LTH Home

Good camera for taking food pictures

Good camera for taking food pictures
  • Forum HomePost Reply BackTop
    Page 2 of 5
  • Post #31 - June 17th, 2006, 7:08 pm
    Post #31 - June 17th, 2006, 7:08 pm Post #31 - June 17th, 2006, 7:08 pm
    I'm not nearly as avid a photographer as others here -- even when I remember to bring the camera, I forget to use it half the time -- but I do like our Sony Cyber-shot DSC W1. I bought it at Costco in a kit that included a case, tripod, battery charger and other stuff.

    A particularly nice feature is the 2.5-inch LCD screen.

    I've taken some professional, publication-quality photos with this camera, but I agree with Mike G that the best way to get good shots is to shoot in good light and take lots of them.

    I expect to use this camera for many years yet, but if I ever upgrade, I'll be looking for something that has less lag time between shots for action photos. I'm told the Sony is pretty speedy for a digital camera in its class, but compared to film cameras it seems very slow. The camera does have a burst mode, but I haven't played with it much.
  • Post #32 - June 22nd, 2006, 8:43 pm
    Post #32 - June 22nd, 2006, 8:43 pm Post #32 - June 22nd, 2006, 8:43 pm
    To those looking to buy, the Canon SD700 IS is available from Dell Home for $390 after these coupons:

    20% W00T5CR67WQRCF
    $10 Paypal coupon C99$273GQ1L4W8

    The 630 is also available, but I'm not sure of the limits on these coupons -- the 20% may be $400 and up, for instance.

    The 20% off coupon expires Saturday, or after 650 uses, so I'd suggest not waiting if it's a deal you're interested in.

    Also you can buy a $15 coupon that stacks with those above on ebay for $1. So, another $14 off. Whee!
    Ed Fisher
    my chicago food photos

    RIP LTH.
  • Post #33 - July 17th, 2006, 3:51 pm
    Post #33 - July 17th, 2006, 3:51 pm Post #33 - July 17th, 2006, 3:51 pm
    Here's an interesting piece on what food photos mean, and why selective focus is your friend:

    http://www.slate.com/id/2145883/
    Watch Sky Full of Bacon, the Chicago food HD podcast!
    New episode: Soil, Corn, Cows and Cheese
    Watch the Reader's James Beard Award-winning Key Ingredient here.
  • Post #34 - February 5th, 2007, 10:50 am
    Post #34 - February 5th, 2007, 10:50 am Post #34 - February 5th, 2007, 10:50 am
    I have a related question -- that is, not what camera to buy, but what to expect. I'm still shooting film (Kodachrome slides -- mostly because, if you're sleeping in a tent in the Sahara, there just isn't anywhere to recharge your batteries -- my trusty Nikon FM2 is completely manual, so it's ideal for when I'm on the road). However, it's clear that for low-light, macro shots, and most especially shots you want to see in fewer than 10 days after you send the film to Kodak, digital is the way to go.

    So my question: what is the learning curve and what are the differences to which one must adjust.

    I should probably mention that I don't intend to buy a camera to replace my FM2 at this point -- I'm not ready to give that up. But I am rather looking for something to replace my little pocket-size Rolei, which is also a film camera, but which also travels with me for times when carrying a large camera and full complement of lenses is not practical. I realize that the adjustments needed to a DSLR are different from the smaller cameras (less time lag for the bigger cameras, for example). But, aside from the time lag, and the lack of need to look through the viewfinder, what adjustments will I have to make and how much practice would someone reasonably allow before one needed to "go live" with shooting a digital camera.

    In case it affects the performance, and therefore learning curve, I'm looking to get something in the $200 (or less) range, as it will not be my primary camera.

    Thanks.
  • Post #35 - February 5th, 2007, 11:45 am
    Post #35 - February 5th, 2007, 11:45 am Post #35 - February 5th, 2007, 11:45 am
    It's been ages since I've dragged out my FM or FM2. My complete switch to digital is a result of my experience with Photoshop, and I'm able to improve many in-camera exposure and color problems in 'post'production'.

