Canon Powershot Pro 1 - 8MP digicam

jewelsvernzjewelsvernz
Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
Canon Powershot Pro 1



Any thoughts on this new offering from Canon? How does it compare with others in this price range?
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 35
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,441member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JewelsVernz

    Canon Powershot Pro 1



    Any thoughts on this new offering from Canon? How does it compare with others in this price range?



    No reviews yet but it will be competing with



    C-8080 from Olympus- $999



    Dimage A2- Minolta - should be similar price



    Sony F28<?> 8MP camera



    Nikon Coolpix 8700- $999





    They are all probably using the same basic 8MP chip. So we'll see soon enough how each company polishes the rest of the camera.
  • Reply 2 of 35
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    You might as well throw in the other cameras in the price-range...namely the Canon Digital Rebel, complete with 18-55mm lens.



    Q: What's the market for these 8 mp 'prosumer' cams again?

    A: People with more money than sense.
  • Reply 3 of 35
    messiahtoshmessiahtosh Posts: 1,754member
    I know my Canon S50 has performed beautifully, I cant even imagine an 8 Megapixel...
  • Reply 4 of 35
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member
    Quote:

    Any thoughts on this new [Canon Powershot Pro 1]?



    It looks like a great camera to me, although a 6MP sensor would have been perfectly fine IMO. Especially with such a small(er) sensor, boosting megapixel count will show diminishing returns. What makes the Pro 1 stand out in front of the Nikon Coolpix 8700 is its much faster lens. I haven't thought about the other competitors yet.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    You might as well throw in the other cameras in the price-range...namely the Canon Digital Rebel, complete with 18-55mm lens.



    Definitely agree that the Digital Rebel needs to be on the comparison list, even though the similarities end with price. You'll have to rember that the zoom that comes with the Rebel is only 3x, and slow.



    Quote:

    Q: What's the market for these 8 mp 'prosumer' cams again?

    A: People with more money than sense.



    Agree on the pointless megapixel wars. However, I'm starting to realize that a prosumer camera with a non-interchangeable zoom is not a completely silly concept. This is even though I'm an ardent fan of my interchangeable lens film SLR with a good collection of lenses.



    If you're not going to buy any additional lenses (i.e. stay at the sub$1000 price point), the F2.4-3.5 7X zoom (28-200mm equivalent) in the Pro 1 is likely to be more useful than the very slow F3.5-5.6 3x zoom (28.8-88mm equiv.) bundled with the Digital Rebel. If you want to get more out of your Rebel, you'll need more money for more lenses.



    Escher
  • Reply 5 of 35
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member
    Some afterthoughts:



    If you're really going to live with the slow bundled lens of the Digital Rebel, you might as well get the PowerShot S1 IS for half the price. After seeing how much use I have been getting out of my "primitive" PowerShot A20 (2MP, 3x slow zoom, but good pics), I'm seriously considering the S1 IS.



    First, Canon's 30D seemed like the best thing since sliced bread. Then came the 60D. Then Nikon's D100 and Canon's 10D. Then the Digital Rebel. Now the Nikon D70. And the competition's digital SLRs and non-interchangeable lens high-end prosumer cameras are getting better as well. Case in point, Pentax's *ist D is smaller, would let me keep my Pentax lenses and AA NiMH batteries from my A20, if only it were as inexpensive as the Digital Rebel or the D70.



    There are so many choices, I keep waiting to see where the chips fall.... But I am shooting away with my A20 (and the film SLR) in the meantime.



    Escher
  • Reply 6 of 35
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    If you're throwing around that much money on the digital camera though, what's another $299 on a Sigma 24-135mm F/2.8-4.5? $900 + $300 = $1200... You lose a little bit on the wide-angle, but...
  • Reply 7 of 35
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    The PowerShot S1 IS doesn't even use a 1/1.8" sensor, but a 1/2.7" one. Their marketing is working, I'd say...
  • Reply 8 of 35
    michael wilkiemichael wilkie Posts: 223member
    I think $1000 is too much to spend on a digital camera unless you've got money to burn or you're a professional, in which case you would snicker at that crumby "PowerShot Pro". If you were a pro you'd get the EOS-1D or a digital back for your Hasselblad. A grand can buy you a used interchangable lens film SLR, made of durable metal and mechanized parts that will not fail or even require batteries, and it will produce images over 14 megapixels when scanned at 4000 dpi. And they'll be sharper, more contrasty, and with a general photographic specularity that I find lacking in digital originals. Not to mention you don't have that stupid figgin' shutter release delay. And the best part about it? Five years from now, you can laugh at your friends whose fancy digital cameras from 2004 are worth squat, while your professional machine is still worth what you paid for it...perhaps even more!



