Canon S3

[scoolover]

Your needs were exactly why I got the Rebel XT. I got it last week and took some great shots at a balloon rally over memorial day weekend. I have not scratched the surface yet with it. I also got the ef 70-300 USM lens. It is pretty incredible as I am also an amateur. So what if it won't be paid off until I need a new one in about 2012!

 

[mhutchinson]

I had an adapter on my old Canon S-20 that allowed for adapters and filters and did find that they add-ons produced nice results. Plus it allowed me to keep a UV filter on the camera when I was out in sunny conditions to help with the haze. The one I had attached to the tripod mount which was very handy as well.

Mike

 

[boBQuincy]

A polarizer can cut through haze and reflections and add saturation to the image. All this is difficult or impossible to do after the fact with a computer. I usually have a polarizer on the camera if there is enough light.

It's easy to use one with a P&S, just hold the polarizer up to your eye and rotate it until you see the desired effect, then place it over the lens and take the photo.

I don't see much use for other filters as they are generally made redundant by filters already inside the camera.

For B&W there is no real difference between filters and Photoshop. It's not a 'cheat', it's merely reducing the amount of light for one (or more) colors. The big difference is with Photoshop you are 'carrying' a lot of filters with you.


boB

 

[Mellie0119]

I have the Canon Rebel XT. And I'm not an expert by any defintion, but the kit lens is only okay. I've had my camera since Nov 05, just learning the techincal aspects of photography and now have the dreaded "lens envy". 18-55mm just doesn't cut it for real zoom, I'm considering a Sigma lens, I'd love to get the Canon IS lens, but until my skill level increases considerably, I can't justify the cost. That said, I love my camera- the shutter speed, start up speed, burst mode. It's a great camera for someone who wants more than a P&S and has a desire to learn more.

 

[Mom2Ashli]

Has anyone ever used Royalcamera.com? Was hoping to hear some feedback.

F.Y.I.

They have the Canon S2 listed for $275.00

And the Canon S3 for $389.00

Shipping appears to be $29.99 for Ground.

I missed out on the good deal that Dell was running last week.

 

[jann1033]

http://www.resellerratings.com/

some one posted this link on another thread and i think royal might have been not good...the articles are scary!!!!! but i guess better forewarned. i just bought something form Beach and they seemed fine, butterfly i was going to order from but their csr was really snotty. Ecost, i have ordered a few things and got them promptly but now i see some have said their rebates never come...since they owe me about $100 worth i hope that doesn't happen to me

 

[Mom2Ashli]

http://www.resellerratings.com/

some one posted this link on another thread and i think royal might have been not good...the articles are scary!!!!! but i guess better forewarned. i just bought something form Beach and they seemed fine, butterfly i was going to order from but their csr was really snotty. Ecost, i have ordered a few things and got them promptly but now i see some have said their rebates never come...since they owe me about $100 worth i hope that doesn't happen to me

WOW! Thank you very much. I just read some of them.

 

[Jeanne B]

I haven't heard of Royalcamera but the price seems a little too good which makes me question them. Beachcamera and buydig are very reputable, sister companies and you can buy the S3 from them for $424 and the S2 for $325, free shipping. I see them recommended quite often on the dpreview.com forums. I bought my A610 from buydig and I've been watching their prices on the S2 and S3 since I may also buy one of these from them. Definitely check out resellerratings.com - that should tell you a lot!!

 

[PoohJen]

Thanks Y'all! Feeling more secure in going the XT direction..

Kelly, you are sooo close to convincing me! It'll likely be the Rebel XT. btw, LOVED your Castle At Night pic on the architecture contest thread!

But I do fear the kit lens won't be enough zoom; lens envy already!

Are lenses easily transferable among cameras? (did I just reveal my total ignorance?!!!). i.e., will my Sigma lens from my old Minolta Maxxum fit the Rebel, or is each camera proprietary, requiring different sizes/specs?

p.s. I am really enjoying lurking around the photography board! Great pics and great tips!!!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Thank you for the praise.

To answer your concern, the kit lens won't be enough in the long run for you. I personally would rather buy just the body and use the difference and add a bit of dough to get Sigma 18-125 (around US$250 shipped in the US, if I remember correctly). It's an awesome walkaround lens. The AF is a tad slow and the AF motor is rather noisy. You get what you pay for, but optically you get far more than what you pay for.

If you have a higher budget, get the Sigma 17-70 (around US$500 in Canada, don't know about US, usually far cheaper). Also you with this lens you get far more than what you pay for.

If you REALLY have a crazy budget, get Canon 18-55 f/2.8 IS. The IS is really wonderful, solidly built, tack sharp result, blazing fast auto focus and silent motor too.

Look at my other thread about that lens. The pic was taken at 1/13 sec shutter speed and the pic you see have been cropped by 80%, so what you see there is almost the full resolution, non-resized picture.

 

[jann1033]

i was on another website and reading a lot of complaints about bad nosie pictures in "auto" in all situations, to the point where one said canon said not to use the auto setting at all . anyone else come across this and would that include any of the auto settings ( like the scene settings) ? the major reason i decided on this one was so husband could use the auto settings and if they look bad, what's the point? if it has to be used like a dslr, i'll get a dslr instead
thanks

 

[Kelly Grannell]

First of all, most probably under the auto setting the factory default for flash is off (instead of auto) so in some low-light cases, the ISO is bumped up to ISO 800.

Second, if you have the budget for dSLR, don't even bother with the S3. You can get P&S performance out of dSLR but you'll never get dSLR performance out of P&S.

