Powershot SX10

"Ted G." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:02:45 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


"BobB" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:06:23 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

Has anyone seen any pics from the new Canon Powershot SX10 IS?

I'm just wondering how that lens is performing, what the noise level is
like, how good the video is, etc...

Is it worth $420?

Thanks,
Dudley


Here's a good example
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca..._results.shtml

The SX10 clearly beats the 450D DSLR in most every way. Higher
resolution,
less
chromatic aberration, more features, more convenience, quiet operation,
etc.,
etc., etc.

In order to get comparable (still-frame only) performance out of the
DSLR
you'd
have to spend in excess of $6,500 for at least two new lenses that would
come in
at over 9 lbs. Not counting the 6-12 lb. tripod required to make the
longer zoom
range lens useable on the DSLR. I've already done all the math and the
SX10
makes any DSLR look like a money-hungry black-hole mass that provides
little to
nothing extra in return.


Actually, I've read most of the reviews and test reports, and I've been
fairly impressed by what I've read.

While I don't agree with everything you've stated above, I have to admit
that the SX10 rates pretty good -- which is one reason why this is a
difficult decision for me.

That is why I'm hoping to hear from somebody who actually owns one and can
give me the low-down on how it performs in his / her real life situation.
My main concern is low-light. I have no doubt I'd be pretty happy with
the
pics from daylight shots, but I do a lot of work in low-light, and I am
more
than a bit curious how the SX10 does there.

Take Care,
Dudley


I've been an available-light photographer all my life. I have yet to find
a
situation in which I can't use a small-sensor camera to achieve the same
results
as when using a larger-sensor camera.

Proper exposure in low-light at low ISOs has no more noise on a sensor
than
those taken in daylight at low ISOs. This is a given for any digital
camera. I
can easily get noise-free 65 second exposures on a 1/2.5" sensor. If the
sensor
receives enough light during the exposure than it's the same as if taken
in
daylight at the same ISOs. The cumulative number of photons on that sensor
are
no different if collected for 2 hours or 1/2,000th of a second. This is
something that the DSLR-Trolls always seem to never understand nor know.

Some ISO800 images are also very useful from that size of sensor if you
require
higher shutter speeds in low-light. A P&S camera with an EVF that
auto-increases
sensor gain in the viewfinder in low-light will also allow you to focus in
levels so low where it would make an optical viewfinder in a DSLR totally
useless. This is another reason that I gave up on optical-viewfinder
cameras in
lieu of the more useful EVF cameras for low-light performance. It all
depends on
your own photography skills (and use of noise-removal editing tools if
using
higher ISOs) for low-light situations. This too is a given for any digital
camera and is relative to the situation at the time. A larger sensor only
gives
you about a 2-stop ISO advantage. That's hardly any kind of selling point
for an
experienced photographer. For a point and shoot novice? Yes, they need all
the
help they can get.

Now, if you're just a novice point and shoot photographer and require 2
stops
faster shutter speeds from 2 stops higher ISOs in low-light because you
lack the
skills and abilities to do things like pan with your subject or know how
to hold
a camera steady then, by all means, dish out the $6,500 needed to try to
make up
for what you lack as a photographer. Just remember, it will come with its
own
set of even greater drawbacks. Like not being allowed into many public
events,
nor even shopping malls, due to the clattering noise that your dslr makes;
crud
on your sensor ruining all your photos until you find out later when you
get
home and you can't go back and re-shoot those photos; lost shots from
changing
lenses; and a hundred other drawbacks to using today's dslrs.


As I've pointed out elsewhere, I am quite happy with my Powershot A720 IS
P&S camera. I use it for things most people would shake their heads in
wonder at.

But, after more carefully contemplating why I want a new camera, it is
becoming clear that the SX10 would simply give me a better version of what I
already have; it won't address the deficiencies of the P&S line.

As a P&S user, I like to extoll the virtues of these cameras as much as
anyone, possibly more so. But, I try to look at things honestly and
practically. Having done that, I don't see how purchasing another, albeit
better, P&S camera will help me to take pics with less DOF, or help me get
back to the state-of-mind I used to enter into when shooting with my former
35mm cameras.

Regarding the shallower DOF, say what you will about the P&S camera, I
haven't found one yet that will achieve anything close to what can be
obtained with a good prime lens. If I'm wrong, please feel free to correct
me.

