snubbr.com

Better Pics with Canon S2 IS Than EOS!!!
Hi guys. I finally decided on Canon to Nikon, but what a disappointment!.

I currently own the Powershot S2 IS and the EOS 450d. I would have thought that these 2 cameras are not even comparable. Please help me carify a few things..

The S2 has (5.75 x 4.31 mm) 0.24 cm sensor and a lens of approx. 35mm (diameter). The EOS has a (22.2 x 14.8 mm) 3.28 cm sensor and a slightly bigger lense (18-55 IS)..

The bigger sensor on the EOS means you need more light, for the same fstop. F5.6 on the S2 is bringing in more light (compared to sensor size) than the same setting on the EOS which means you can use a quicker shutter on the S2 than the EOS thus getting less shake and better picture..

Also the mirror has to flip out of the way and the shutter must be bigger all contributing to more vibrations.Is this correct? Or did I have a faulty camera?.

Thanks..

Comments (16)

It is obvious you don't have a clue about what you are talking about.At f/5.6 you have the same amount of light (on sq. cm) on both sensors..

FYI Canon S2 has a lens of 6-72 mm f/2.7-f/3.5 that means you have the maximum aperture 20.57 mm (72 mm f/3.5). The kit lens of Canon 450D is 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6 and the maximum aperture is 9.82 mm (55 mm f/5.6). But if you compare apples with apples at 88 mm equivalent you have the focal length of 14.67 mm on S2 and 55 mm on 450D. Now the apertures at f/5.6 are 2.62 mm and, respectively, 9.82 mm..

Try to shoot something at ISO800 (if Canon S2 has it) on both cameras and see the results at f/5.6 at the same equivalent focal length (to be easier use 22 mm on Canon 450D and 6 mm on Canon S2). You'll see why Canon S2 need so much light and not the other way around.VictorBucuresti, Romaniahttp://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/..

Comment #1

Having a larger sensor is a good thing. The smaller the sensor, the more MP are crammed into it which makes the sensor less sensitive to the light and invites more noise to the party at higher ISOs. A larger Sensor means that those megapixels have room to absorb the light coming in which makes for sharper images and bolder colors with less noise..

Secondly, if you're not in the habit of prefocusing, then when you fire off a shot it's easy to get an out of focus shot due to either shutter lag or even camera shake. The S2 is a point and shoot and does have some lag to it. So, if you practice both prefocusing and panning with the action, you can cut that lag by as much as 80%.James DeRuvoDigital Camera HQhttp://www.digitalcamera-hq.com..

Comment #2

Can you post examples of comparable pictures from your two cameras that show that the compact performs better than the DSLR?.

Best wishesMike..

Comment #3

Then you should use the S2..

You are sure lucky to be able to get better pictures from the cheaper and technologically inferior S2! Or, perhaps, you just don't know how to use a DSLR..

Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...

Comment #4

It is obvious you don't have a clue about what you are talking about.>.

Thanks for putting it so gently. When someone doesn't know something he usually asks a question which is what I did..

At f/5.6 you have the same amount of light (on sq. cm) on both sensors..

FYI Canon S2 has a lens of 6-72 mm f/2.7-f/3.5 that means you have the maximum aperture 20.57 mm (72 mm f/3.5). The kit lens of Canon 450D is 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6 and the maximum aperture is 9.82 mm (55 mm f/5.6). But if you compare apples with apples at 88 mm equivalent you have the focal length of 14.67 mm on S2 and 55 mm on 450D. Now the apertures at f/5.6 are 2.62 mm and, respectively, 9.82 mm.>.

Thanks for the explanation..

Try to shoot something at ISO800 (if Canon S2 has it) on both cameras and see the results at f/5.6 at the same equivalent focal length (to be easier use 22 mm on Canon 450D and 6 mm on Canon S2). You'll see why Canon S2 need so much light and not the other way around.>.

The S2 only goes up to ISO400 and even the ISO 100 is not too good but compare these pics..

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/28660287@N04/?saved=1.

There is not much difference in them. I would have expected a huge difference given the different cameras!..

Comment #5

Looks like on the EOS bag picture you misfocused in front of the subject..

If what you value are pictures in bright light with a large depth of field, the smaller sensor is superior. Lots of things in sharp focus..

If what you want is good sensitivity in lower light, and the ability to limit depth of field, which serves to keep a selected object of interest in focus, and the rest blurred, you want the larger sensor. Photography as an art, where we make a photograph that can influence the viewer's perception by bringing attention to a specific object : then we want the smaller depth of field..

If we want to document a set of objects on a table, evenly lit with a flash, and we want them all in focus - the smaller sensor will do. We would actually need more light on a large sensor format to make the same depth of field from the same viewpoint and same angle of view, by allowing us to stop down..