 

[Anewman]

i was on another website and reading a lot of complaints about bad nosie pictures in "auto" in all situations, to the point where one said canon said not to use the auto setting at all .

I have read about noise issue(not horrible but visible) with ISO 800, but that is not used unless needed to avoid underexposure. The camera is not the problem, shooting in low light is.


Less zoom helps(get closer and shoot wide angle).

There are 2 reasons why shooting on the WIDE side(vs TELE/Zoom) helps.
1. Shutter speed does not need to be as fast to avoid camera shake, shutter will be open longer hence ISO can be lowered to one that does not display as much noise.

2. Camera will be closer to subject allowing flash to illuminate properly. When shooting at full zoom you will be TOO far away from the subject for the flash illuminate the subject and required shutter speed maybe too fast to allow sync.

 

[jann1033]

OK here is my dilemma , i can get a Pentax dslr with a basic lens( i think it's ist dl) for just about the same money...but i am getting a low end slr and can't really afford much more, maybe $100 or so ( probably not enough for the rebel with a lens . plus due to hand shake, the IS is a good idea for me.with a dslr,i know i would want more of a tele lens( I like landscapes and if the lens that comes with them is like the 28-80mm i had for my film slr,i was disappointed in the limit of pics i could get with it) and they seem to be a good bit more( cheapest i saw was 300 or so, not worrying about pro quality but don't want total junk either) and i like macro shots so pretty sure if i would want one for that too. but i also don't want to spend 400+ for the s3 and be irritated...i do like lots of the features of the s3 and the convenience of just point and shot if that's what i feel like doing and it seemed the Pentax was a total no frills camera which would mean i'd have to think about every shot( not always a good thing for me).for me it's a hobby so i can't really see spending $1000++ for it like i think i would have to to get a dslr that is comparable to the s3 in range of functions.

husband said if i really want a dslr he could get a cheapo digital for his before shots at work and i'd take the after shots ( what we do now)

i am having such a tough time deciding

 

[Kelly Grannell]

There is truth in what you're saying but... there is another side of the truth.

1. Pentax dSLR, lowest end, body only is about $450
2. add Sigma 18-125 w/ Pentax mount for about $230
3. add Hoya AF Macro Tube (and turn your regular Sigma 18-125 into macro) about $100

Total, including shipping, still less than $1,000

about image stabilizer. Yes, you'll lose that... but at the same time you WON'T lose it. Why? S3 uses small sensor, so ISO 800 is the max you can use, the IS 2-stop effective advatange makes it equivalent to Pentax at ISO 3200 (in terms of level of ISO noise, due to far larger sensor size). It's not 100% the same effect, of course, but by having a relatively clean ISO 1600 (as clean as S3 ISO 400), you'll be able to freeze fast action BETTER than the S3.

Not to mention faster AF and more accurate AE.

 

[Anewman]

Refurbished NIKON D50 with kit lens is about $550 @ Beachcamera.com(I think no shipping or tax).

Or if you prefer the Pentax.

DL with KIT LENS is $463 @ Buydig.com(no tax, no shipping). AND Tamron 28-300mm XR = $139.
The Pentax(and nikon D50) maybe a "no frills" DSLR, but it still miles ahead of any P&S when it comes to ISO noise and overall picture quality. I dont think it would require any extra thought vs the S3.

But IMO it neither of these combos will solve the LOW LIGHT issues, help yes but they will not solve them when shooting in auto.

 

[Greg K.]

I have the Pentax, and am very happy with it. Yes, it is a "low end" dSLR. But for my purposes -- which are similar to yours, i.e., hobby, casual snapping, vacations and the like -- it's swell! I've taken some sensational pictures in low light at 1600 and 3200 iso that are remarkably free of noise (and if they have any noise, Noise Ninja or some other program cleans em up with the click of a mouse.) They'd rival anything taken by one of those fancy schmancy Canon or Nikons.

It's easy to learn and use, with a straightforward and fairly intuitive LCD menu; it's versatile; and when I want to just point and shoot, in AUTO, I can do that, and the pictures turn out great.

I got a kit at buydig for about $500, which included a lens and an SD card.

A great value, from a very good and reliable company.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

28-300 is cheap because it's not wide enough. Will you buy a 35mm film camera lens that starts at 45mm? Even the S3 "wide angle" is equivalent to 35mm.

My Disney range of shooting tend to be 17-24 and 70-125 range.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

28-300 is cheap because it's not wide enough. Will you buy a 35mm film camera lens that starts at 45mm? Even the S3 "wide angle" is equivalent to 35mm.

My Disney range of shooting tend to be 17-24 and 70-125 range.

 

[jann1033]

i read the pentax review again and it has more auto than i thought,,,

comparatively speaking would anyone know if the size would be heavier/lighter larger / smaller than an canon rebel film? I know some of you he-men/women can lug a 50 lb camera up a 90 degree incline with out giving it a second thought but i can't

(husband is going to faint when i tell him the s3 might be out... just when he thinks he doesn't have to listen to me tell him about cameras anymore another one comes along )

i guess this is weird thinking but i expect more from the s3...like it's fairly expensive for a point and shoot imo so i'd expect not to have tons of issues with it...i just read another review where the writer had to go through a number of them to find one that didn't take a slanted picture ( he thought the sensor was put in crooked in a bunch he tested)

as far as the light issues in auto, i guess i am thinking if i'm going to have to use my brain i might as well have a dslr

i don't know if i am trying to talk myself out of the s3 or into a dslr i just have this sick feeling i'm going to be disappointed in the s3

what would be close ( in mm i mean) to the 12x zoom of the s3?