Regarding the more ethereal area of "state-of-mind" and how that can
contribute to more creative pics, I can't elaborate much on that. All I can
say is that the tactile sensation of something can truly act as a
psychological "anchor" that can be used to help one establish a certain
mental / physiological condition which can demonstrably effect one's
capabilities (see "Unlimited Power," by Anthony Robins, possibly chapter 13
or 14).

Having used cameras with a certain shape and feel for more than 30 years,
having shot many rock concerts in many large venues, I tend to work in a
fairly systematic fashion. The shape and feel of P&S cameras is such that,
while possibly more useful for some things than a DSLR, I cannot find my
stride with them in the more esoteric areas of the craft. This isn't the
fault of the camera; it's simply the way I work.

Now, if I want to take a picture in a shopping mall, I always have my trusty
A720 in my pocket or fanny pack. Etc...

Sorry, this calls for a bit of a side bar:

The other day I wanted to buy myself a pair of gloves. Here in Edmonton,
the temp dropped dramatically, and the wind picked up, so it was time to
pull out the winter clothes.

Not being able to find my gloves from last year, I hopped a bus and went
down to the mall. But, when I got there, I discovered I had forgotten my
wallet at home, so I couldn't get my gloves.

More than a bit ****ed off, I trudged back to the bus terminal at the mall.
However, with all of the blowing snow and my frozen hands trying to handle
my aluminum cane (God, I miss my guide), it took me about 20 minutes to get
to the bus stop. Then, I had to wait another 10 minutes or so for the bus
to arrive.

Needless to say, by the time the bus got there, I was frozen and not in the
best of humour. Thus, when the bus driver asked me to show my card, I was
both embarrassed and rather ****ed off.

As a blind person, the Canadian National Institute issues me an
identification card which is accepted in lue of a bus pass. Theoretically,
I should have it on me whenever I ride the buses. But, in practice, 99.999%
of the bus drivers don't ask to see it, most even discourage blind people
from digging through their wallets / pockets looking for it because it slows
things down. Accordingly, one gets rather used to just walking onto a bus
and asking "Which seat is open?"
I apologized to the bus driver for not having my card with me and explained
my situation, pointing out that I had my white cane with me which can only
be obtained from the CNIB, and which in fact is illegal for anyone other
than a blind person to possess and / or use in Canada. This didn't phase
the driver at all; he still wanted to see my card in order for me to board
the bus.

Next, I pointed out that it is actually quite hazardous for a blind person
to try to navigate in a busy city in conditions such as was the case at the
moment, that the sidewalks were obscured by drifts which caused people to
wander into traffic or off their routes and into open areas such as parks
and parking lots. And, I ended up by explaining that it normally took me an
hour to walk from the mall to my home; in this weather it would more than
likely take 3 or 4 hours (without gloves), assuming I could find my way at
all.

Still, he was unphased.

At this point, I lost it and told him rather angrily that I wanted him to
get a supervisor down, pronto, and I asked him for his name and badge
number.

At this, he quickly changed his mind and said he would graciously let me
ride the bus, "this time," but that I better not forget my card in the
future. I told him that was nice of him, but that I still wanted to speak
with a supervisor.

He refused to call one down, presumably because he knew that transit policy
in Edmonton is to err on the side of caution with blind passengers in
general, and everyone in bad weather. I have even witnessed bus drivers
pulling over in between stops to pick up children, seniors and disabled
people in cold weather. When told that they can't afford the fare, the
drivers simply say, "Don't worry about it. You'll freeze out there today.

It was clear to me that this guy knew the policy and was merely amusing
himself by harrasing a blind guy. So, I got my revenge.

While I was verbally venting my displeasure at his attitude, I slipped my
hand into my pocket and pulled out my ever-present A720. Not having to look
at the camera to set it, i flipped the mode dial with my thumb until I felt
the larger atenuation while rotating the dial counter-clockwise.

Next, I rotated it back three clicks, clockwise. This put it in Tv mode,
which I always leave set at 1/200 seconds with the flash enabled.

With the camera in the right mode, I made sure that the switch along the top
right side of the camera back was set to shooting mode instead of viewing
mode, and I pressed the power button and waited for the lens to pop out.

The bus driver was too busy defending his decision not to summon a
supervisor, so he didn't notice what I was doing, that is, until the flash
went off right in front of his face.

Wow, was he ****ed off.