    For about $500 bucks, you can get a used Contax RTS II and Carl Zeiss 50mm 1.4 lens that makes the Powershot look disposable. For another $500 you can get a 4000 dpi slide scanner. Your photos will thank you.
  • Reply 9 of 35
    jewelsvernzjewelsvernz Posts: 48member
    Hmmm,.



    Only digicams need apply..





    My impression from those of you in the know, is that you think an 8MP camera is a waste of money at this time. And perhaps at a fraction of that cost a much better buy would be a much cheaper 4MP compact digicam. Something like perhaps the Canon Elph S400.



    The thing is, I already own a nice Nikon 35mm SLR (N6006) with a nice set of complementary lenses. But I haven't shot a roll of film with it for over two years due to development costs and the uneven quality of the final results. I was hoping a digicam would get me back into taking pictures again. I like the feature set of the Canon Powershot Pro 1 and the flexibility it affords. And it seems from the pics like it's not too bulky and would travel better than my nikon SLR. But I agree. $1000 is a lot of dough for this toy.
  • Reply 10 of 35
    luckystar52luckystar52 Posts: 17member
    so like there have been replies by people who really know what they're talking about, but i'mma put my 2 cents in anyways.



    i think that if you like it then you should get it. but seriously, EIGHT megapixels?!?! i work at a print shop and although i don't work directly with production and am therefore less knowledgeable about all of that jazz... i'm thinking "who needs it?" i may be behind the times, but i feel that digital cameras are for people who just like to take lots of pictures of their family or trips or whatever... personal use type stuff. you can take loads of pics without feeling like you're wasting film (it's great - guilt free clicking!) and then conveniently e-mail them, post them online, or import them directly into your personalized printing projects. it costs more to print pictures when compared to 35mm film processing, but you can be selective about what you print and even edit pictures before you print them. regular people who just take pictures for personal use like that, really don't require 8 mp IMO. i'm thinking 5 mp is gonna give you the best quality prints that you can physically see when you develope photos up to 5" x 7", larger than that, you may sacrifice some quality. but c'mon... how often do you print 8" x 10"s of photos you took yourself? and how likely is it that you'll have your camera on the 8 mp setting all the time when taking pics? you sacrifice disk space when you're on that high of a setting right? it's more feasible in regular personal use, to have it on a 3mp setting in which case your 5" x 7"s will still turn out fairly nice.



    now although i know NOTHING about photography, i'm thinking if you want professional pictures and wanna be all fancy about it, then ya gotta go with the nondigital, nice cameras (like the one you've already got) so you can get all those cool lenses and use all those photo washing techniques to get great prints and what not. but since you have one already, why not get something fun, small, portable, easy, and cute to play with?



    in any case, hope you find what you're looking for!
  • Reply 11 of 35
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    The PowerShot S1 IS doesn't even use a 1/1.8" sensor, but a 1/2.7" one.



    Hey, it's gotta be better than my PowerShot A20, which was useful enough to banish my film SLR to the back of the closet. I've taken a lot more pictures since I switched from a film SLR to a P&S digicam. Good ones too. Maybe they won't print well poster-size, but the result is still more productive photography. In the end, that's what matters... not fast glass, long zooms, big sensors and megapixels out the wazoo.



    Escher
  • Reply 12 of 35
    admactaniumadmactanium Posts: 812member
    well, there is a use for such things depending on your field. in commercial photography, very often you don't maximize the object in the field of view, so having more pixel density make things easier to blow-up and keep quality. but if you frame up every shot exactly and don't plan on doing any intense cropping, 8 megapixels is pretty darn big. i can't imagine a printing format where you'd be at a loss of resolution unless you wanted to just print huge wall-sized murals for your living room.
  • Reply 13 of 35
    thedustinthedustin Posts: 176member
    Looks like the G5 on ROIDS... I have never been impressed with any of the CCD sensors. The CMOS in the 10D and 300D (Rebel) is awsome. I have had the digital Rebel for about a month and it is a great camera! I can post some pics that I took with the Rebel and the G5. Give me an hour.



