 would resolve the test target - so I set it up as per instructions -





However these test targets were produced LONG before digital cameras - I had to figure out the dimensions of the layout and the distance to set the camera - in the end I used the 35mm dimensions - adjusted for the 4:3 aspect ratio and set the camera distance to a 28mm lens (+about 4.4% my error) so the reading would be more or less direct in cycles or line-pairs per mm.

Center (ISO50)





Corner (ISO50)





There is noticable geometric distortion from the 28mm (equivalent) wide-angle lens.

These 600dpi scans of the 300ppi print/crops show that the Canon S70 can resolve somewhere between 30 - 33 cycles (or line-pairs) per mm equivalent in the center of the frame - perhaps a bit higher, due to my slightly longer test distance. 

There doesn't seem to be too much degradation in resolution in the corners of the frame may be about 30 cycles/mm.

These high magnification scan of the (300ppi) print crops look ugly - but the test is supposed to find the limit of the camera/lens sensor system.

In real-life the print crops look more like this to the naked eye (this is about 2.5x area magnified) -





Just out of interest here are the high magnification scans from the Blue panel of the test prints at ISO50 and ISO400 -

ISO50




ISO400


----------



## ChopperCFI (Jun 23, 2005)

Great information. I'm convinced.

Does the S70 take the first shot significantly faster than the A70? I have missed many action shots due to the delay on tha A75 I have. I love the great pictures of an empty soccer field where a player used to be when the button was pressed.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 24, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*ChopperCFI said:* Does the S70 take the first shot significantly faster than the A70? 

[/ QUOTE ]
The Canon S70 is fast but not blazingly fast like the latest generation of Dig!c II Canons such as the SD500.

Timings -

S70 timing at dpReview.com 
Off to Shot Taken LCD live view ~3.6sec

S70 Timing at Imaging-Resource.com 
Power On -> First shot 2.9 LCD turns on and lens extends forward. Average. 

A70 timing at dpReview.com 
Off to Shot Taken Wide angle (includes 0.7 power button delay) 3.5sec

A70 timing at Imaging-Resource.com -
Power On -> First shot 3.14 Canon startup screen appears and lens extends forward. About average. 

A75 Timings at Imaging-Resource.com 
Power On -> First shot 2.7 LCD turns on and lens extends forward. About average. 

So the S70 doesn't look any faster from off to shot taken (or ready to shoot) compared to the A70 - 
your A75 maybe just a bit faster.....

In contrast compared to the newer generation of SD500 (with Dig!c II processor)
Off to Shot Taken LCD live view ~1.4sec (dpReview.com)
Power On -> First shot 1.0 LCD turns on and lens extends forward. Very fast. (Imaging-Resource.com)


----------



## karlthev (Jun 24, 2005)

Well, comprehensive discussion to say the least and...thank you! I just ordered a S70 yesterday and was wondering if I'd made the best choice. My format had been 35mm up to this point. I guess I'll have some learning curve to face. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/happy14.gif


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 24, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*karlthev said:* I just ordered a S70 yesterday and was wondering if I'd made the best choice. My format had been 35mm up to this point. I guess I'll have some learning curve to face. 

[/ QUOTE ]
I too used to be a die-hard 35mm user owning several SLRs and probably more p&s than I have hands and feet to use /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif I was always pursuing the dream of being able to have the quality and versatility of an SLR in my pocket.

I shot half film and half digital for a long time - before finally giving in to doing almost all digital - and this was with a mere 2mp Canon S100 (the original Digital ELPH).

The one thing I found to be the most advantageous was being able to review one's shot immediately after taking it. This gave confirmation (or not) of the success of the shot - and led me to improve on my shots - sort of on-the-spot.

I used to think I was a good photographer (and I probably was /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif) but I continually improved using a simple digital camera - just because of the ability to review one's shots.

PLUS it costs virtually nothing to shoot more, so one is much more likely to experiment and try out new things.

I owe my style of using slow-sync flash and dragging the shutter to this kind of experimentation and reviewing.

I hope you enjoy the Canon S70 - as it does have the image quality to be at least on par with 35mm film, and the versatility/flexibility to be creative and match one's SLR system.... 

As I suggested previously without being deliberately conscious of it - I may have finally found a camera that fulfills matching the quality and versatility of my SLRs (for my usage) that fits in my pocket.

One major hint - most Digital cameras still can suffer from shutter lag - that's because they're trying to do all sorts of things before the shot - like focus, set exposure etc.

So if one simply jabs at the shutter to take the photo - one may well be disappointed that the shot might not be taken until 1/2 to maybe even a couple of seconds later.....

The big hint is to PRE-Focus the digicam - 
ie: place the focus point and half-way depress the shutter to lock focus.
Then the Canon S70 is blazingly FAST with a shutter lag (pre-focussed) of less than 0.1 sec.

Look at my pics in the links in my sig - they are almost all of musicians on stage and moving (and there are literally thousands of pics) - 
neither my old A70 nor my new S70 lacked for anything in speed when I Pre-Focus.

Best of luck - enjoy your new camera - 
at least I think you made a great choice /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif ..../ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 24, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:* These 600dpi scans of the 300ppi print/crops show that the Canon S70 can resolve somewhere between 30 - 33 cycles (or line-pairs) per mm equivalent in the center of the frame - perhaps a bit higher, due to my slightly longer test distance. 

There doesn't seem to be too much degradation in resolution in the corners of the frame may be about 30 cycles/mm.

These high magnification scan of the (300ppi) print crops look ugly - but the test is supposed to find the limit of the camera/lens sensor system.

[/ QUOTE ]
The above tests using prints at 300ppi (or about 10x8 from my 7mp images) is tesing everything from camera lens, sensor, overall system and even printing. 