But, I told him that first thing in the morning, I would be calling the
complaint line and he could explain himself to a supervisor at that point,
and I finished with "I hope you gave me your correct badge number, because I
have a picture to establish your identity, as well as the route number and
time of day. I punctuated this statement by pressing the button on my
talking watch which immediately responded with, "It is 9:05 pm."

With that, he turned around and sat quietly in his seat, and I found one for
myself.

The moral of this long diversion, is that I will always own and have on my
person a P&S camera because of what it CAN do. But, I also want a DSLR
because of what the P&S CAN'T do.

Take Care,
Dudley

Dudley Hanks wrote:
Has anyone seen any pics from the new Canon Powershot SX10 IS?

I'm just wondering how that lens is performing, what the noise level is
like, how good the video is, etc...

Is it worth $420?

Wide angle sounds *much* more useful than super telephoto for your
limited sight situation... though maybe I'm missing something in your
approach and vision of photography. I'm looking at the Panasonic LX-3
for that price with 24mm f/2 wide and a mere 60mm eq. on the long end. I
want to use it for street shooting where you get that feeling of being
immersed in the scene with lots of foreground.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
...
Dudley Hanks wrote:
Has anyone seen any pics from the new Canon Powershot SX10 IS?

I'm just wondering how that lens is performing, what the noise level is
like, how good the video is, etc...

Is it worth $420?

Wide angle sounds *much* more useful than super telephoto for your limited
sight situation... though maybe I'm missing something in your approach and
vision of photography. I'm looking at the Panasonic LX-3 for that price
with 24mm f/2 wide and a mere 60mm eq. on the long end. I want to use it
for street shooting where you get that feeling of being immersed in the
scene with lots of foreground.

--
Paul Furman

The first thing that went through my mind when I thought about the 20X zoom
was, "Wow, I could really get a good shot of something in the distance to
show others when I want more info..." But, the more I thought about it, the
more I came to realize I'd never be able to aim it accurately at full zoom.

You're right, Paul, the 28mm end would be much more useful.

But, that first 100mm would have a pretty good aperture...

Take Care,
Dudley

Xxxxx wrote:
I have both the SX10 IS and the XSi. The SX10 is noisier, but it lets me
capture shots that the XSi can't quite match, due to the added zoom and
the image stabilizer. I use a Tamon 28-300 most of the time on the XSi
(the 75-300 that came with the camera is still in the box, gathering
dust), and its zoom can't compare with that of the SX10. The 18-55 gets
used much less often. (The XSi + 75-300 + 18-55 was $750 at Costco. The
SX10 IS was $349 via Amazon.)

$349 is a fair price for the SX10is. The original poster asked if it was
worth $420, which it isn't. BTW, the SX10IS is now $330 at Amazon.
That's a pretty good deal.

Costco now has the XSi with two IS lenses (not on Costco.com, in the
stores), and IIRC it was $900.

Yes. The sound quality is excellent, IMO, and actually achieves a decent
stereo/surround effect. When I shot video of an eagle, some kids were
yelling behind me. When I played it back at my office desk (I have good
stereo speakers), it actually sounded like the yelling was coming from
behind me. So, the acoustical capture was pretty effective.

--
nadie
"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:Pxb1l.775$O53.26@edtnps82...
Thanks, I appreciate your comments.

Have you taken any video with the SX10? If so, how would you rate the
sound quality?

Take Care,
Dudley



"Xxxxx" wrote in message
...
I have both the SX10 IS and the XSi. The SX10 is noisier, but it lets me
capture shots that the XSi can't quite match, due to the added zoom and
the image stabilizer. I use a Tamon 28-300 most of the time on the XSi
(the 75-300 that came with the camera is still in the box, gathering
dust), and its zoom can't compare with that of the SX10. The 18-55 gets
used much less often. (The XSi + 75-300 + 18-55 was $750 at Costco. The
SX10 IS was $349 via Amazon.)

Weight and size are definitely factors. When I'm out on an 8 mile hike,
the SX10 IS is decidely more portable and more flexible. When I need
quality, speed, or a wider angel however, I'll yank out the XSi (with the
18-55 attached).

For the SX10 IS, I was replacing my S1 IS. My only disappointment was
that the SX10 IS does not have an intervelometer feature.

--
nadie
"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:cc41l.753$O53.4@edtnps82...

But, that 28mm - 560mm lens is kinda tempting...

I'm really torn between the SX10 and a XSi or XS DSLR. Dell's got a
nice package with the XS and two lenses (the 18 - 55mm and the 75 -
300mm).

