http://dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powers...w/gallery.shtml

the crappy S3is was a great success, so Canon releases another bigger piece of crap and it will become another big success, amazing.

I just don't understand why that everytime you post something about Canon, Sony or something else other than Fujifilm, you'll just keeps on insulting them, all that. If you hate them so much, then why bother to talk about them?

i write what i see, it is my honest opinion, unlike some people who always say good thing about certain brand, even the IQ is crappy.

back to the topic.

s5is at iso400


fuji s6000 at iso1600


s6000 iso1600 is 100000000 times better than canon iso400, of course the canon fanboys cant see this bcoz they are always in denial.

even at low iso, s5is is rubbish.

---

Added on June 9, 2007, 11:36 amcanon s5is horrible PF.



This post has been edited by greyPJ: Jun 9 2007, 11:36 AM

hoho, head-to-head bang eh? where do u get all those pics?

here;
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat...thread=23547725

wow, what a purple fringing level by S5

i used 3 canons so far, but i never liked the SxIS series, right from the 1st gen to the latest gen.. noise is an big issue for me.. and i'm not a big fans of megazoom.

at least the noice control is getting bette

have to agree with greyPJ, bunch of crap o_O

this looks bad... I tot my S9600 was bad...

Noise control? I think noise is greater than S3IS.

kantoi la sudah

---

Added on June 9, 2007, 8:49 pmfuji very good one

---

Added on June 9, 2007, 8:49 pmfuji very good one

---

Added on June 9, 2007, 8:49 pmfuji very good one

This post has been edited by tongyam: Jun 9 2007, 08:49 PM

Fuji relies heavily on their ISO noise control as they don't have image stabilizers built in.... No fight....

But am suprised that the noise is this horrendous. My previous S3IS looks much better than these initial pics of the S5 IS. Is this a test unit or the finished in market product?

This post has been edited by julchin_09: Jun 10 2007, 01:20 AM

soon i think fuji will include IS into their cams. soon

the S3 has lower noise is due to the fact that its only 6mpx while the S5 has 8... I guessing they used the same sensor build and jacked up the iso just for profit's sake... what's happening to manufacturers now not building good cameras nowadays?

Maybe trying to keep up with the competition and launching new products to be in the news... I am not sure as to whether this is a prototype unit or the finished product. If its the latter, then this is sad. The S3 IS was a minor jump from its older counterpart the S2IS. Overall that camera was good.

Now when they decided to make the changes for this newer model more noticable, they can't leave the innards to be the same old 'same old'. 1/2.5" is pushing it really.....

wow, I can't believe the S5 produces such noisy photos.

Well.. I've been using Cams without IS all along, doesnt really matter if its there...at least for now, Just carry a mono-pod around then it should be fine.

But still hoping Fuji will put a real Image stabilizer in the cam tho... every manufacturer has it now..they will be left out if they still neglect this function.

yalo yalo agree u

look at its ccd size @ 1/2.5" compare to f31fd @ 1/1.7" and f40 @ 1/1.6" (even my ex-dc A620 already @ 1/1.8"), wonder why the ccd become smaller & smaller with newer products, cut cost? with higher pixels squeeze into tiny ccd, what to expect on the low noise?

Actually how to measure the sensor size given that data ar?
Sorry but my maths damn bad.

1/2.5" vs. 1/1.7" vs. 1/1.6".

1/2.5 smaller meh?

This post has been edited by m|ng: Jun 10 2007, 09:30 PM

1/2.5" (1" divide by 2.5") vs 1/1.6" (1" divide by 1.6"), which is bigger?

Oh got it now..lol..suddenly forgot my divide sign

Cost reduction is the only reason I can think off. Canon does have some A series with larger sensor, but S3 is just not in the list... Come to think of it, with all those features built in, just can't ask for more, can we?

Ever notice and wonder why most if not all megazooms uses tiny sensors while normal cameras and wide angle cameras have bigger sensors?
it's because they wanna keep it as a megazoom.. if they increase the sensor size on megazooms, then the effective focal length will be shorter, unless they use longer lens.
it's the same theory as DSLRs sensor crop, a full frame sensor will have a crop factor of 1X, while an APS-C sized sensors will have a crop of 1.5/1.6X.. the smaller the sensor, the higher the crop factor, and a lens will give u higher effective focal length on smaller sensors as compared to a larger sensor.

for example, a 50mm prime will be functioning as a 80mm prime on an APS-C sized DSLR(1.6X crop factor), but if u use it on a full frame sensor DSLR(1X crop factor), it will remain as a 50mm.

This post has been edited by kevin613: Jun 11 2007, 09:02 PM

While I would support the 9600 over the S5IS, there are some undeniably better things about the S5:

- Bright lens (F2.8-3.7). Fujifilm dumped their F2.8-3.1 lens in favor of a much darker one ages ago. Panasonic dropped their constant F2.8 lens too. Why?!?

- physical stabilization

The Panasonic TZ is noisy, and its noise reduction kills details. Give me noisy purple-fringed detailed shots over watercolor blotches anytime!

i would guess panasonic dropped the F2.8 lens because of the increase in sensor size(from 1/2.5 to 1/1.8), if they were to retain the same F2.8 lens used in FZ20, it'll either have an shorter effective focal length, or if they wanna maintain the maximum effective focal length(400+ mm) and constant F2.8, then the lens will have to be extremely bulky. so instead of making the FZ30 and FZ50 too bulky, they opted to drop the F2.8 lens.

But the lens specs and the aperture in the camera is diffrent rite?

like my Fuji (F2.8 - F4.9) can go down till 2.8 (biggest) and the smallest is F11.. It is diffrent from the lens spec? Is there any formula to count that?