    Expect to see more 'grain' in low light, long exposures, most digitals have trouble with noise, cheap ones are worse. Expect to not have the depth of field selection you have with a manual - cheap digitals only have a couple of f-stops, if they're available to set at all. Expect shutter lag, as well as lag between shots, but this has improved even in cheaper cameras. Expect frustration with auto-focus, both in speed and what it focuses on, unless it has manual settings. Expect to learn how to set things using a menu, rather than having the dials right up front. Eventually, you'll learn where settings are deep inside menus, but a certain amount of fumbling is expected. Expect to guess your composition during very bright sunny days, since unless you get a viewfinder or old-time photographers hood, you won't see the screen well-enough.

    But expect to be able to carry your camera all the time, and you'll never worry about not taking a shoot cause it would be a waste of film. You can bracket every shot (if you get manual options) and you can 'chimp' or look at the shot and be assured you got what you want, and if not, you can shoot again 'til you do.

    I can't recommend a camera for $200, but the Nikon coolpix line has a few cameras with enough manual features to satisfy you when you learn where they all are.

    See http://dpreview.com/ for detailed reviews of every digital camera and their features.

    I got a new Nikon P3 in December and am still learning where everything is and what will give me the best results. It has tons of advanced features (even WiFi and the ability to add voice comments to photos) but a preset white balance, manual focus option, more than two f-stops and several exposure options were what sold me. Features are fairly well laid out with common settings like image size and white balance available on the dial, as well as the menu.

    It replaces my Nikon 885, which after somehwere near 20,000 exposures, finally has the shutter button worn to the point where I needed to shake it vigorously to make it go off. Which isn't optimal for sharp pictures. I miss it's actual viewfinder, slightly bigger lens (with the option to screw on other ones) and center tripod mount, which is off on the P3, making an unbalanced set-up on a mini-tripod. I miss having a bit of a handle, or some way to hold it with both hands as well. I figured these trade-offs would be solved eventually by a DSLR.

    By the way Rolei makes a digital but it's ridiculously expensive.
  • Post #36 - February 5th, 2007, 4:58 pm
    Post #36 - February 5th, 2007, 4:58 pm Post #36 - February 5th, 2007, 4:58 pm
    Cynthia-- for point and click purposes, a $200ish totally automatic digital camera offers next to no learning curve. No, you don't have total control although once you get savvy about its capabilities you can certainly produce photos with arty focus effects and so on--

    Image

    I also wouldn't worry about lag time, it still exists but it's a lot shorter than it used to be.

    Now, that said, at that price level it's still an inexpensive, automatic, point and shoot camera, Kiplog aptly summarizes the limitations, so you don't have all the control of an SLR with changeable lenses and so on. But the advantage of actually carrying it everywhere you go outweighs that in many situations. For me, in nearly all situations.

    As far as brands, I remain very happy with my second Canon, though I am occasionally jealous of Dmnkly's Fuji for its superior-- indeed fairly amazing-- low-light capabilities.
    Watch Sky Full of Bacon, the Chicago food HD podcast!
    New episode: Soil, Corn, Cows and Cheese
    Watch the Reader's James Beard Award-winning Key Ingredient here.
  • Post #37 - February 5th, 2007, 5:55 pm
    Post #37 - February 5th, 2007, 5:55 pm Post #37 - February 5th, 2007, 5:55 pm
    I also wouldn't worry about lag time, it still exists but it's a lot shorter than it used to be.


    Please note there is the camera, then there is the media card, which is always a separate purchase. Before I acquired my latest camera two years ago, I went to a cad/cam seminar. The best piece of information I took away occurred during a break related to digital cameras: make sure your media card has a high speed rating.

    Lag time can increase or decrease by the processing speed of the media card. For example, I bought a media card capable of holding 1 GB with a processing speed of 80X. When I bought it, Canon's recommended no more than 512 MB. I called customer service to find it had been tested for no more than 512 MB, which meant there was no barrier to the larger size. I asked about speed ratings, they said go as fast I cared to afford though they offered no specific recommendations.

    If you economize by purchasing a low speed media card, then you may have the camera waiting to pass information to the media card. It's like three lanes of traffic having to condense down to a one-lane bridge, you find yourself waiting. I bought mine via e-Bay with full manufacturer's warranty for around $70 two years ago.

    For years I used to have a high end Nikon with several lenses. I never wanted it, it was my Dad who insisted on it. If I had the digital point and shoot with great built in focussing features available to me, then I would have ditched the Nikon long ago. Plus I love the little film clip feature to record cooking techniques I cannot possibly remember later. When it was finally stolen, I wasn't very sorry about it because it was heavy and conspicuous.