So the test was perhaps a little more demanding - but maybe more real-life since it is testing the FULL-CYCLE from taking the shot to the finished print.

Most lens/film tests examine only the negatives - and since a lot of people use only the digital image to display on the web or e-mail - examining only the original digital image is also valid and may show how much loss there might (or might not) be in the printing stage.

Being pedantic I retook my series of resolution test shots this time at the correct distance (for the 35mm film equivalent).

These are the UNretouched 100% (actual size) crops from the test images comparing ISO100-400 (all Fine JPG) against the ISO50 SuperFine JPG control standard










As one can see the actual size image is significantly smaller than the 600dpi scans I did of the 300ppi print - and they obviously don't look as ugly as the hugely magnified print image.

At the correct distance - the central resoution is still somewhere between 30-33 cycles or line-pairs per mm equivalent.
Corner resolution is closer to 30 cycles or line-pairs per mm equivalent.

There is image degradation at the higher ISO sentitivities like ISO400 - noise is visible on closer examination - but surprisingly not too ugly (I don't understanbd this - perhaps it's because we're looking at a mainly black and white image? - I'll examine the colored panels later and report back).

There doesn't seem to be much degradation of the actual resolving power even at ISO400 despite the noise - the 30 cycle line-pairs group is still resolved, perhaps the 33 cycles is not quite as clear as on the lower ISO shots?

Just for interest and to be more comparable to the 600dpi scanned prints - I UpSampled - Up-Sized the white panel of the ISO50 control shot to show what the image looks like hugely magnified










I leave the images to speak for themselves.....


----------



## KevinL (Jun 26, 2005)

Vincent, glad you THE camera you were looking for /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

You've made some excellent points. I've owned the original S100, the Powershot S40 and now the DRebel XT. Had the first two been able to deliver Rebel XT-like startup speed, AF speed and first-shot speed, I may never have become a digital SLR owner. Most digital cameras take forever to "gather their wits" as has been said on another forum. The Rebel XT starts faster than I can bring the camera up to my eye - and on occasion when the camera is already up at eye level, faster than I can frame the shot and take the decision to pull the trigger! Plus lightning fast AF (even with the kit lens and its mechanical drive, as opposed to ring USM drive on my other lens) and shutter lag timings that feel like heaven to someone who is used to waiting for 1-2 seconds for the S40 to get it all figured out before clicking. Sometimes one doesn't have time to prefocus, I have even shot a few "blind" without having had the opportunity to look through the viewfinder. I framed the shot in my mind, pulled the camera up and clicked it off - perfect! If I had looked, it was almost certain I would have missed it. Surprisingly, these weren't taken in an environment normally regarded as challenging - it was snapshots of friends, sometimes capturing a candid moment that lasts for a fraction of a second can be just as demanding. Thanks to the ultra fast speed, I've shot photos that I never thought possible and that still leave my jaw hanging when I reviewed them. 

Useable ISO 1600 and inherently accessible controls (vs menus on the S40 where I would have had to dig for every shot) to provide *FAST* access to the controls I need is a huge plus. I looked up one day and saw a parachutist descending through the sky. How often do you see those? And he sure as heck wasn't gonna wait for me to dig through a menu to switch to AI servo focus (full time tracking AF) - but I had it in half a second and got a few good shots. 

Agreed, digital is fantastic because of the ability to review shots. It's free, so I just keep firing away. Emptied a 1GB CF clip at 8mpixels yesterday. Loved every moment. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif (with film I'd be too busy counting $$ to shoot properly)

But you also make some really good points about the SLRs being big. The day they can pack all of the above including a 27-135mm (film equiv) image stabilized lens into something the size of the SD500/IXUS 700 or even the S70, /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/takeit.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/takeit.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/takeit.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/paypal.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif No way am I saying you made the wrong choice, in fact I am glad you found exactly what you were looking for, for your unique needs. If I wasn't specifically in the market for a DSLR and the extra features, either of those two cameras would have been my logical upgrade path. 

And rant time /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif Why can't they make the Rebel XT in Nitrolon? That would make it my perfect camera. Unfortunately, mine has acquired a couple of character marks on the outside.. same with lights, the first scratch hurts the most. And Nitrolon owns me - it's closer to fiberglass than plastic, shrugs off not just scratches but outright ABUSE.. maybe Canon needs to ring Surefire and ask what they make the SF G2 out of /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 27, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:* But you also make some really good points about the SLRs being big. The day they can pack all of the above including a 27-135mm (film equiv) image stabilized lens into something the size of the SD500/IXUS 700 or even the S70, 
No way am I saying you made the wrong choice, in fact I am glad you found exactly what you were looking for, for your unique needs. If I wasn't specifically in the market for a DSLR and the extra features, either of those two cameras would have been my logical upgrade path. 

[/ QUOTE ]

This is entirely the point - different cameras suit different needs (... and even personalities(?) /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif ).

I have owned several pretty "serious" 35mm SLRs since 1970..... including the Canon F-1, Olympus OM-2n, OM-4, Minolta Maxxum 7xi.....

Despite all of these being fabulous cameras - and I have taken some photos with them that I have been particularly happy with - including competition winners (and one where I didn't even enter the photo /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif) - I used 35mm p&s cameras out of choice for my musician shots - because of their portability, being less imposing, better optical viewfinders in darker environments, and actual quicker working.

It was fairly natural for me to migrate to p&s style digicams for my same types of photo subjects.

Digicam of the Canon A70 & S70 type are far more versatile with a lot more exposure control than most 35mm p&s. 

They satisfy my photographic needs and give me enough contol for my creativity.

DSLRs are obviously superior photographic instruments - but their superiority although still very desirable/covettable - do not sigificantly affect my photography - perhaps I have learnt to live with my digicam's shortcomings - afterall I managed with an intermittently faulty Canon A70 for all my China shots - but I don't think so.

