Which one is recommended, Sony P10 or Canon IXUS 500

[nakedtoes]

of cos i know different conditions, different timing of the day can produce different coloration.... From the 2 pic we can see the sony one taken most "probably" in a hot noon.. bt it look so "FAKE" look at the color of the leaves.. so dark... and some part are too bright... anyway there is a reason why most professional photographers choose canon digi cam anytime.... As the comparasion with yr friend's pic on the same outing... do both of u set to the same setting.. or one use auto another use manual.... Different cam setting can affect a lot of thing too...

 

[nakedtoes]

All things being constant, of course the subject will look nicer with better colour in the evening sun compared to being washed out under the noon sun.

Then do u only choose to shoot in the evening??? if a digi cam produce "wash out" images under the noon sun, it show how lousy their CDD processor are... can't even diferentiate and produce better accurate image..

 

[nakedtoes]

Actually, i quite like my P9 camera. I
s just that, i find that the colour is abit more towards yellowish.
I want to sell away my P9 leh...

Hi giraffed,

Can i know how much you buy the camera?

Now, i prefer to buy Canon IXUS500

Thats the problem with SOny DIgi cam.. their color is totally out.. some model too bluerish also.. I also find that their auto white balance is not that accurate..

 

[ricleo]

hmm...if sony is so bad, why does canon use the sony 8MP chip for it's 8MP camera?

once again, your intepretation of the effect of the noon sun on the pics is wrong.

The leaves being bright, and some other parts being dark, looking unatural is precisely caused by the harsh noon lighthing, which without a doubt, would be present in the canon if it was shot in the same condition. That's why some parts are dark, and parts that are washed out till almost white is casued by the hot spots caused by harsh lighting.

I do not doubt that canon produces excellent DSLRs,but how do you feel u can actually make the sweeping statement that "most professional photographers choose canon digi cam anytime" I know alot many canon DSLR users that use Sony or Nikon compact cameras or Prosumer cameras to supplements theit DSLR.

For your only shooting in the evening statement" that's totally out of point too, as the morning/evening differences were only mentioned to bring out the possibility that the better colour in the canon pic may be due to the softer and nicer evening light, hence causing less hotspots/ extreme lighting conditions in the pictures.

Do try not to be over zealous in defending your favourite brand to the extent of being biased. Afterall this is a consumer corner forum, and your posts just come out to bash sony and does not even highlight any of canon's flaws.

 

[TROY]

Price wise i'm not too sure

Price for Sony DSC-P100 cost $660 before GST at AP i just check today and Canon IXUS 500 $650 before GST foc sandisk 128MB CF & Air Purifier Redeem at Canon well Sony also foc 128mb and a case for P100 ......... :bsmilie:

 

[ricleo]

just FYI, not all sonys have poor AWB, some canons have poor AWB too. Newer models since the P8/P10/P100, T1, V1, W1, F717, F828 and so on all have excellent colour reproduction.

Just to name a few canon flaws in the Ixus 400...

1) Slow start up
2) Small LCD
3) poor(long) shutter lag - (common knowledge that canon P&S suffers from this.)
4) good noise performance at the expense of image sharpness and detail.

 

[ricleo]

W1 at Song Bros in SLS at $650 with free 128MB MS, price after GST just an update

 

[nakedtoes]

i am not supporting the brand canon... because i only mention ixus 400/430 only ... and highlighted that most professionals indeed choose canon higher end models then other brands as some info for the thread starter ... every single digicam sure has its flaws... however i believe a good digi cam is the one that can produced the most accurate, detailed images and until now canon ixus 400/430 is still the best in the compact series.... their older series like the ixus v2 really cMI duo... IMHO a good digi cam shld produce images that give me a feeling that i am in that particular environment and time of the day when i view it. Pics taken with the Ixus 400 did give me that feeling. while i did make a comparasion of my frend's sony W1 and the photo quality is good and sharp too however it appears the whole pic a bit blurish if u look as a whole and i dun have that "feeling" i am in the pic... ...

 

[ricleo]

Just FYI, here's another pic from steve's digicams, comparing btw the P10 and the Canon. It's the same scene, although the canoes in the rack are kind of different... howver, these pictures clearly show the P10 i scapable of nice and strong colour rendition.

P10
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/sony_p10/samples/DSC00234.JPG

Ixus 400
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/s400/samples/IMG_0222.JPG

 

[nakedtoes]

Just FYI, here's another pic from steve's digicams, comparing btw the P10 and the Canon. It's the same scene, although the canoes in the rack are kind of different... howver, these pictures clearly show the P10 i scapable of nice and strong colour rendition.

P10
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/sony_p10/samples/DSC00234.JPG

Ixus 400
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/s400/samples/IMG_0222.JPG

:nono:

Unfair lar.. in the shot of P10 the canoes in it is different from the one in the ixus 400's shot.. maybe u shld compare this..