    My film card is capable of almost 500 photos. I run out of battery around 375 and keep a spare in my purse that cost $29. The battery recharger is 110/220, which a simple adapter makes it available to go anywhere. When I travel I bring a few writeable CD/DVD blank disks with me to download to at a internet cafe, which I have never used. You also could upload them to webhost like flickr.com, which may not be possible everywhere.

    ReneG acquired a camera recently that is very good for low light conditions that rivals film very well. Energy consumption on his camera has dropped enough he didn't find the need to buy a 2nd battery. He runs out of space on his media card before the battery dies. Info on this camera may already be on this board or he may chime in eventually.

    Last but not least, you can keep thousands of pictures on your computer without getting anything processed. Tremendous amount of savings, plus for less than $100 you can acquired PHotoshop Elements, which has about 80% of Photoshop Pro's $600+ program. You can crop and modify to your heart's content. You can pass your image to anyone by a few clicks.

    The aforementioned Nikon camera did break occasionally and usually at a critical moment. The cost of repair was far more than any digital camera I have owned to date.

    Now I feel ill-equiped when my camera is not with me. I lent it to my sister Friday with the caveat to return it the same evening. I was not very happy Saturday morning when I pulled in front of Kendall College to have no camera available to record the ice sculptures. I hate missed opportunities.

    My veteran of 24000+ photos has been a real asset and almost always with me.

    [edit to correct a name]

    Regards,
    Cathy2

    "You'll be remembered long after you're dead if you make good gravy, mashed potatoes and biscuits." -- Nathalie Dupree
    Facebook, Twitter, Greater Midwest Foodways, Road Food 2012: Podcast
  • Post #38 - February 13th, 2007, 7:22 pm
    Post #38 - February 13th, 2007, 7:22 pm Post #38 - February 13th, 2007, 7:22 pm
    I can highly reccomend the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2. I's a bit larger than the Canon Elph series (The Canon SD800 was my 2nd choice) - but w/ a Leica Lens,10MP, 16:9 wide screen image capture and viewing/a huge LCD screen- AND a Food Mode....it's taken very good images.
    Plus, in the Black version, w/ the large sized lens,(and lens cover) it "swaggers" in uber-hip cool-ness!

    As far as Memeory/ SD Cards- I'm a big fan of the "foldable" Ultra (http://www.pricegrabber.com/rating_getp ... /id_type=M) Cards- that way- you can plug the card directly into ANY USB , without having to shlep cables,cardreaders, etc...
  • Post #39 - February 13th, 2007, 7:45 pm
    Post #39 - February 13th, 2007, 7:45 pm Post #39 - February 13th, 2007, 7:45 pm
    So what is the Food Mode?
    Watch Sky Full of Bacon, the Chicago food HD podcast!
    New episode: Soil, Corn, Cows and Cheese
    Watch the Reader's James Beard Award-winning Key Ingredient here.
  • Post #40 - February 13th, 2007, 8:18 pm
    Post #40 - February 13th, 2007, 8:18 pm Post #40 - February 13th, 2007, 8:18 pm
    Hombre de Acero wrote:I can highly reccomend the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2. I's a bit larger than the Canon Elph series (The Canon SD800 was my 2nd choice) - but w/ a Leica Lens,10MP, 16:9 wide screen image capture and viewing/a huge LCD screen- AND a Food Mode....it's taken very good images.
    Plus, in the Black version, w/ the large sized lens,(and lens cover) it "swaggers" in uber-hip cool-ness


    Though Panasonic apparently isn't very forthcoming on details, they claim that the food mode is "intended to capture pictures of food without having their colour affected by the ambient light", which would seem to imply that it simply turns on macro, adjusts the white balance and gives it a name that the marketing folks can have fun with.

    I was surprised to read that it's actually a 16:9 sensor though! I had assumed that the 16:9 images simply discarded a bunch of the 4:3 data, but it's the other way around. The only time you're using the entire sensor in this camera is when you're shooting 16:9... so there's really no reason to shoot anything else, unless you're pressed for storage or need the visual reference for framing.