If the DSLR would show significant advantages for me - then I think I would be using one. I am not so perverse to struggle with an inferior piece of equipment - when there are obvious options open to me......

I take too many photos not to notice - for example my Canon S70 was received June/7 - less than 20 days ago - I am on shot # 1,735.....

I spent the better part of yesterday at our local blues society festival -
Back Porch Blues 

and a separate album on the legendary

Hubert Sumlin 
- Howlin' Wolf's guitarist and "son". 
Hubert is my all time guitar hero - 
he is also Eric Clapton's - who refused to play the Howlin' Wolf London Sessions unless Hubert was there......


Most of my photos tend to be in dark clubs - so daylight photos are not so common - but look at the (technical) quality of this shot from the Back Porch Blues album -




- to me that leaves very little to be desired in terms of (technical) improvement out of a camera.....


----------



## UnknownVT (Jun 29, 2005)

maybe at this point I'm just talking to myself /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Nevertheless I wanted to say more about the image quality of the Canon S70.

This weekend I had the occassion to shoot a couple of outdoor musical events - one where unfortunately I did not get a photo pass and had to shoot from way back.

The Canon S70 has a nice zoom range of 28-100mm equivalent - which is very suitable for most of my photography -
BUT on this occassion even at the maximum telephoto end it was woefully lacking.....

Or so I thought /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif

Checkout the last 14 photos (all marked with *050626) of this album:

13 Stories 2005 Pt.2 

They are one of my favorite bands to photograph - for pretty obvious reasons /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Look at this -





It's a pretty severe crop from this full-frame shot -





I was pretty impressed - as normally with my previous cameras - including my 35mm SLRs** - I would consider this pretty marginal for quality.......

Well, OK with a good system one probably could squeeze the crop/shot out to be pretty reasonable - maybe it's not _that_ "amazing"....

OK, how about this one?





I think I would be pretty happy with this shot - there doesn't seem to be all that much compromise - certainly not in technical quality anyway.....

Here's the full-frame shot -





Now even I'm impressed! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[** just in case - 
a 35mm shot would probably retain the resolution and sharpness - but such a crop probably would start showing image degrading grain and lose some other image quality aspects - like color saturation and contrast - which requires specialized pro work to restore.]


----------



## Vikas Sontakke (Jul 1, 2005)

Great writeup!

I would like to know which albums are from S100. I have S410 and wanted to find out how to use it in low light condition.

Thanks,
- Vikas


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 1, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*Vikas Sontakke said:* I would like to know which albums are from S100. I have S410 and wanted to find out how to use it in low light condition.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks.

I bought my Canon S100 (original Digital ELPH) in July/2000, and replaced it in September/2003 with a Canon A70 - 
so any shots between July/2000 and Sept/2003 are either film, or mostly the S100 (my film shots mostly have a date imprint, and they are likely to retain the 3:2 aspect ratio of the regular 35mm film format).

This means that there will be NONE in the first two links of my sig. (from 2005 and 2004 only) -

BUT this 3rd link -

http://UnknownVincent.cjb.net/ 

is going to be mostly from the S100.

The S100 images tend to be noisier in comparison to the A70 or the S70 which have progressively improved on noise respectively, even at lower sensitivities like ISO100. But in no case is it objectionable - this is just in comparison. 

Your S410 is at least 3, if not 4 generations newer than the original S100 - technology had made great strides to improve the noise and basic image quality. I'll bet your ISO400 probably is marginally acceptable - and if you re-size the full 4mp image down to web size like 480x360 - noise would be virtually eliminated (see my earlier posts above on noise "reduction" from down-sampling the image)

The S100 was amazing in terms of focus-lock confirmation - I hardly ever had any difficulties locking focus in low light - like I do with the S70 (or A70) - 
BUT conversely I have yet to see a single S70 shot that I consider out of focus (I'm on shot count #1,868). 
Whereas I have some S100 shots that had focus confirmation but were GROSSLY out of focus.... 
not many, but enough for me to notice and comment on it.

The S100 flash is actually pretty powerful for such a tiny camera - within range it does a great job on the Slow-Synchronized (night) shots.

So if your S410 improved on the S100 - then I would say it is entirely suitable for lower light photography. 

Only one word of caution I think Canon changed from a bright white light for their focus-assist, to an orange-yellow one - which has caused some difficulties locking focus in dimmer conditions - 
however please note my comments about my S70's focussing ability.....


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 3, 2005)

*Viewfinders - S70 vs. DSLR* .....

a thought occured to me last night as I was taking photos in yet another dark music venue.....

Let's back up just a bit - among other digicams that were under serious consideration were DSLRs like the 6mp D Rebel, the newer 8mp D Rebel XT and the G6 (as well as A95).

Size was an issue as I literally EDC (EveryDay Carry) my digicam - every single day whenever I am out of my house. DSLRs and the G6 would be just too bulky for convenient carry. The G6 got eliminated because although the f/2 aperture lens would be "superior" for lower light photography - the fact that the widest angle was still 35mm meant it loses out.

The DSLR's although bulky - I may still have considered them because of their pretty obvious superiority as shooting machines. In the end I decided for the S70 because of the portability and most of the positive attributes and image quality of the DSLRs from the new 7mp sensor..... 
One thing I did NOT think of at the time was what occured to me last night (see later**)

The A95 was attractive because it was compact/portable - retained the Compact Flash and used AA batteries like my previous A70. It also gains the attractive tilt and swivel LCD screen. However becaue of the widest angle of the lens was 38mm - which is about 10% narrower than the 35mm I had been using on the A70 - it didn't make it. From test reviews the 5mp chip was surprisingly noisier than the 7mp. What about the twisty LCD?