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/s410/samples/img_0741.jpg

and this
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/sony_p10/samples/DSC00234.JPG

since the ixus 430 and 400 are using the same CCD... althought the color in the P10 is vivid.. However i still find the color of the P100 oversaturated... and noise is visible too :thumbsd:

 

[nakedtoes]

bro also compare this 2 indoor pics..
No more sunlight to effect the color ..


http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/sony_p10/samples/DSC00273.JPG

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/s410/samples/img_0601.jpg

See the color of the canister, see the top part of the canister too... see the edges of the photo behind the canister.. see the burr wordings of the magazine (P10)... see also the red of the MM's mascot and the GOld color of its helmet.. :think: then now look at the ruby ball near the white line for P10.. did u see the very bad purple fringing from 8 o'clock to 2 o'clock of the white line? Sorry that i am that particular about detail cos i always use my photo shot as screensaver/ wallper for my Flat screen CRT... If a user always print thiers in 3R 4R cannot see liaoz.. ;p

 

[ricleo]

now you that u are comparing with the newer ixus430, u have to take into account the newer innards other than the CCD, like the image processor, colour settings, AF and so on, so it's like comparing canon technology with a sony cam one year it's predessor. A "fairer" comparison would be with the P100? for your M&M shot.

P100
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/sony_p100/samples/dsc00083.jpg

canoe shots u might as well compare with the p100 as well for the Ixus 430.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/sony_p100/samples/dsc00054.jpg
colours seem more natural doesn't it?

Anyway, it is really not up to us to judge whether the P10/P100/Ixus400/430 did the original scene the most justice, because we were both not at the original scene However, with regard to colour accuracy, i still feel that the canons over saturate their images.(Not that i'm saying it makes images look bad, infact it makes images more pleasing most of the time. but if you are talking abt colour accuracy, being over saturate basically isn't accurate.)

I do agree that that particular photo by the P10 is horrid, PF, with focus issues as well. But that can't be totally blamed on the camera as well (PF yes, focus no). somehow if u look at the P10, the clearest part of the image, is the american flag in front of the m&M toy. At such range, with a small aperture like F2.0-2.8, the DOf is really shallow, which would explain the BG being blur. Internal flash pics, i guess the Ixus 430 does outshine the P10, but it is on par with the current techonology P100.

Slight noise visibility is actually good, for prints that is. HAve you used the program neat image or noise ninja before? They are great noise removers, and if used properly, do not take away any sharpness in the images while removing noise.

I've printed same images, processed for noise and unprocessed for noise, prints with the natural noise in the image actually look more lifelike and natural compared to the cleaned images. The processed pics that were noise free were simply too clean

 

[ricleo]

anyway, we could go on and on posting and comparing images from "Steve" or other review sites, but that wouldn't be a accurate user testimonial to the cameras, haha, might as well post some of our own images taken with the cameras to show how good each cam is

 

[nakedtoes]

FYI ixus 400 is the same as 430 with added better bridgepict function.. the internal is totally the same.. i use 430 because the pic is supposed to be latest and the canoes are the newer one in the latest pic.. Mind u the P10 is 5Mega pixel, i believe P100 too.. the 400/430 actually a 4 mega pixel can produce better image quality then p10/p100.

Since u point the Americian flag.. if u compare the pic from P100 and Ixus 430.. the 430 is much detail and clearer such that u can actually see the "STARS" on the other side of the flag for Ixus 430:bigeyes:

Rightfull speaking the P100 is indeed better and improved then P10 and some other well known camera brands in imageoutput... indeed the P100 improved quite alot from P10. less purple fringe.. As for noise reduction software, i do not need to use that when i use the canon ixus 400/430.. . And yr quote that a bit of noise in the photo print for P10 make it more life-like.. can u elaborate cos this is first time i heard it HAHA... Izzt to stimulate a dusty environment (No offence through)..??? Even at low ISO for P10 has so much noise i can't imagine higher ISO how... But the P100 is suprising better.. Very very clean image Image details, colorations, sharpness in depend on individual... We are saying so much hopefully for the benifit of fellow members to compare before parting with their hardearn money...

 

[ricleo]

Geez.... haha... this can see the "stars" on the other side meaning more detail in the Ixus compared to the P100 is just funny The flag is semi transparent because of the texture of the cloth, and being able to see the stars is because of the angle the pic was taken of, which in the case of the Ixus 40o,allowed the viewer to see light reflected from the bottom layer of the flag. For the P100 shot, it's just that the angle was different, and the bottom layer stars couldn't be seen. IF this is supposed to be a difference caused by the CCD, might as well say that the Ixus 430 has X-ray vision, and hence can see thru the flag to the bottom layer of the rolled flag.

Now for a real observation of the detail in the flag, look carefully at the cloth and texture of the flag. The texture and stitching of the cloth in the P100 shot can be clearly seen, whereas for the Ixus 430 image, the detail in the flag texture is all mushed up to be very smooth, this is what i mean by the Sony having more "Detail" in the image.

Now really... for the "noise issue" in the P10 at low ISO, i really don't see "so much noise" in any of my old P10 images taken in ISO100 and below. Granted, the noise level only really increases in ISO200 and above, and i only use Noise reduction for images with lowlight at ISO 200 and above. Show me a pic at low ISO with high noise levels?