    Sounds like a nice cam, but it appears to have low light issues, which would be a problem in restaurants. According to dpreview.com (which is AWESOME), it's a very noisy sensor at high ISO, and their noise correction really overcompensates and kills the fine detail. Of course, this isn't a problem if you're flashing, but that's a subject for another thread :-) Has this been your experience, Hombre?
    Dominic Armato
    Dining Critic
    The Arizona Republic and azcentral.com
  • Post #41 - February 20th, 2008, 12:50 pm
    Post #41 - February 20th, 2008, 12:50 pm Post #41 - February 20th, 2008, 12:50 pm
    One update, since people may refer back to this thread and read about the awesomeness of the Finepix for low-light (read: restaurant) photography.

    They went on to make the F30 (and F31) which was, remarkably, a great improvement over the F10. HOWEVER... the more recent cameras in the Finepix line are actually WORSE for low light photography. Because they were pushing image quality instead of megapixels with the F10 and F30, they got stellar reviews, but the sales didn't follow. People who didn't know any better saying "why should I buy a six megapixel camera when I can get a ten megapixel camera for the same price," were the problem, I'm sure. So with the Finepix cameras after the F31, they went to a new CCD that has basically blown the incredible low-light quality of the line. The images are higher resolution, but the low-light noise is back with a vengeance.

    As a result, the discontinued F30s and F31s are now selling on eBay for $400 or more. I got lucky and found a Fuji employee who got an F30 as a bonus and sold it to me for $200 a few weeks ago (I even told her some were selling for $400!)... there are deals to be found. But just so you're aware, the awesomeness of the F10 and F30 does NOT apply to the newer Finepix cameras.
    Dominic Armato
    Dining Critic
    The Arizona Republic and azcentral.com
  • Post #42 - February 20th, 2008, 1:01 pm
    Post #42 - February 20th, 2008, 1:01 pm Post #42 - February 20th, 2008, 1:01 pm
    Hi,

    Thanks! I am in the market for a new (or at least new to me) camera. How is the optical correction or is it called optical stabilitzation?

    Regards,
    Cathy2

    "You'll be remembered long after you're dead if you make good gravy, mashed potatoes and biscuits." -- Nathalie Dupree
    Facebook, Twitter, Greater Midwest Foodways, Road Food 2012: Podcast
  • Post #43 - February 20th, 2008, 1:45 pm
    Post #43 - February 20th, 2008, 1:45 pm Post #43 - February 20th, 2008, 1:45 pm
    Cathy2 wrote:Hi,

    Thanks! I am in the market for a new (or at least new to me) camera. How is the optical correction or is it called optical stabilitzation?

    Regards,


    Though I LOVE the camera, I'm not a fan of the stabilization. I believe all it does is crank up the ISO to get the fastest shutter speed possible, which just results in really noisy, grainy photos. For low light, I usually use it at 800 ISO (which produces less noise than most compacts at 200 ISO), occasionally going to 1600 when it's really dim. But past that, images get pretty nasty and the stabilization usually cranks it right up to 3200, which is a ridiculous ISO even for the Finepix.
    Dominic Armato
    Dining Critic
    The Arizona Republic and azcentral.com
  • Post #44 - February 20th, 2008, 1:51 pm
    Post #44 - February 20th, 2008, 1:51 pm Post #44 - February 20th, 2008, 1:51 pm
    Hi,

    I have a slight tremor in my hands. Consequently I take a lot of pictures of the same thing, then select the best. I had been hoping optical stabilization would save me some trouble. From your explanation I am better off simply to take lots of pictures.

    Thanks for the feedback.

    Regards,
    Cathy2

    "You'll be remembered long after you're dead if you make good gravy, mashed potatoes and biscuits." -- Nathalie Dupree
    Facebook, Twitter, Greater Midwest Foodways, Road Food 2012: Podcast
  • Post #45 - February 20th, 2008, 1:55 pm
    Post #45 - February 20th, 2008, 1:55 pm Post #45 - February 20th, 2008, 1:55 pm
    Cathy2 wrote:Hi,

    I have a slight tremor in my hands. Consequently I take a lot of pictures of the same thing, then select the best. I had been hoping optical stabilization would save me some trouble. From your explanation I am better off simply to take lots of pictures.

    Thanks for the feedback.

    Regards,


    I'm not certain how "stabilization" works on other cameras -- that's never been a feature that was important to me -- so it could work more effectively on other cameras.

