Don't forget that if you plan on using the camera around water you can get a wonderful waterproof case for the S300. With the case it's not much bigger (if not smaller still) then my current Epson digicam.

Anybody know any good eshops in Canada for digicams other then Herny's?

I would seriously recommend the S300. I have a Fuji with a 3x zoom. On my camera, a 3x zoom basically equates to a "what you see with your eye is what you get on the camera." A 2x zoom would mean that everything you shoot will appear smaller and further away than what you see with your eye.

I just came back from Egypt and Greece, and there were plenty of shots that I wished I had a bigger zoom for. I wouldn't sacrifice that zoom for just a hundred bucks. You will kick yourself for it later.

I just looked up all three cameras on dpreview. My FinePix 4800 has a zoom from 36mm to 108mm. The S300 is 35mm to 105mm (so roughly the same as mine), and the S110 has 35mm to 70mm.

Keep in mind that I'm a poor photographer, and these are just my impressions, but that zoom would be the deal killer for me.

Thanks for the info. Pocketability is important, and if the s110 is smaller but has the same image quality in an even smaller package, then it sounds like what I want.


That's one of the reason's I was asking about the 300 vs 110. The only difference I could find was the zoom lens.

Btw, if you want to look at some of the full pictures from a 110, I've got a gallery set up. It's got a pretty good mix of pictures, in various conditions, be it taken by me, who knows how to stand still when pressing the shutter, to my wife... who hasn't quite got the knack. The last three albums are the majority of the digital pictures.

Btw, Gallery is a VERY nice piece of work. I love the way it pulls the EXIF information automatically (photo properties). The amount of information these camera's store in the picture is really neat.

Agreed. I was not planning on getting the unit unless I got at least a 64mb card to go with it and an extra battery. The extra battery that comes in the package kit is really the only main plus I would like about it. But the $100.00 cheaper, now that's a big deal.

Plus, the smaller size and weight is a big deal for me, too.

Which of the two cameras is newer? The 300?



The 110 is the newer camera. I put a 128M card in mine, handed it to my wife and went to Vegas. She took so many damn pictures of the strip with that thing, it wasn't even funny. I'm only using the original battery, and haven't had a problem with it. You end up having to change the flash memory before the battery, so I've just been charging it then, or overnight.

Hi,

I have the Canon Digital Ixus. IM(H)O, the three best things about it is:

1) it's small (I have it with me everywhere)
2) it takes amazing looking pictures
3) it runs DOS natively, and someone ought to whip up a PacMan clone for it's cute high-res screen (nerd factor)

Mine hasn't got the video-clip capability, but really, who needs it? A DV cam will do the job much better, both sound and picture wise.

Just my €0.02,

My biggest disappointment is a problem that plagues almost all digital cameras, and that's the fact that when I click the shutter, there is a noticable delay between when the shutter actually releases.

I probably shouldn't get into this discussion, since the tiny bit of knowledge I have about digital cameras is anecdotal and second hand... but never let it be said that I passed up an opportunity to display my ignorance.

I have been doing a bit of research (the dpreview.com site is outstanding) and have tentatively decided to buy a Canon G1. (It has been superceded by the G2, but the G1 seems only marginally less capable, and there is plenty of NOS (New Old Stock) still on the shelves selling for hundreds of dollars less.)

What prompted this post is that I remembered reading that the shutter release delay on the Canon G1 was less than 1/10 of a second. ("...shutter release lag was unmeasurable, well below the 0.1 secs minimum our timer can catch")

It is certainly not small or compact, which I guess was the main point of this thread... but for my particular needs there is no advantage whatsoever to having a tiny camera, and the additional features enabled by having a larger form factor to work with are substantial. You can read about the G1 here.

If anybody who knows more about digital cameras than I do (that is, everybody) has specific information or advice about this camera, I would like to hear.

tanstaafl.

Wow, that looks like a pretty good camera. I especially like the option of the raw image feature. If extreme portability wasn't one of my goals, I'd look more closely at that one.