Unlike many others I seldom use the LCD monitor as a viewfinder. For my photography I have to be able to see detail and fleeting expressions clearly. I have not found any LCD screen that could be clear, or fast enough to do this.

Another very, very important point to me - is that I shoot alot at deliberately slow shutter speeds** (dragging the shutter) and have to be able to hold the camera still - the typical two hand arms extended hold for LCD viewing is much less stable than being able to push the camera against my face for an extra point of support.

** Viewfinders -
First let me be clear I fully acknowledge the superiority of TTL (through the lens) SLR viewfiders over the typical squinty optical viewfinders found on p&s cameras - this was one of the prime considerations for the DSLR.

BUT last night I realized my inadvertant correct decision of choosing the S70.

Since I shoot a lot with SLOW shutter speeds in the typical range of 1/8 to 1 sec - I have to hold the camera as still as I can (no, I obviously do not eliminate all camera shake) - to do this I have to follow-through - ie: keep my eye on the target.....

I think some of you who are following all this may have got it .....

On DSLRs and any SLR there is a blackout during exposure - which is negligible for normal daylight exposures and shutter speeds as the blackout is a mere blink.

BUT when the shutter speed is for example about 1/3 sec this blackout becomes very noticable and it would make any follow-through much more difficult. This didn't occured to me until last night when the majority of my exposures were at a deliberate 0.4 sec and 1sec. There would be no way a DSLR could be held with follow-through for me.

Now I understand why many legendary photographers chose rangefinder cameras (like Leicas) over SLRs for low light photography......

With a typical direct vision optical viewfinder there is no blackout and allows me follow through.....

Hence (retrospectively) my "correct" choice of the Canon S70 over some very tough and superior competition.

13 Stories - both shots at 0.4 sec -


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 9, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:*
I was amazed at the 1200mAh rating in the ad - and then to receive those batteries with a label marked 1500mAh - was like almost too good to be true . /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/huh.gif

The $14 I paid for each battery even at my estimated much lower rating of 590mAh would still seem fairly "good value" - 
but I probably would not have bought them if they listed at only 590mAh.....

But to be fair, I think I should reserve any judgement or further comments until I hear back from SterlingTEK on this huge discreprency in battery capacity. 

[/ QUOTE ]

SterlingTEK wrote back with standard return instructions and form - which I duely filled out, and returned the 2 batteries and asked for my return postage to be refunded.

I received the replacements a couple of days ago.

These were labelled as 1200mAh (compared to the previous returned batteries which were labelled 1500mAh see photo in previous post or click Here ) -





I am using one of them (fully charged first) in my S70 right now, and carry the other fully charged as a spare - it will take me a few days before I can report on their initial capacity for my usage.

The service from SterlingTEK has been good their shipping was fast. And although impersonal - the return for replacement was hassel free with no arguments. They even refunded my return shipping. So as a merchant they are good to deal with - I reserve my comments on the actual mechandise (ie: batteries) until I've had time to assess their capacity for my usage.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 10, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:*
These were labelled as 1200mAh (compared to the previous returned batteries which were labelled 1500mAh
I am using one of them (fully charged first) in my S70 right now, and carry the other fully charged as a spare - it will take me a few days before I can report on their initial capacity for my usage.

[/ QUOTE ]
I took photos at a concert last night and the first new SterlingTEK 1200mAh battery managed 266 shots to the camera's power-down.

This at first sight may seem very good capacity for a new battery on its first full-charge discharge cycle - 
BUT most of my 200 or so shots were withOUT flash - about 60+shots were with flash.... don't forget I do NOT use the LCD screen as the viewfinder - I use the optical viewfinder from deliberate choice, but with a 2 sec review on the LCD, so this is not my "typical" shooting situation - where I use a lot of slow-sync flash which would significantly reduce the shot count.

For example for the times I ran the supplied Canon NB-2LH battery right to camera power-down - I managed to get 222, and 272 shots - and these were more with my typical shooting.....

Please don't get me wrong, I am encouraged with this initial result so far (with my assumption that Li-ion batteries need a few cycles to reach full capacity - please correct me if I'm wrong....) - 
will report more later as I get more results with my more typical shooting situation.


----------



## KevinL (Jul 10, 2005)

Wow, time to slap that one on a battery analyzer with a discharge meter. 

I have a pair of aging NB2Ls from my S40, very well used over the years, and yet when I clock them on my Maha C777Plus2 in discharge mode they still register 500+ mAH. This is within still close of their rated capacity of 570mAH, especially considering that these cells are close to 3 years old and have been used on a very regular basis. No idea how many cycles, "a lot" would describe it well.

BTW, it's been noted by one of our other battery gurus with an analyzer that lithium ions do not seem to benefit from cycling, but NiMH cells do.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 10, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:*
Wow, time to slap that one on a battery analyzer with a discharge meter. 
BTW, it's been noted by one of our other battery gurus with an analyzer that lithium ions do not seem to benefit from cycling, but NiMH cells do. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks Kevin.

Unfortunately I do not have a battery analyser - is there some relatively easy way to rig one up using reasonably commonly available components? I have a DMM (digital multimeter) with 10A DC capability - but that's about the extent of the analytical stuff I have....

Otherwise I'll just have to do my typical shot capacity reports....

I "suspect" these newer generic NB-2LH probably are not 1200mAh as labelled.... 
since you've already suggested that the NB-2LH use none other than a pair of RCR123 cells which have max capacity of 750-800mAh - 
so that's probably the best I can hope for regardless any labelling. 

So I'm really looking for comparable capacity to my one supplied Canon NB-2LH which is rated at 720mAh, and I get about 222-272 shots for my typical shooting......

20-27% LESS as in the previous 2 examples of the SterlingTek labelled "1500mAh" - would be very disappointing.