    FYI, both the Finepix and a lot of other cameras have a feature that automatically snaps a number of shots rapid fire, so you can choose the best. That's something you might want to look into. One feature that I believe the F30 has (I'd have to check) that's a little less common is that it'll snap two in rapid succession, one with flash and one high ISO without, so you don't have to try to decide whether 'tis best to flash or not to flash.
    Dominic Armato
    Dining Critic
    The Arizona Republic and azcentral.com
  • Post #46 - February 20th, 2008, 1:57 pm
    Post #46 - February 20th, 2008, 1:57 pm Post #46 - February 20th, 2008, 1:57 pm
    Dmnkly wrote:
    Cathy2 wrote:Hi,

    Thanks! I am in the market for a new (or at least new to me) camera. How is the optical correction or is it called optical stabilitzation?

    Regards,

    I believe all it does is crank up the ISO to get the fastest shutter speed possible, which just results in really noisy, grainy photos. .


    That's not my understanding of how it works...
    Check out the wiki here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stabilization
    what you are talking about is more of an "auto-ASA" feature.
  • Post #47 - February 20th, 2008, 2:14 pm
    Post #47 - February 20th, 2008, 2:14 pm Post #47 - February 20th, 2008, 2:14 pm
    In case anybody's interested, though there's a slight learning curve and it's on the slightly pricier side of point-and-shoot cameras, but we love our Olympus Stylus 770 It also takes pictures underwater (which means if you splatter it with food or drop it in your oatmea, as I am apt to, you can just rinse the thing off) If you buy an "unpopular" color, as we did, it takes about $50 off the top (ours is a lovely golden brown.)

    It has a "food" setting, a "macro" setting with a non-flash lamp that I use a lot for food porn closeups - but for live action shots, it has a 'click and choose' option which automatically takes 5 or 6 shots in rapid succession.
  • Post #48 - February 20th, 2008, 2:54 pm
    Post #48 - February 20th, 2008, 2:54 pm Post #48 - February 20th, 2008, 2:54 pm
    mhill95149 wrote:
    Dmnkly wrote:
    Cathy2 wrote:Hi,

    Thanks! I am in the market for a new (or at least new to me) camera. How is the optical correction or is it called optical stabilitzation?

    Regards,

    I believe all it does is crank up the ISO to get the fastest shutter speed possible, which just results in really noisy, grainy photos. .


    That's not my understanding of how it works...
    Check out the wiki here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stabilization
    what you are talking about is more of an "auto-ASA" feature.


    Ah, well, this would explain it... the Finepix F30 doesn't have "image stabilization", it has an "anti-blur" mode, which is says produces a high shutter speed to reduce blurring (by virtue of a crazy high ISO, in my experience). I didn't mean to suggest that's how all image stabilization works... just on this particular camera. It could also be that the newer FinePix cameras actually DO have true image stabilization.
    Dominic Armato
    Dining Critic
    The Arizona Republic and azcentral.com
  • Post #49 - February 20th, 2008, 4:16 pm
    Post #49 - February 20th, 2008, 4:16 pm Post #49 - February 20th, 2008, 4:16 pm
    With the Canon series of compacts, anything model number with an IS at the end has image stabilization. I believe the cheapest model to have it is the A570 IS. As much as I love the Fuji F30, I ended up going for the SD700 IS. The F30 is clearly better at high ISOs than the Canon. Its 800ISO is pretty much the only acceptable 800ISO I've seen from a compact camera, and even the 1600 is surprisingly decent.

    But if you're dealing with still subjects (like much of food photography), you'd be better off getting a camera with a decent image stabilization, and use a lower ISO. From what I can find, the Canon IS system should give you another 2 to 3 stops to work with. In other words, something that might have to be taken at 1600ISO on a Fuji in order to eliminate camera movement blur can be taken at ISO400 or ISO200 on a Canon, with cleaner results.

    For people who like to take pictures at concerts, bars, clubs, etc., where the subjects are moving around, I would recommend the F30.
  • Post #50 - April 10th, 2008, 9:07 am
    Post #50 - April 10th, 2008, 9:07 am Post #50 - April 10th, 2008, 9:07 am
    Recently, Jimthebeerguy and I bought the best camera $170 will buy, which ended up being a Canon Powershot with its own rechargable battery-pack.