 

[nakedtoes]

Geez.... haha... this can see the "stars" on the other side meaning more detail in the Ixus compared to the P100 is just funny The flag is semi transparent because of the texture of the cloth, and being able to see the stars is because of the angle the pic was taken of, which in the case of the Ixus 40o,allowed the viewer to see light reflected from the bottom layer of the flag. For the P100 shot, it's just that the angle was different, and the bottom layer stars couldn't be seen. IF this is supposed to be a difference caused by the CCD, might as well say that the Ixus 430 has X-ray vision, and hence can see thru the flag to the bottom layer of the rolled flag.

Now for a real observation of the detail in the flag, look carefully at the cloth and texture of the flag. The texture and stitching of the cloth in the P100 shot can be clearly seen, whereas for the Ixus 430 image, the detail in the flag texture is all mushed up to be very smooth, this is what i mean by the Sony having more "Detail" in the image.

Now really... for the "noise issue" in the P10 at low ISO, i really don't see "so much noise" in any of my old P10 images taken in ISO100 and below. Granted, the noise level only really increases in ISO200 and above, and i only use Noise reduction for images with lowlight at ISO 200 and above. Show me a pic at low ISO with high noise levels?

Since like u cannot get what i said.. the P10 has noise at low ISO level and this is the last time i going to said.. i nv said HIGH NOISE LEVEL IN LOW ISO!!... .. .. u want the sample steve site got a lot... so many purple fringing in the pics too(P10).. I dun know why u so supportive of sony digicam.. as u have recomend W1, P100, P10.. Maybe u work for them..

As for the Flag i make a mistake i thought it show the other side of the flag but it actually is the surface a new side.. :blah:

 

[ricleo]

Since like u cannot get what i said.. the P10 has noise at low ISO level and this is the last time i going to said.. i nv said HIGH NOISE LEVEL IN LOW ISO!!... .. .. u want the sample steve site got a lot... so many purple fringing in the pics too(P10).. I dun know why u so supportive of sony digicam.. as u have recomend W1, P100, P10.. Maybe u work for them..

As for the Flag i make a mistake i thought it show the other side of the flag but it actually is the surface a new side.. :blah:

Wow now it's me who can't get what u are talking about?? Here's a direct quote from you below. If "So much noise at low ISO level" does not mean HIGH NOISE LEVEL IN LOW ISO... maybe my English is too poor to comprehend your high level of english... Didn't anyone teach you that it is RUDE to shout in CAPS online? If anyone has the time to read thru all these, one would see that I'm pretty neutral and fair. I'm a Sony supporter definitely, but I do admit to their flaws and point them out when necessary, unlike someone who just likes to bash Sony's products, with the first post being "For me even if the P10 is given to me free i also dun want.. See for yrself.." Talk about neutrality and maturity....

Even at low ISO for P10 has so much noise i can't imagine higher ISO how

 

[dropzone]

If picture quality wise is yr top priority chose Canon Ixus 430/ 400..

Comparing the picture quality of IXUS 400 with Sony P10 ... below.. For me even if the P10 is given to me free i also dun want.. See for yrself..

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/sony_p10/samples/DSC00077.JPG


http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/s410/samples/img_0655.jpg

Not talking about the comparsion between the 2 cameras. I think it's pretty BS to say "For me even if the P10 is given to me free i also dun want.. See for yrself.." That would be pretty.. Smart? No....

 

[ricleo]

I dun know why u so supportive of sony digicam.. .. Maybe u work for them..

Maybe i work for Sony? Why not say maybe you are just anti-sony, and see only things u wanna see, but turn a blind eye to everything else, notice that u have never addressed anything about the issues of canon which i pointed out.

1) Over saturation vs colour accuracy
2) Noise reduction hence softer images and lack of detail.
3) poor shutter lag

You just simply choose to skip and gloss over the issues and concentrate on PF and "noise at low ISO level"

Just FYI, the noise at low ISO level(below iso 100) basically isn't even noticable unless u blow the image to 100% or 200%. At 5MP, when view on the PC monitor, the noise will not even be seen at the usually screen res of 1280*1024, which incidentally is the setting I use.

I'm not the only one with a properly calibrated flat screen CRT monitor here.

 

[dropzone]

Nakedtoes: Personally, I don't see the need to point out on flat screen CRT monitor. It does not make a difference to which monitor you are using. Ultimately, as what ricleo said, at 5MP or 4MP quality, regardless you are using it for wallpaper or printout, noise is not an issue anymore. One cannot see the noise at such high MP, even at ISO200. Purple fringing and noise should not be an issue, unless you like to view images at 100%.. Well, maybe it's you only. It's important to take note of more important aspects.

I used a Ixus 400 before myself, found the shutter lag to be bad, and the images are soft (not much of an issue though). They are some features that Canon is lacking in, eg a histogram is important, to be able to see if your images are exposed or not and Sony gains a point here in having that.

I think a more important issue and apparently basic feature, which was surprisely lacking in Ixus 400, and maybe 430 and 500?, is the absence of a battery indicator.

The playback in the Ixus series is slow too, taking loads of time to view the images if they are many, and even worse when the switching of playback to record mode is carried out. Waiting for 3-5 seconds is no joke.