Although in all practical use if I can get better than about 220+ shots out of them would be OK for my use - that means I'd be reasonably happy with a "true" capacity of about 11% less than the original Canon NB-2LH (720mAh) - ie: about 650mAh? (ie: just about 10% better than those previous SterlingTEK "1500mAh")

Thank you for the information regarding the benefits of cycling on Li-ions - from my limited experience the Li-ion batteries as typical proprietary batteries for digicams seem to need about 2-3 charge discharge cycles to reach full/peak capacity - but I am willing to accept that may just be my inconsistency in the way I record capacity.

I'll just have to continue to use the 2 new SterlingTEK "1200mAh" and the one Canon NB-2LH (720mAh) and see what I get.

FWIW - further searching I have found some NB-2LH at 1500mAh at $3.99 - BUT S&H is $6.99 for the first item, $2.99 for each additional item - but even then the total cost including shipping for even just one NB-2LH "1500mAh" is less than $11.....

Search on eBay.com for "NB-2LH 1500mAh" reveals 4 BuyItNow vendors who have different names but very similar verbage in their display ads - Here's One 


Thanks


----------



## KevinL (Jul 11, 2005)

Hmm, I believe there was a way to do it, using a big beefy resistor and Ohm's Law. Problem is that I'm not sure how accurate it is given the fact that battery voltage drops and as Vf drops, the current dissipated through the resistor dwindles. 

In my mind I'm thinking you could get a big fat 5W capable resistor of 30 ohms with a good heatsink (though it will only be dissipating 3W and should be ok), which will pull down ~250mA of current. Measure voltage until it drops to something like 7V (keep your 'termination' voltage consistent) or you can measure it until the pack's low-voltage protection circuit cuts off (may not be reliable or suitable for our uses). 

Theoretically, such a pack should last for 1500mAH/250mA avg current, or 6 hours. 

You could use a lower ohm value to pull a higher current if your resistor can take it, or parallel the resistors and their heatsinks. 2 x 30 ohm in parallel would work and double average draw to 500mA. Expect pack at nominal rated capacity to last 3 hours, but I'm projecting you'll be done in 90 minutes /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Get a 5W resistor, even though for the values I've stated above I only expect each resistor to handle slightly over 2W of power. I always over-spec to avoid unintended consequences and resistors are cheap. 

You might want to ask the electronics gurus though, I'm just a tweaker and I might have missed something.


Edit: I think we have our answer. Check out Evan's post about the LM317 constant-current regulator. 

You'll need to find a big heatsink for the LM317, any substantial chunk of metal should do the job.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 11, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:* I'm thinking you could get a big fat 5W capable resistor of 30 ohms with a good heatsink (though it will only be dissipating 3W and should be ok), which will pull down ~250mA of current. Measure voltage until it drops to something like 7V (keep your 'termination' voltage consistent) or you can measure it until the pack's low-voltage protection circuit cuts off (may not be reliable or suitable for our uses). 

Theoretically, such a pack should last for 1500mAH/250mA avg current, or 6 hours. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for thinking this out Kevin - much appreciated.

That sounds about right. I think capacity rating is supposed to be measured at C/10 - although c/2.5 is probably more realistic for digicam usage......

The main concern I have is possible battery damage due to over-discharge. Since I should stop the test when the battery drops to 7V - this probably means I have to monitor the test - since I don't really think that "1200mAh" capacity rating is realistic.

Overall, I think although it may be longer and theoretically less scientific/accurate - I think actual usage in my digicam is a safer and more realistic way of measuring capacity of actual usage....

I've long given up on the labeled rating of these SterlingTEK generic NB-2LH batteries, since the "1500mAh" managed about 20-27% LESS than the Canon NB-2LH (720mAh) - 
when I reported this and SterlingTEK sent me replacements they sent me ones labeled at "1200mAh" - if these perform at better capacity than those returned "1500mAh" ones then there is NO corrolation between the labeled capacity and actual usage capacity.... 
Unless there is an inverse/negative relationship? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

Here's a Reference I found while searching the Canon Talk Forums at dpReview.com
This is the Direct Link to the clone battery tests refered to.

My Edit after your Edit /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:* Edit: I think we have our answer. Check out Evan's post about the LM317 constant-current regulator. 

You'll need to find a big heatsink for the LM317, any substantial chunk of metal should do the job. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Many thanks Kevin for following up /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif - 
I'll pursue the LM317 course and see if I can run some tests (is there a good easy source to get a LM317?), hopefully without damaging the batteries.....


----------



## KevinL (Jul 11, 2005)

Digikey and Radio Shack have been mentioned in the past, you'll need to follow up on that thread as to what sense resistor to use. I remember from my previous research into the LM317 that 3.9 ohms sense resistor gives you ~320mA and halving the resistance gives you double the current - which was about there with what I wanted. These parts should be no more than a few dollars.

You're right, Sterlingtek doesn't seem to impress the folks behind that webpage. I'm lucky because I have a local dealer that rebadges some affordable OEM NB-2LHs under their name, but the capacities reported are honest and the batteries perform well. Around $20 per battery, definitely not the cheapest but then again I would prefer not to risk dirt cheap cells in my 350D. Never mind the batts, I'm worried about my DSLR! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mpr.gif


I had a cheap and cheerful R123 charger toast itself, complete with hair-raising sound effects, so I tend to prefer the quality goods.. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif plenty of cautionary advice on CPF about lithium ion safety..


BTW, if you ever want to dispose of those batteries, pry them open (CAREFULLY!) first, and check out what is inside, maybe take a few photos for us. Let's see if there are really R123s in there and whether they got 1500mAH by doing 750mAH (per R123) x 2 /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif if you actually find capacities marked on each individual cell, that would be truly informative.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 11, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:* You're right, Sterlingtek doesn't seem to impress the folks behind that webpage. I'm lucky because I have a local dealer that rebadges some affordable OEM NB-2LHs under their name, but the capacities reported are honest and the batteries perform well. 
BTW, if you ever want to dispose of those batteries, pry them open (CAREFULLY!) first, and check out what is inside, maybe take a few photos for us.