    edit: Just kidding, I don't have examples from the G5. I had it for about two hours and returned it. To much like the G3. The auto focus sucks, manual focus is impossible, spinning a tiny wheel, lots of lens distortion, and MAJOR noise if over ISO 200. Those pics are coming...examples from a 1Ds, 300D, and a G3.
  • Reply 14 of 35
    thedustinthedustin Posts: 176member
    READY!
  • Reply 15 of 35
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    At the moment, the Sony 828 is the only real example of noise, dynamic range, and chromatic aberation for an 8MP sensor. To get the CA under control, you must use a smaller aperture. Noise performance is bad, the camera is really only useable at ISO 64 and 100, things fall apart after that. Dynamic range isn't the best, from what I've seen.



    All this has to do with sensor size, not CCD vs CMOS. The quietest big chips still seem to be CCD's, Fuji's 6MP being among the most noise free. CMOS may be the future though, if only because it's come a long way, and it offers the possibility of stacking.



    I like the way Eugene put it. These are cameras for people with more money than sense.



    One decent deal in the SLR-a-like small sensor stakes is the Fuji S7000. It's got problems too, it's most glaring fault being the lack of a wide angle (35-210mm equivalent). It's the only small sensor digicam with a usable ISO 200. With 14bits of RAW resolution and a 3rd party RAW converter, it actually seems to get the most out of available DR. It has a touch more than the average small sensor cams to start with.



    And price? Oly C8080, Pro 1, and 828 are all in the 1400-1500 Canadian range. I can get an S7000 for 850 street. Don't know about the US prices. It's about 40% less, any more than that, and it's time to look at a DSLR plus budget lense -- which will still deliver better performance.
  • Reply 16 of 35
    maninmacmaninmac Posts: 64member
    Can I as a silly question??



    I really want to 'get into' photography, and was really excited about the new batch of digital SLR's...however...



    the main appeal of this for me, was that I loathe the expense involved with buying film, and developing it. It struck me that one would recoup the camera cost in no time with digital in print savings.



    So, my silly question is this: How does a 'film/slide' acanner work? Do I still need to pay for developing, or do I scan straight from the film/camera?



    Sorry for my ignorance on this matter, it is just that I do indeed get a whole lot of analog SLR for lets say $800.



    Thanks!!



    Robin.



  • Reply 17 of 35
    jbljbl Posts: 555member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by maninmac



    So, my silly question is this: How does a 'film/slide' acanner work? Do I still need to pay for developing, or do I scan straight from the film/camera?





    When you shoot film, first you need to get the film developed into slides or negatives (so that you can see the images and it it no longer light sensitive). Then you can print or scan the resulting slides or negatives. It costs about $5 to deveop a roll of film and about 25 cents a picture to print them.
  • Reply 18 of 35
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    I have ordered a digital rebel with the kit lens today.



    I expect that i won't wait too much.
  • Reply 19 of 35
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    I have ordered a digital rebel with the kit lens today.



    Félicitations, Powerdoc! Quel choix excellent. Si seulement j'avais l'argent...



    Escher
  • Reply 20 of 35
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    At the moment, the Sony 828 is the only real example of noise, dynamic range, and chromatic aberation for an 8MP sensor. To get the CA under control, you must use a smaller aperture. Noise performance is bad, the camera is really only useable at ISO 64 and 100, things fall apart after that. Dynamic range isn't the best, from what I've seen.



    <snip>



    And price? Oly C8080, Pro 1, and 828 are all in the 1400-1500 Canadian range. I can get an S7000 for 850 street. Don't know about the US prices. It's about 40% less, any more than that, and it's time to look at a DSLR plus budget lense -- which will still deliver better performance.



    The F828 is "usable" at ISO 200 and higher...all you have to do is scale down the photos...



    I'm sure Canon will do a better job than Sony when it comes to noise, but I doubt they can solve the purple fringing. Sometimes the results of "DIGIC" processing seem too unnaturally smooth though. If you've seen some of the sample photos coming from the new EOS-1D Mark II, they look as if they were painted with a wide brush, Monet style. It's the same phenomenon we've seen with the Kodak DCS 14/n.



    I'm also disappointed in Canon designating the Pro1 as having an "L" lens, when it really isn't. It's the Zeiss debacle all over again.
Sign In or Register to comment.