    We look forward to posting MANY food reviews in the coming weeks. It arrived on Tuesday, and we already have had a minor squabble over who would get to have it for the day, and when.
    "Part of the secret of success in life is to eat what you want and let the food fight it out inside."
    -Mark Twain
  • Post #51 - February 2nd, 2010, 12:45 pm
    Post #51 - February 2nd, 2010, 12:45 pm Post #51 - February 2nd, 2010, 12:45 pm
    Question for Ronnie Suburban about his S90. How do you think it fares in regular light (not a dim as some restaurants, but definitely not well lit) with active kids and without using flash, if you are able to comment on that scenario? We use a relatively fast prime lens in general for these situations, but would love a point and shoot that gives at least decent but not great photos (not expecting it to be comparable to the DSLR). Have seen a G10 in this scenario and it's not that great IMHO.
  • Post #52 - February 2nd, 2010, 12:56 pm
    Post #52 - February 2nd, 2010, 12:56 pm Post #52 - February 2nd, 2010, 12:56 pm
    The S90 is F/2 wide open at 28mm, so you can compare it to a prime lens that way. But the S90 isn't really usable past iso 400, so you're the one who knows if f/2 and iso 400 = a suitable shutter speed for kids in your lighting conditions.
    Ed Fisher
    my chicago food photos

    RIP LTH.
  • Post #53 - February 2nd, 2010, 1:42 pm
    Post #53 - February 2nd, 2010, 1:42 pm Post #53 - February 2nd, 2010, 1:42 pm
    Have seen a G10 in this scenario and it's not that great IMHO.


    The G11 is the current model and has a much-improved sensor.
  • Post #54 - February 2nd, 2010, 1:46 pm
    Post #54 - February 2nd, 2010, 1:46 pm Post #54 - February 2nd, 2010, 1:46 pm
    spinynorman99 wrote:
    Have seen a G10 in this scenario and it's not that great IMHO.


    The G11 is the current model and has a much-improved sensor.


    really, the g11 just tries to extract fewer megapixels out of the sensor.. the g10 was 14.7MP and the g11 is 10.. the sensor is the same size, and I'm not really convinced that the sensor itself is vastly improved. The G11 also widens up the maximum aperture to f/2 like the S90 does.. the G10's max aperture was f/2.8. I think the lower MP count combined with the faster lens is what really makes the G11's shots look better than the G10's.

    Of course, people not devoted to canon could have had a 10MP 1/1.7" sensor camera with an f/2.0 to f/2.8 lens a long time go with the Panasonic DMC-LX3.

    edit: just realized that the G11 still has the same lens as the g10, I was looking at a picture of the S90 and misremembering
    Last edited by gleam on February 2nd, 2010, 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Ed Fisher
    my chicago food photos

    RIP LTH.
  • Post #55 - February 2nd, 2010, 2:29 pm
    Post #55 - February 2nd, 2010, 2:29 pm Post #55 - February 2nd, 2010, 2:29 pm
    Thanks, gleam. That's a very helpful way of putting it.

    Anyone with opinions between the G11 and S90? Or, stated differently, what do I miss out with the S90? It is much more pocketable.
  • Post #56 - February 2nd, 2010, 3:22 pm
    Post #56 - February 2nd, 2010, 3:22 pm Post #56 - February 2nd, 2010, 3:22 pm
    gleam wrote:
    spinynorman99 wrote:
    Have seen a G10 in this scenario and it's not that great IMHO.


    The G11 is the current model and has a much-improved sensor.


    really, the g11 just tries to extract fewer megapixels out of the sensor.. the g10 was 14.7MP and the g11 is 10.. the sensor is the same size, and I'm not really convinced that the sensor itself is vastly improved. The G11 also widens up the maximum aperture to f/2 like the S90 does.. the G10's max aperture was f/2.8. I think the lower MP count combined with the faster lens is what really makes the G11's shots look better than the G10's.

    Of course, people not devoted to canon could have had a 10MP 1/1.7" sensor camera with an f/2.0 to f/2.8 lens a long time go with the Panasonic DMC-LX3.