[/ QUOTE ]
At about $14 a piece these are not that cheap to destroy.... I'll see what I get capacity-wise - if they're "satisfactory" ie: averaging about 220+ shots for my usage I may keep them - otherwise I'll return them - again.

SterlingTEK appears to have a good reputation - at least in their dealings. 

Again I'll delay/reserve comments about these latest "1200mAh" batteries until I get some more indicative capacities for my usage.

Thanks for helping out.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 12, 2005)

I don't want to sound like a shill/shrill(?) for the Canon S70 - but in my humble estimation it is the best digicam I've ever owned, and it "might" just be the best single camera I've ever owned.

You might think this is a blessing -
as most people "think" that a good camera = better pictures....
well ok, conditionally it might, with better technical results - but photography is still about capturing the image one sees, and being able to commuicate that image (sorry to sound all "filosofical" /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif)
For me it's become a challenge - because the 7mp Canon S70 has effectively REMOVED any excuses for bad shots......
perhaps that's just a different way of thinking - 
but no longer can I use the excuse that the digicam I use can be considered a "toy" an interim measure that's just more convenient than my "real" 35mm film photography stuff.

Since 7mp gives me the magical 10x8 at 300ppi - which is the long held intenationally accepted publication quality standard - and the ability to print at 200ppi to some 16x12 or dropping to about 150ppi to 20x16.......
I no longer have excuses.

Just to show how pleased I am with the Canon S70 - here are some shots I took the opther night of Mike Clark's Prescription Trio with Robert Walter and Skerik - just in case - Mike Clark was the drummer with (Herbie Hancock's) HeadHunters -
















The last shot was from the back and over the small but enthusiastic audience - ISO400, -1 stop compensation, 1/10sec Handheld........
yes, the full-sized image shows obvious noise/grain, and there is some movement too.... 
but down-sampled the noise is greatly reduced, and the movement not as obvious.......

Here's the link to the Mike Clark album for more photos from this gig.....


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 14, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:* I took photos at a concert last night and the first new SterlingTEK 1200mAh battery managed 266 shots to the camera's power-down.

This at first sight may seem very good capacity for a new battery on its first full-charge discharge cycle - 
BUT most of my 200 or so shots were withOUT flash - about 60+shots were with flash.... don't forget I do NOT use the LCD screen as the viewfinder - I use the optical viewfinder from deliberate choice, but with a 2 sec review on the LCD, so this is not my "typical" shooting situation - where I use a lot of slow-sync flash which would significantly reduce the shot count. 

[/ QUOTE ]
FWIW - 
I depleted the second "1200mAh" SterlingTEK NB-2LH replacement battery - this is on its first fully charge to discharge cycle, and closer to my normal typical shooting, over a few days, it managed 207 shots to power-down by the camera.

At first I was a bit concerned because the camera showed the low battery warning at after 185 shots.

But what's encouraged and somewhat impressed me was that I shot with my typical setting (1/4sec, slow-sync flash, 2sec LCD review) basically to "use up" the remaining capacity, and the battery did not want to seem to power-down, this did not happen until at 207 shots.

So.... so far not too bad - it is short of my desired 220+ shots, but looks close......


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 21, 2005)

NB-2LH batteries - summary of the number of shots I got using the Canon S70 - from fully charged to depletion/camera power-down -

OEM Canon NB-2LH rated at 720mAh - 
222, 272 shots

previously reported
SterlingTEK "1500mAh" -
returned for replacement due to unsatisfactory capacity -
(#1) 170, 196 shots
(#2) 191, 182 shots

the replacements -
SterlingTEK "1200mAh" -
(#1) 266**, 172 shots
(** NOT typical of my normal shooting - majority were withOUT flash)
(#2) 207, 190 shots

So in actual usage - even though I am probably not very "consistent" it appears that these latest generic SterlingTEK "1200mAh" NB-2LH batteries did NO better than the "1500mAh" ones I returned for these replacements.

I think I can say these SterlingTEK "1200mAh" batteries probably would last somewhere around 190 shots for my typical usage - whereas the original Canon NB-2LH (rated at 720mAh) probably will manage something in excess of 220 shots per charge.

I'll probably keep these SterlingTEK batteries despite the fact they are NO where near their labelled rating of "1200mAh" - but for the price I paid at about $14 each shipped - they are still good value and the very good service and no hassel exchange from SterlingTEK gives me some confidence should I ever have a problem with these.


----------



## KevinL (Jul 23, 2005)

Well, at least they are not complete duds /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif though the battery manufacturer could be a little bit more accurate with regards to the capacity. 

BTW, regarding your earlier comment about rangefinder cameras, your S70 is essentially an electronic rangefinder based camera with no mirror and no blackout while shooting. Seems perfectly suited to what you need it to do. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif 

I was shooting on drive mode earlier today and I couldn't see ANYTHING through my DSLR viewfinder (well, not with the mirror up all the time in continuous shooting mode) so I just stood back and watched it in person /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif fortunately I didn't need to recompose every shot, I just nailed it to the tripod and kept shooting.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 25, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:* Well, at least they are not complete duds /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif though the battery manufacturer could be a little bit more accurate with regards to the capacity.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, that's my main disappointment.

If the generic battery suppliers were honest with their capacity ratings - and if the NB-2LH batteries are probably based on 2x R-CR123 - then the maximum capacity that one can expect is going to be 750-800mAh, so to me anything rated above that level is going to be ...well... "optimistic".

