Are these pics ok? see if my camera is working fine. Canon SD400

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Epoman

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2003
2,984
0
0
Originally posted by: SinNisTeR
i love my sd400 :)

Well tell me why? I love it too. Hows the flash working out for you? I feel it's a little weak.

Plus tell me how did my pics come out?
 

Brown Noser

Member
Jun 30, 2005
38
0
0
The first pic looks ok. I actually find the bokeh to contribute to it. It's not the greatest picture and it could be more defined but no big problems here.
The second picture looks OOF. Was your camera in macro mode and were you using a tripod? That might be the reason it's OOF.
The third picture looks fine to me! It makes me hungry AND thirsty. That's all.

Canon makes great P&S cameras. I have a SD300 that I carry around and a DRebel for other photography.
 

Epoman

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2003
2,984
0
0
Originally posted by: Brown Noser
The first pic looks ok. I actually find the bokeh to contribute to it. It's not the greatest picture and it could be more defined but no big problems here.
The second picture looks OOF. Was your camera in macro mode and were you using a tripod? That might be the reason it's OOF.
The third picture looks fine to me! It makes me hungry AND thirsty. That's all.

Canon makes great P&S cameras. I have a SD300 that I carry around and a DRebel for other photography.

Actually I was just holding it (no tripod), it was in macro mode but it was windy and the flowers were moving. Thanks for the comments on the pics.
 

SouthPaW1227

Golden Member
Aug 4, 2004
1,863
0
0
I think they look awesome. You can't beat the features/size of the SD-series. I love my SD200.

If you're trying to get RebelXT quality out of a credit card sized camera, you won't. But you gotta admit it looks EXTREMELY good for the small size/price.
 

rh71

No Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
52,853
1,048
126
I've found with my SD400 that the pics taken without flash have a lot of noise in them. What about you guys ? Am I doing something wrong ?
 

kyutip

Golden Member
Jul 24, 2000
1,729
0
0
rh71,
Check your settings to see if the auto ISO is selected.
If it does, change it to ISO 50 or 100.
Disabled flash, put it on tripod or table, use timer and check the shot again after that.
Should reduce the noise. Auto ISO prolly pump it up to ISO 400 (noisy) to compensate for lack of flash.

Epoman,
Your camera should be able to take reasonably sharp & nice pictures, regardless of it's a small P&S. There is a general consensus that SD300/400 produce softer picture on the corner & edge than its predecessor (S400/500), but not that noticeable unless viewed at 100%. It is believed that the new UA lens is the culprit, but that is also why the camera can be that thin. Can't have the cake & eat it too :)
A little bit of sharpening prolly should take care of it.

Just to give you some comparison, here are some that I took with Canon S400.
I'm not a great photog by any means but I think these are pretty sharp and show what a small cam can do.

My Nikon D70

AZ's Sunset

Lexar JumpDrive

Getty

Sammich Anyone ?

 

randomlinh

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,853
2
0
linh.wordpress.com
2nd pic looks a little soft, but otherwise, alright. i love my SD200. I'm not expecting superior pics, as I went around snapping w/ my rebel at my friends party (just happened to have it w/ me), so I'm a little spoiled.. but it works well enough for the 4x6 if I want to print out. flash sucks indoors (general P&S flash photography really irks me, but it must be done, i don't have steady hands), but i find my sd200 to be just fine.
 

Epoman

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2003
2,984
0
0
Originally posted by: kyutip
rh71,
Check your settings to see if the auto ISO is selected.
If it does, change it to ISO 50 or 100.
Disabled flash, put it on tripod or table, use timer and check the shot again after that.
Should reduce the noise. Auto ISO prolly pump it up to ISO 400 (noisy) to compensate for lack of flash.

Epoman,
Your camera should be able to take reasonably sharp & nice pictures, regardless of it's a small P&S. There is a general consensus that SD300/400 produce softer picture on the corner & edge than its predecessor (S400/500), but not that noticeable unless viewed at 100%. It is believed that the new UA lens is the culprit, but that is also why the camera can be that thin. Can't have the cake & eat it too :)
A little bit of sharpening prolly should take care of it.

Just to give you some comparison, here are some that I took with Canon S400.
I'm not a great photog by any means but I think these are pretty sharp and show what a small cam can do.

My Nikon D70

AZ's Sunset

Lexar JumpDrive

Getty

Sammich Anyone ?