Hmm, Doug, did you see the bit on the the chromatic aberrations? From what I can glean on the dpreview site, this kind of aberration is common, but there are also cameras which do not exhibit the problem.

I have the Canon S100 (which I'm very happy with BTW) and I too was very concerned with the apparent lag in the shutter. I discovered that the lag isn't due to the shutter. It is caused by the time it takes to auto-focus. I have found that if you depress and hold the button half way, it will focus and beep when it is ready (I think the LED flashes as well). Once that happens, finish pressing the button and it will immediately snap the picture. Once you get used to taking pictures that way, it is much nicer.

Chromatic abberations aren't as big as a problem (in my limited experience) as dpreview.com makes them out to be. Its interesting that digital cameras suffer from this problem, those of you wearing polycarbonate(featherwate) glasses at higher prescriptions may suffer from chromatic abberations as well. People see halos, discolorations, and sometimes get headaches. I wonder if some of the lenses in the camera are made out of polycarb? Anyway, if you have photoshop, you can fix them yourself, or you can download actions that will do it for you (at a price).

Sean

It has been superceded by the G2, but the G1 seems only marginally less capable

As a current owner of the G2, and a previous owner of the G1, let me say that you should definitely go for the G2. I did tons of research before buying the G1, as well as listening to another friend who also did tons of research. At the time, the G1 was THE camera to get, in terms of quality and features. So, I went out and bought the G1.

Then, about a week later they announced the G2. Basically, the G2 is the G1 with all the bugs fixed and tons of wishlist items added. I, of course, quickly returned my G1 and patiently waited for the G2. I got it only a few weeks after it came out.

Let me tell you...the differences are subtle, but worth the extra money. Things such as the histogram view, the much improved manual focus, and the fix for the chromatic aberration make the G2 worthwhile.

Also, if you read on the Canon forum on dpreview.com, you'll see that everybody recommends the G2 if you're buying a new camera, but not to upgrade if you already have the G1.

And if price is an issue, I HIGHLY recommend doing the AMEX Price Match. Basically, on their higher end cards, AMEX does price protection up to $250. All you do is buy the camera with your AMEX card, fax them a printout of a lower price, and they send you a check for the difference. I bought my G2 for $875 when it came out at a local shop. I faxed a price of like $600 later, and received a $250 check two weeks later. So, I got the G2 for $625 and from a local camera shop.

I hope all the info helps your decision.

I wonder if some of the lenses in the camera are made out of polycarb?

Chromatic abberation is not a feature of polycarbonate. No optical media has index of refraction exactly same for various wavelenghts (wavelength vs. refraction index relationship is called dispersion relation). This is compensated for by coupling a strong convex lense with 'narrow' dispersion characteristic with a weaker concave one made of material that disperses more strongly. By careful matching of lense strength (inverse focal length) and dispersion charasteristic of material one can achieve for a lense group the same overall index of refraction for a range of wavelenghts.

Of course, there are other aberations to account for (spherical, diffraction effects etc).

The poly lenses we use (index 1.586) are formed by putting the material into a mold. We then cut a curve into the back of the lens with a type of specialized cnc machine. The front, however, still has distortions of the front of it from the molding proess. This is especially easy to see with polarized lenses. A property of a lens materials is Abbe value. The Abbe value is a measure of the degree to which light is dispersed when entering a lens. (Dispersion occurs when white light is broken into its component colors, like a prism hanging in a window.) The lower the Abbe value, the greater the dispersion of light, causing chromatic aberration (color fringing) in the periphery of the lens. The higher the Abbe value, the better the peripheral optics will be. A lower Abbe value means that the lens will have more chromatic aberration. Standard plastic has an Abbe value of 58. Most high index materials have a much lower Abbe value of 36 although Spectralite high index has an Abbe of 47.

Sean

So, if I understood correctly, achromatic lens group with positive focal lenght is composed of a short-focal-length convex lens with higher Abbe value and a 'weaker' concave one with lower Abbe value ('wider' dispersion), right?