Getting back to the fact that I'm getting about 75% the capacity compared to the Canon NB-2LH at less than 1/3 the price - is still good value for money......
It's just those "Not Very Honest" capacity ratings.


[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:* BTW, regarding your earlier comment about rangefinder cameras, your S70 is essentially an electronic rangefinder based camera with no mirror and no blackout while shooting. Seems perfectly suited to what you need it to do. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif 

I was shooting on drive mode earlier today and I couldn't see ANYTHING through my DSLR viewfinder (well, not with the mirror up all the time in continuous shooting mode) so I just stood back and watched it in person /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif fortunately I didn't need to recompose every shot, I just nailed it to the tripod and kept shooting. 

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, tripod mounting makes mirror blackout moot - unless one were panning to follow the action.

Unfortunately for my usage a tripod is just out of the question as I have to move around and follow the action - this already difficult in a crowd with just a handheld camera - it is probably very awkward if not dangerous with a tripod, but I have thought seriously about aided support to considering a mono-pod - but again it is still very awkward and the mobility issue far outweighs being able to use a DSLR.

So the direct vision optical viewfinder is much, much better for me. Even the fact that it only shows about 80% the image I have gotten used to it and there is an advantage allowing for a slight margin for framing error.

I more than acknowledge that an SLR/DSLR is a much superior photographic machine under most other circumstances, and the fact that I've owned numerous "top" 35mm film SLR shows that - but unfortunately not for my current kind of shooting.

Thanks,


----------



## Seth (Jul 25, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:*

Unfortunately for my usage a tripod is just out of the question as I have to move around and follow the action - this already difficult in a crowd with just a handheld camera - it is probably very awkward if not dangerous with a tripod, but I have thought seriously about aided support to considering a mono-pod - but again it is still very awkward and the mobility issue far outweighs being able to use a DSLR.



[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Vincent,

maybe a chest-pod could help?

chestpod 

How it looks in actual use can be better seen on this page ( scroll down to about the middle ):

chestpod in use 

Hope I could help /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Seth


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 25, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*Seth said:*
maybe a chest-pod could help?
chestpod 


[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, Seth, a chest-pod would help .... 
in fact I actually have one from my earlier attempt at video days /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif

It still comes down to being able to follow the action with the viewfinder - which I still can't with the (D)SLR blackout even if the camera is stationary with a tri-, mono- or chest-pod.

But it probably is the best of the bunch.

Thanks for the suggestion and reminder.

Unfortunately it still boils down to my earlier take on portability - a (D)SLR and chest-pod is substantially less easy to carry than just a compact p&s style camera - I even considered the Canon G6 a bit too bulky - and although there was a moment's hesitation with the latest drop in pricing on the very capable Olympus C-7070 - that also is a bit too bulky for me - especially in comparison to the Canon S70....

and I do not feel there is much advantage of any other type of camera over the S70...... 
(for me and YMMV)

Thanks,


----------



## KevinL (Jul 26, 2005)

Correct, 2 pounds of DSLR is not what you want in that kind of crowd. I'm a right-tool-for-the-right-task kinda guy, there are occasions where I would still opt for my older S40. Yup, still a valuable camera and takes great pictures. Nothing wrong with it except that at times, I need more CF - but I can always borrow the 350D's 1GB Sandisk anyway, so problem solved.

But just had to repeat a really funny quote from somewhere else on the Net (I forgot where). "Try taking your DSLR and tripod into that mosh pit!" /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crackup.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crackup.gif 

Vincent.. that quote sums up your reasons perfectly. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif no way would I take my precious cam into that kinda situation!!

BTW, Canon has their new prosumer S2 IS with image stabilizer (the "IS" part), it might help a bit with your situation and stability. The problem is that the S2 is substantially bigger than the S70. I am using their new 17-85mm IS USM lens on my DSLR and I must say that the stabilizer totally owns me for all those occasions where you can't haul ANY 'pod. The good thing about the S2 is that it has IS, without forcing you to trade up to the bulk and heft of an SLR. The S2 has no mirror, it still follows the normal digital camera design. So far, apart from its direct ancestor the S1, no other model in Canon's digital line (excluding SLRs, which as discussed above don't suit your requirements) has IS.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 26, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:* BTW, Canon has their new prosumer S2 IS with image stabilizer (the "IS" part), it might help a bit with your situation and stability. The problem is that the S2 is substantially bigger than the S70. 

[/ QUOTE ]
The Canon S2-IS is indeed attractive with its image stabilization.

BUT, and it's a BIG but(t /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif) -
It uses an EVF (Electronic ViewFinder) so it still has the blackout or freeze problem on long exposures - 
Then, its widest angle is 36mm - substantially narrower than the 28mm of the S70 
and 
as you know it is a lot BULKIER/less portable than the S70. 
The telephoto end to 432mm is one of its main appeals - but I hardly use focal lengths longer than about 80-90mm in the venues I shoot ....

It obviously is a very appealing camera - but NOT for my usage.......

So I do realize you're all trying to be helpful - 
WHY would I even want to consider the Canon S2-IS with ALL those compromises - 
when I've been saying all along the Canon S70 suits me really well? 
Is it that you guys don't believe me? 
or do you think I really don't know what I'm doing, 
and my Canon S70 is such a WRONG and BAD choice? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
(just to be clear - 
I'm not being rude - just joking with ya - 
I do appreciate all the suggestions)


----------



## Seth (Jul 26, 2005)

Vincent,

seems like you do a lot of low-light photo´s.

Lately, I had to do the same and found out my Canon S230 isn´t very satisfactory in this aspect, even at ISO200 - can you say *noise*? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon15.gif 

So I´m thinking about a good low-light performer that doesn´t empty my bank-account too hard.

Almost all cam´s I know about have a min. aperture of 2,8 besides one I found by coincidence: Sony DSC-S85 which has a min. aperture of 2.0, images made with this cam under low-light conditions can be found here: Sony S85 at low light .