Thanks for the reply, I'm getting more and more convinced to keep my SD400. ;)
 

dartworth

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
15,195
1
81
Originally posted by: Epoman
Anybody else?

Anyone else...

Yeah how about you stop posting about this camera already...you made at least 3 different post about it...
 

Epoman

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2003
2,984
0
0
Originally posted by: dartworth
Originally posted by: Epoman
Anybody else?

Anyone else...

Yeah how about you stop posting about this camera already...you made at least 3 different post about it...

Don't like, don't click it's that simple. But anyway thanks for the bump.
 

desk

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2004
1,124
0
0
i have an sd300 and my photos often appear a little washed out (except in macro mode). i normally run washed out pictures though 'the gimp', making the following adjustments: brightness, contrast, sharpness.

look at your yellow flower pic before and after:

before gimp

after gimp

the difference is subtle, but i think the second one looks a little better.
 

Epoman

Platinum Member
Apr 15, 2003
2,984
0
0
Originally posted by: desk
i have an sd300 and my photos often appear a little washed out (except in macro mode). i normally run washed out pictures though 'the gimp', making the following adjustments: brightness, contrast, sharpness.

look at your yellow flower pic before and after:

before gimp

after gimp

the difference is subtle, but i think the second one looks a little better.

WOW! yeah there is a BIG improvement thanks for taking the time to this for me. I have Adobe Photoshop 7 but do you think "the gimp" is easier or better?

 

desk

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2004
1,124
0
0
Originally posted by: Epoman
Originally posted by: desk
i have an sd300 and my photos often appear a little washed out (except in macro mode). i normally run washed out pictures though 'the gimp', making the following adjustments: brightness, contrast, sharpness.

look at your yellow flower pic before and after:

before gimp

after gimp

the difference is subtle, but i think the second one looks a little better.

WOW! yeah there is a BIG improvement thanks for taking the time to this for me. I have Adobe Photoshop 7 but do you think "the gimp" is easier or better?

photoshop is better, gimp is freer. ;)
 

CTho9305

Elite Member
Jul 26, 2000
9,214
1
81
Originally posted by: rh71
I've found with my SD400 that the pics taken without flash have a lot of noise in them. What about you guys ? Am I doing something wrong ?

Unfortunately, Canon used a smaller CCD for the SD200-SD400 than they had in the S400 and have in the S410 / S500 / SD500. The result is noisier images... since I like evening / low light pictures, CCD size (well, noise at higher ISOs) was a big factor in what I decided to buy. I would have gone for an SD400 if the CCD was bigger, but it's not, and the SD500 cost more than I really wanted to spend.

I ended up getting a Fujifilm Finepix F10, and it's pretty good - but one thing that occurs a lot is blown highlights - the brightest part of an image ends up white. You can avoid it by doing the metering in a different part of the scene or adjusting the exposure a bit though, so it's not a huge problem.

Some pics from here and here.

1
2
3 (I should've used a lower ISO here)
4 (I didn't mean to use the flash).
5
6a vs 6b - they're the same thing, but one metered with the sky and the other with the trees (note that in 6a the sky is *completely* overexposed)
7
 

faenix

Platinum Member
Sep 28, 2003
2,717
0
76
Keep the fscking camera. It's a great P&S and it'll last you for a couple of years. It won't take the pictures like a DSLR but what else can you expect from a compact digital camera?

Let this thread die please, Epoman's question's been answered plenty of times.
 

rh71

No Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
52,853
1,048
126
Originally posted by: kyutip
rh71,
Check your settings to see if the auto ISO is selected.
If it does, change it to ISO 50 or 100.
Disabled flash, put it on tripod or table, use timer and check the shot again after that.
Should reduce the noise. Auto ISO prolly pump it up to ISO 400 (noisy) to compensate for lack of flash.
thanks for that info. I just did a test in manual mode (you were probably right about auto mode)... with lower ISOs, it takes longer to complete snapping the picture and with my unsteady hands, it creates a bit of a blur. However, the lower ISOs did get rid of the noise in the flash-less pics. At least now I know... I'll try for a happy medium.
 

fbrdphreak

Lifer
Apr 17, 2004
17,556
1
0
I think they are fine. My 5MP A95 I think gets a little sharper under ideal conditions, but that (A) might be in my head and (B) might have to do with the lens they use on the Elph's (smaller camera, less quality lens?)