You are able to be more creative with your SLR - if you want quick snapshots and sensitivity is not an issue, the smaller camera is better. I use both kinds in appropriate situations...

Comment #6

You can't tell anything much from these - at 1000 x 700 pixels thay are less than 1MP in size. The only differences I can see (apart from differences in colour balance which are easily corrected) are on the shots of the bag on the bed, where.

(i) the picture taken with the DSLR has narrower depth of field than the picture taken with the S2, which is normal - you can see that the bag in the background is out of focus, whereas with the inherently greater depth of field of the compact, all of the bags are in focus..

(ii) also the flash does not quite cover the wide angle of the lens on the EOS camera as there is vignetting at the corners. if you zoom in / stop down the lens a bit this will disappear..

It is not clear what the problem is. Any slight differences in colour balance / brightness could be fixed by a single click in photoshop. Is that what you are concerned about?.

Try a better test. Set both cameras to ISO 800 and take a photo of something - anything - but the same in both cases. Now look at the pics on your computer screen and zoom in a lot until a small part of the image fills the screen. What do you see?.

Best wishesMike..

Comment #7

Try a better test. Set both cameras to ISO 800 and take a photo ofsomething - anything - but the same in both cases. Now look at thepics on your computer screen and zoom in a lot until a small part ofthe image fills the screen. What do you see?.

Here's a clue:.

Http://forums.dpreview.com/...forums/read.asp?forum=1002&message=28614770.

Best wishes.

Mike..

Comment #8

Aletheia wrote:.

Then you should use the S2..

You are sure lucky to be able to get better pictures from the cheaperand technologically inferior S2! Or, perhaps, you just don't knowhow to use a DSLR..

Could be or he could just upgrade to an S5 and be completely happy.

Http://www.flickr.com/photos/w-photos/full resolution Canon S5 video http://www.filefactory.com/file/8e57cf..

Comment #9

Ciancu wrote:.

It is obvious you don't have a clue about what you are talking about.>.

Thanks for putting it so gently. When someone doesn't know somethinghe usually asks a question which is what I did..

I was referring at this:.

The S2 has (5.75 x 4.31 mm) 0.24 cm sensor and a lens of approx. 35mm.

(diameter). The EOS has a (22.2 x 14.8 mm) 3.28 cm sensor and a slightly bigger > lense (18-55 IS)..

You compare the external diameter of a lens with the focal length of other lens..

In very good conditions the P&S will have comparable results with a dSLR. the dSLR will have a better IQ with more DR and cleaner image. You used the flash so you have enough light and the DR of the picture is very narrow. As you can see ISO800 of 450D is about the same as ISO100 of S2..

I would like to make a test in plenty of light. Then crop a portion of the image at your monitor resolution. Then you'll see what is about the clean image.As an example of ISO1600 picture see here (no NR applied)..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Try not to use flash with Canon S2 and make a ISO400 picture in the same low light.VictorBucuresti, Romaniahttp://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/..

Comment #10

I doubt it. I'm not at all happy with the low light capabilities of my S5.JonGive me something to shoot..

Comment #11

Have a look at this thread....

Canon S3-IS vs Canon EOS-5Dhttp://forums.dpreview.com:80/...ums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=27327328.

General Turgidson: 'Well, I don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up, sir.' (Dr. Strangelove, 1964)..

Comment #12

Aside from what was already mentioned, the S2 underexposed the fan picture. The 2nd image is also a bit underexposed..

Mark..

Comment #13

Ciancu wrote:.

It is obvious you don't have a clue about what you are talking about.>.

Thanks for putting it so gently. When someone doesn't know somethinghe usually asks a question which is what I did..

No you didn't ask a question. You made a statement based on lack of understanding and then asked if you were wrong. The answer to your question is: yes, you are wrong..

Assuming two cameras of any type are accurate, S2 and a Rebel for instance, the same shutter speed, aperture, and iso setting will result in the same amount of light exposing the film or sensor. The units of measure were designed that way on purpose...

Comment #14

Thanks Sam_pol.

We would actually need more light on a large sensor format to make the same depth of field from the same viewpoint and same angle of view, by allowing us to stop down.>.

This is what I was trying to get at. To bring the same amount of things into focus you need to stop down which decreases the amount of light hitting the sensor, so you need a higher iso and or a slower shutter..

So when comparing the two there is not much in it and to ME not worth the extra bucks. I'm sending the camera back and buying a brighter lamp. The camera was approx $900 and the lamp cost approx $ 20.

Thanks..

Comment #15

If you cannot see any difference between the two cameras this is the best decision..

It is not that there are no differences but a dSLR will not make you a better photographer. It would just provide more flexibility to you.VictorBucuresti, Romaniahttp://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/..

Comment #16

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.