The Casio EX-S1 looks great. I like my Canon G1, but it is too big. If I was buying again I'd think seriously about this camera. It doesn't have the resolution, but it is supremely small. Here's the Steve's digicams review (here's the conclusion) and here's the dcresource review. Very cool. Still, my guess is that cameras will become a feature of cellphones (like the p800) soon enough, and that will be even cooler (always with you, plus you can upload pictures wirelessly right from the same device.)
The G1 is great but check out this review of the Canon Powershot G6 its a definate upgrade to it. :) http://www.bargainfindsonebay.com/canon/Canon_PowerShotG6.html
I had one of those Casio's, handed down from my lord, and then he got me a Panasonic, 2megapixel, 60 second videos, and it is considerably smaller and lighter, and takes great pictures in daylight, not so good low light (tiny flash is insufficient and f stop is set in middle range). I like it a lot, mostly for it's size and weight. Without knowing jack about it here is my take on the smaller camera's. I think no matter how many features they can pack into (and this will apply to phone cameras too I guess) these cameras, the main limitation is going to be, I think, lens focal length, if I'm saying that right. The little Panasonic has variable shutter speed but only one f/stop setting and I think it is one of the medium ones, like f8. Which is good for average light shots at medium average distances. It will take outstanding daytime pictures in the ten foot range. Very acceptable landscape pictures but would benefit from higher f stop (smaller aperture opening) number like 16 or 22, to get better depth of field clarity. This (fstops in the lower number range) also accounts, I think, for why you have to be very very still when you use one of the smaller cameras. The variable shutter speed helps but in full daylight the f16 or 22 stop will forgive much more movement. So that's pretty much all my photo 101 knowledge. So--waiting for the small camera with autofocus and/or variable f stops. And,I think they will be hard pressed to make one with a flash adequate to the task of lighting up a room or area as much as it needs to. So for overall better picture taking (if that is the goal) I think the camera still has to be a little bigger. That being said, I'm pretty happy with my little Panasonic. I can't remember the name or model number though and it down the driveway at the other house. I've had it for about a year so there may be something superior by now. I'll show it to you next time I see you. I think we looked at the Casio 2megapixel upgraded camera but it seems like they had done something stupid like did away with the short movie feature altogether, but I may be trippin about that.
Of course, NOW I see the date on your post. Still, most of what I said applies.
Did I already mention that I only now see the date of your original post?
Yes, you did.
|
- jim 8-24-2002 12:16 am
The G1 is great but check out this review of the Canon Powershot G6 its a definate upgrade to it. :) http://www.bargainfindsonebay.com/canon/Canon_PowerShotG6.html
- Digital Camera (guest) 12-14-2004 11:00 pm
I had one of those Casio's, handed down from my lord, and then he got me a Panasonic, 2megapixel, 60 second videos, and it is considerably smaller and lighter, and takes great pictures in daylight, not so good low light (tiny flash is insufficient and f stop is set in middle range). I like it a lot, mostly for it's size and weight. Without knowing jack about it here is my take on the smaller camera's. I think no matter how many features they can pack into (and this will apply to phone cameras too I guess) these cameras, the main limitation is going to be, I think, lens focal length, if I'm saying that right. The little Panasonic has variable shutter speed but only one f/stop setting and I think it is one of the medium ones, like f8. Which is good for average light shots at medium average distances. It will take outstanding daytime pictures in the ten foot range. Very acceptable landscape pictures but would benefit from higher f stop (smaller aperture opening) number like 16 or 22, to get better depth of field clarity. This (fstops in the lower number range) also accounts, I think, for why you have to be very very still when you use one of the smaller cameras. The variable shutter speed helps but in full daylight the f16 or 22 stop will forgive much more movement. So that's pretty much all my photo 101 knowledge. So--waiting for the small camera with autofocus and/or variable f stops. And,I think they will be hard pressed to make one with a flash adequate to the task of lighting up a room or area as much as it needs to. So for overall better picture taking (if that is the goal) I think the camera still has to be a little bigger. That being said, I'm pretty happy with my little Panasonic. I can't remember the name or model number though and it down the driveway at the other house. I've had it for about a year so there may be something superior by now. I'll show it to you next time I see you. I think we looked at the Casio 2megapixel upgraded camera but it seems like they had done something stupid like did away with the short movie feature altogether, but I may be trippin about that.
- jimlouis 12-15-2004 2:56 am
Of course, NOW I see the date on your post. Still, most of what I said applies.
- jimlouis 12-15-2004 2:57 am
Did I already mention that I only now see the date of your original post?
- jimlouis 12-15-2004 3:00 am
Yes, you did.
- tom moody 12-15-2004 3:01 am