The image stabilizer actually makes it possible at 20x... a bit more
difficult when you crank it out to 80x. This picture was shot at 20x on the
S10 IS:

http://tinyurl.com/6kwdkk

--
nadie
"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:lLd1l.791$O53.634@edtnps82...

The first thing that went through my mind when I thought about the 20X
zoom was, "Wow, I could really get a good shot of something in the
distance to show others when I want more info..." But, the more I thought
about it, the more I came to realize I'd never be able to aim it
accurately at full zoom.

You're right, Paul, the 28mm end would be much more useful.

But, that first 100mm would have a pretty good aperture...

"SMS" wrote in message
...
Xxxxx wrote:
I have both the SX10 IS and the XSi. The SX10 is noisier, but it lets me
capture shots that the XSi can't quite match, due to the added zoom and
the image stabilizer. I use a Tamon 28-300 most of the time on the XSi
(the 75-300 that came with the camera is still in the box, gathering
dust), and its zoom can't compare with that of the SX10. The 18-55 gets
used much less often. (The XSi + 75-300 + 18-55 was $750 at Costco. The
SX10 IS was $349 via Amazon.)

$349 is a fair price for the SX10is. The original poster asked if it was
worth $420, which it isn't. BTW, the SX10IS is now $330 at Amazon.

I should note that the price is $420 (Cdn) at a local camera shop which
includes it's own warranty coverage on top of Canon's. This warranty gives
free cleaning and service checks for the life of the camera.

To put this in context, Best Buy is selling the SX10 locally for about $440
(Cdn) without the extra warranty.

Also, I tend to shop locally. I'd rather pay a bit extra and get the more
personalized service.

Take Care,
Dudley

I have had my SX10 for almost 2 months now. It is actually better than
I expected. The focus is extremely precise, even in low light when it
uses the built in focus lamp for the flash. The exposures are also very
precise. The antishake has worked remarkably well. Macro shots still
give me fits. They always come out great, but I haven't yet figured out
when to use the macro on and off. I do know that with macro on, it
likes the wider angles of zoom. With the macro off, it focuses fairly
close even in telephoto. I am going to set up a test to see what the
best settings are for macro photography.

Several of my friends with DSLR's are looking at my SX10. Most don't
change their lenses very often, especially in the field because they
can't afford to take a chance of getting dust on their sensor. It is
their dream to have a digital camera where they have the full range of
zoom without changing lenses and with super antishake performance. I
already have that.

--
Pardon my spam deterrent; send email to
Cheers, Steve Henning in Reading, PA USA - http://rhodyman.net

Stephen Henning wrote:
[]
Several of my friends with DSLR's are looking at my SX10. Most don't
change their lenses very often, especially in the field because they
can't afford to take a chance of getting dust on their sensor. It is
their dream to have a digital camera where they have the full range of
zoom without changing lenses and with super antishake performance. I
already have that.

Your friends also have the option of either an own-brand or 3rd party
18-200mm image-stabilised lens such as:

Nikon 18-200:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...p6_vr_afs_n15/

Canon 18-200:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...p5-5p6_is_c16/

Tamron 18-270:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/...p5-6p3_vc_n15/

Cheers,
David

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 23:40:00 -0500, Stephen Henning wrote:

I have had my SX10 for almost 2 months now. It is actually better than
I expected. The focus is extremely precise, even in low light when it
uses the built in focus lamp for the flash. The exposures are also very
precise. The antishake has worked remarkably well. Macro shots still
give me fits. They always come out great, but I haven't yet figured out
when to use the macro on and off. I do know that with macro on, it
likes the wider angles of zoom. With the macro off, it focuses fairly
close even in telephoto. I am going to set up a test to see what the
best settings are for macro photography.

Several of my friends with DSLR's are looking at my SX10. Most don't
change their lenses very often, especially in the field because they
can't afford to take a chance of getting dust on their sensor. It is
their dream to have a digital camera where they have the full range of
zoom without changing lenses and with super antishake performance. I
already have that.


Having its predecessor the Canon S5 IS I do understand what you are
saying and I am sure it is a fine camera BUT:

When you desire to use higher ISO and/or less then optimal light and/or
crop quite a bit and print 11x14 and up and still require high resolution,
high dynamic range and razor sharpness you still need to put up with the
disadvantages of a DSLR. Even the lowly Digital Rebel (lowly when
compared to the 5D mark ii) can do these things. In this regard the SX
series has to take a back seat.