So at least *I* consider buying a second cam for occasions where I expect dim lighting /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Seth


----------



## greenlight (Jul 26, 2005)

Right! I have been searching for a digicam too, but the reviews don't mention low light performance much. I see people taking pics in concerts, but suspect that some aren't getting the best images they could get.


----------



## UnknownVT (Jul 27, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*Seth said:*
seems like you do a lot of low-light photo´s.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's an understatement and a half..... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Between June/7 when I got the Canon S70 and July/20 - I put 3,302 shots through it and most are low(er) light shots.

Please see the examples posted here and go to the links in my sig to see for yourself - there are 80+ albums of multiple entires from this year alone - last year I put up over 100 albums (probably over 3,000 photos)

Mostly in dark small clubs..... that's why I'm so interested in talking about the right amount of light for flashlights on CPF - and my use of yellow to conserve any dark adaption I've managed to acquire........


[ QUOTE ]
*Seth said:*Lately, I had to do the same and found out my Canon S230 isn´t very satisfactory in this aspect, even at ISO200 - can you say *noise*? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon15.gif 

[/ QUOTE ] 
All the shots in 2004 and shots before June/7/2005 were on a Canon A70 - which does not have very good high ISO performance either - its noise characteristics would be similar to the S230 at ISO200 and higher.

I live with that - even on my new Canon S70 - I tend to use ISO100 or ISO50 - but that suits my "style' of dragging the shutter to get the deliberate motion blur - which does not suit everyone......

Previous to that I shot the same types of photos on the Canon S100 - the original Digital ELPH - which didn't even allow ISO adjustments - and was fixed at ISO100.

All three digicams only had max apertures of f/2.8

[ QUOTE ]
*Seth said:*So I´m thinking about a good low-light performer that doesn´t empty my bank-account too hard.

[/ QUOTE ]

The ideal is of course a DSLR - the original Canon Digital Rebel (300D) with lens can be found for as low as $580 refurbished delivered, or $650 new delivered. This will allow shooting at ISO1600 that's better than a lot of p&s consumer digicams at ISO200.

[ QUOTE ]
*Seth said:* Almost all cam´s I know about have a min. aperture of 2,8 besides one I found by coincidence: Sony DSC-S85 which has a min. aperture of 2.0, images made with this cam under low-light conditions can be found here: Sony S85 at low light .

So at least *I* consider buying a second cam for occasions where I expect dim lighting /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
The Sony S85 was quite a nice digicam, and on paper seems like a solution of sorts - but beware when I used one it seemed sluggish in response in focus in lower levels of light - and slow with its pre-focussed shutter lag.

Also it was not capable of doing slow-sync flash which was a must for me.

If you don't use the optical viewfinder - you might want to look at the new Fuji F10 which has very good performance at high ISO comparable to DSLRs.......

Fuji F10 Review at dcResource.com 

or the earlier Canon Powershot G-series (which do have optical viewfinders) like the G2, G3 - those had good response times for their time/class, and very good f/2 lenses.


----------



## pradeep1 (Aug 3, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*UnknownVT said:*
I had to buy a new digicam - 

my previous Canon A70 (3mp) was worn out after 21 months and putting some 60K shots through it - it became unreliable I often missed shots because of its bad bahavior. 

[/ QUOTE ]

You took 60,000 shots in 21 months? That's about 3000 a month. What were you shooting that required such heavy use? 

If anyone is interested, check out my photo gallery:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=329507

Pradeep


----------



## UnknownVT (Aug 3, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*pradeep1 said:*
You took 60,000 shots in 21 months? That's about 3000 a month. What were you shooting that required such heavy use? 

[/ QUOTE ]
Please just simply look at the links in my sig.

This year 2005 alone I have already put up 89 albums of multiple entries.
http://UnknownVT2005.cjb.net/

Last year 2004 I had over 100 albums - probably around 3,000 photos posted......
http://UnknownVT.cjb.net/

These are just the ones I process and post. 
The photos are used on band's web sites (eg: Blind Boys of Alabama - 2nd set from bottom of page)


----------



## pradeep1 (Aug 3, 2005)

I see, you shoot semi-professionally for the bands? That's cool. Have you ever thought of doing with a digital SLR? You can do so much more with one of those.

Pradeep


----------



## KevinL (Aug 4, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*pradeep1 said:*
I see, you shoot semi-professionally for the bands? That's cool. Have you ever thought of doing with a digital SLR? You can do so much more with one of those.

Pradeep 

[/ QUOTE ]

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif !!! You can't say that on his thread, he absolutely goes nuts if anybody mentions it /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif (just kidding)

We covered that a little while ago. He's happy with his setup, a DSLR could be difficult to maneuver in his situation.

By the way, are you the same pradeep1 on photography-on-the.net? I read them but have not registered. (350D owner slowly building collection of glass)


----------



## UnknownVT (Aug 4, 2005)

[ QUOTE ]
*KevinL said:*
[ QUOTE ]
*pradeep1 said:*
I see, you shoot semi-professionally for the bands? That's cool. Have you ever thought of doing with a digital SLR? You can do so much more with one of those. 

[/ QUOTE ]

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/sssh.gif !!! You can't say that on his thread, he absolutely goes nuts if anybody mentions it /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif (just kidding)

We covered that a little while ago. He's happy with his setup, a DSLR could be difficult to maneuver in his situation.

[/ QUOTE ]
Pradeep,

Yep, pretty seriously too - some of the reasoning are stated quite clearly in earlier this thread..... 

(D)SLR's have a one distinct disadvantage, compared to a direct vission optical viewfinder - when following through on a long exposure (>1/8 sec) the (D)SLR blackout makes it very difficult - at least for me.....


----------