    All true and quite welcome, as far as I'm concerned. The MP escalation has never made any sense to me. I'm glad to see Canon take the reverse leap with the s90 and the g11 (though, they never needed to take the forward leap in the first place). I think it was a marketplace risk for them to back off because most ordinary consumers judge a digital camera solely on its megapixel count. The 10MP may very well look less attractive to a lot of prospective shoppers, even though the images produced on the s90 and g11 actually look better than images shot on higher MP cameras in the same class.

    I chose the s90 over the g11 because it's got a slightly faster lens, it's more compact, because the expandability features offered on the g11 were of little interest to me and because I hadn't heard a whole lot of positive feedback about the gXX line from people who own them. The s90 comes in a bit cheaper, too.

    =R=
    Gardening is a bloodsport --Meghan Kleeman

    Why don't you take these profiteroles and put them up your shi'-ta-holes? --Jemaine & Bret

    There's a horse loose in a hospital --JM

    That don't impress me much --Shania Twain
  • Post #57 - February 2nd, 2010, 3:23 pm
    Post #57 - February 2nd, 2010, 3:23 pm Post #57 - February 2nd, 2010, 3:23 pm
    Hao wrote:Thanks, gleam. That's a very helpful way of putting it.

    Anyone with opinions between the G11 and S90? Or, stated differently, what do I miss out with the S90? It is much more pocketable.


    I actually realized that the G11 has the same lens as the G10, a 28-140mm (equivalent) f/2.8-f/4.5.

    the g11 adds a hot shoe and the tilt lcd. the s90 has the faster lens, is more compact, and has a cooler control scheme.

    me, of those two, I'd go for the s90 every day of the week.
    Ed Fisher
    my chicago food photos

    RIP LTH.
  • Post #58 - February 2nd, 2010, 5:53 pm
    Post #58 - February 2nd, 2010, 5:53 pm Post #58 - February 2nd, 2010, 5:53 pm
    My G10 has a hot shoe and I have been extremely happy with it. I don't like the tilt screen, one more thing to break imho. Plus the body on my G10 seems sturdier than the G11, less plasticky. Sure it takes great pics but I have no need at all to upgrade mine.
    I used to think the brain was the most important part of the body. Then I realized who was telling me that.
  • Post #59 - February 2nd, 2010, 8:07 pm
    Post #59 - February 2nd, 2010, 8:07 pm Post #59 - February 2nd, 2010, 8:07 pm
    Octarine wrote:My G10 has a hot shoe and I have been extremely happy with it. I don't like the tilt screen, one more thing to break imho. Plus the body on my G10 seems sturdier than the G11, less plasticky. Sure it takes great pics but I have no need at all to upgrade mine.

    Mike,

    I remember you telling me how much you liked your G10 and I definitely considered it when making my decision. If even a few other folks with whom I spoke had shared your enthusiasm, I very well may have ended up with one. I'm really glad to hear that you are still enjoying it. :)

    =R=
    Gardening is a bloodsport --Meghan Kleeman

    Why don't you take these profiteroles and put them up your shi'-ta-holes? --Jemaine & Bret

    There's a horse loose in a hospital --JM

    That don't impress me much --Shania Twain
  • Post #60 - July 16th, 2011, 12:09 am
    Post #60 - July 16th, 2011, 12:09 am Post #60 - July 16th, 2011, 12:09 am
    Hi,

    I have twin HP Photosmart R707 digital cameras.

    Twin 1: I have been using this camera for several years. I changed purses recently with more room allowing the camera to drop out. I thought nothing of it, but since then it has been acting odd. Control buttons are working sporadically, which means the innards probably shifted when dropped.

    Twin 2: This camera was used briefly until the LCD cracked. It may have an innard shift problem, too, but maybe not. It could have been impact. It does power on and off, but without a working screen it is useless.

    If I didn't have Twin 2, I might be shopping for a camera. Instead, I am going to give a shot at fixing (or perhaps the final kill) myself.

    I've been watching youtube videos to prepare for the micro adventure. I have the anti-static mats, jeweler tools and a clean bench, so what the heck. Worse comes to worse, I buy a camera.







    If anyone knows of other sources I should review before embarking, let me know.

    Regards,
    Cathy2

    "You'll be remembered long after you're dead if you make good gravy, mashed potatoes and biscuits." -- Nathalie Dupree
    Facebook, Twitter, Greater Midwest Foodways, Road Food 2012: Podcast

Contact

About

Team

Advertize

Close

Chat

Articles

Guide

Events

more