BTW, apart from using material with higher Abbe values (and you say that requrement for high Abbe value and high refraction index are usually contradictory), does any manufactuter of prescription glasses use multi-lens approach to chromatic abberation elimination, as photography lens manufacturers do?

What is Spectralite?

(Is there any technical discipline we don't have a professional in here? )

After taking a closer look at my camera, I think the lenses are made out of glass, which has the best visual acuity anyway. Thus, abbe values are irrelavent. Some of the abberations may be caused by the design of the sensor in the camera.

Abbe value and high refraction index aren't contradictory. There are some new materials out there that have both. A material called trilogy is now out which has a material index of 1.53 and an abbe of 45. It is an excellent material, and can be cut down to 1mm center thinkness. Another is Trivex, which has the same properties. We can make those thinner due to the high material index - they bend light more.

Spectralite is another proprietary lens material developed by sola. It has a abbe value of 47 and a material index of 1.537. A great choice for (most) people with rx's of over 7 or 8 diopters.

No one uses the multi lens approach. One of the reasons is thickness expectations. Any solution using 2 lenses would be too thick and heavy for people to wear. We used to use a multi lens approach to make AR lenses on the spot for customers instead of them having to wait for 2 weeks. A wafer would be placed on a machine, glue put on the wafer, and another wafer on top of that. Then we cured the glue using uv light. If a speck of dust got on the lens while you were gluing it, you had to start over. We could only use plastic lenses. The end result was a lens that was thicker than it could have been. Often, people would come back months later with delaminated lenses. Our company bought all the machines with the understanding that a process would be developed to use poly lenses, which was an interesting concept since poly blocks 99% of uv light. Thus, there was no way to cure the glue. After 2 years of little use, over 700 15g+ machines were chunked into the trash.

When you get glasses, ask your eye doctor for a lens material reccommendation - not the salesman - especially if you aren't living in a licenced state.

Sean

Err, why is Abbe value irrelevant for glass? I mean, passing a beam of white light through a glass prism will demonstrate that refraction index does wary with wavelenght, won't it?

Do they accept print outs of web prices?

Calvin

Do they accept print outs of web prices?

Yup. I sent them the cheapest price I could find on the internet. Most people have been using BroadwayPhoto.

Here's a little more about the Best Value Guarantee.

Your right, it is relevant for glass. I don't deal with crown glass much, i've always considered glass a good optical material, but too heavy and thick for normal use in glasses. In all optical materials, different wavelengths of light have different indices of refraction. The index of refraction for violet light is higher than red light in standard crown glass. This is what is reponsible for chromatic abberation.

Sean

I'm aware of the best value guarantee, however, I've always interpreted it as an item that is advertised in print. I always assumed that the items that are advertised by web page are not advertised in print. But I always thought that if you printed the page, it is a print of an item advertised by web so doesn't count. But then I guess I took the definition of print to mean printed on a piece of paper. Or perhaps I misinterpreted the syntactical meaning of the clause, perhaps it means if you find an identical item advertised, and if you have it in print to prove it. Or maybe print could more generally include items printed on a computer monitor display? Or perhaps it could be interpreted as an item that is advertised anywhere on any form, but if I found it somehow then it is eligible. Could it be that it doesn't matter where the item is advertised or in what medium, but if it somehow ends up on a computer printer then it is said to be printed -- say, if I took a picture of the item's price tag in a store on my digital camera and printed that? Argh........ So basically even though I knew about the guarantee, it was too vague for me to decide whether I could use it.

The best value guarantee in their words is:

Getting the best value on your purchases is easy. Best Value Guarantee ensures that you pay the lowest price available on covered items purchased entirely with an eligible American Express Card. If, within 60 days, you find an identical item to the one you just purchased with the Card advertised in print at a lower price than you originally paid, American Express will reimburse the difference in price to you, up to $250 per item.

Calvin

Yeah, it's rather vague. I probably wouldn't have thought about it myself. But, American Express has really tried to adopt the internet and get itself set as THE card to use for internet shopping.

So, they allow you to do price matching from any website. The only catch is that the printout (from your web browser) needs to have a date on it somewhere.