Latest long zoom P&S terrible results

Rich

unread,

Mar 27, 2009, 11:38:49 AM3/27/09

to

Horrible. And the hideous red fringe on things means the lens on that
toy isn't much good either.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonsx1is/page15.asp

T. Deston

unread,

Mar 28, 2009, 7:59:15 AM3/28/09

to

On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:38:49 -0700 (PDT), Rich <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Horrible. And the hideous red fringe on things means the lens on that
>toy isn't much good either.
>
>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonsx1is/page15.asp

Do you mean like how this "toy" P&S camera with the exact same lens as the
SX1 beats the pants off of a DSLR, both in resolution and CA performance?

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX10_IS/outdoor_results.shtml

Like that?

Go away you useless fuck of a troll. You haven't a clue about anything, the
least of which is knowledge about photography and cameras.

Mark Thomas

unread,

Mar 28, 2009, 8:03:59 AM3/28/09

to

T. Deston wrote:
(abuse)
Please folks, do not respond to this poster further until you are fully
aware of his background.

"Get Real" is the anti-dslr- and chdk-troll, aka Keoeeit, Vern, X-Man,
Baumbadier, Casiobear, etc, ad infinitum.

He's well known for the 'attitude', and that's being kind. He can be
found on many forums, is frequently banned (eg Steve's Forums,
photography-on-the.net) and he's usually quite easy to spot, by his
withdrawn posts and images, and posting from cpinternet in Minnesota
where he lives.

He doesn't like leaving a trail, yet is too
incompetent to not be recognised wherever he goes..

Having said all that, this IS a post by RichA... He probably belongs here.

Blaize Pascal

unread,

Mar 28, 2009, 8:09:45 AM3/28/09

to

On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 22:03:59 +1000, Mark Thomas <mark.t...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Yes, he belongs here. Just like you do. Just like ALL THE RESIDENT TROLLS
WITH NO REL LIFE AND NO REAL KNOWLEDGE OF CAMERAS BELONG HERE.

LOL!!!!!!!!!

Dave Cohen

unread,

Mar 29, 2009, 1:27:42 PM3/29/09

to

Mark Thomas wrote:
<snipped>

>
>
> Having said all that, this IS a post by RichA... He probably belongs here.

Why, to tell us all that which we already know (or should know), namely
that small sensor cameras don't do well at high iso.
Dave Cohen

Charles

unread,

Mar 29, 2009, 7:08:45 PM3/29/09

to

"T. Deston" <tde...@antispam.org> wrote in message
news:tq3ss4lpug2qtoq0j...@4ax.com...

Don't respond, and they will go away.

SneakyP

unread,

Mar 29, 2009, 10:48:43 PM3/29/09

to

Dave Cohen <us...@example.net> wrote in
news:gqo7i3$fuo$1...@news.motzarella.org:

That's why I'm here, to get a few opinions of point-n-shoot and DSLR.

I'm considering getting a Canon DSLR at the moment, simply because of the
terrible noise on p&s and shoot speeds between shots.

Troll or not, I see where some have clouded their own views on high ISO
and small sensor size, completely bypassing the issue with an article
that is not discussing the high ISO issue.

Thanks troll, you convinced me to buy a DSLR.

--
SneakyP
To reply: newsgroup only, what's posted in ng stays in ng.

Some choose to swim in the potty bowl of nan-ae rather than flush it
down :0)

SMS

unread,

Mar 30, 2009, 12:26:54 AM3/30/09

to

Well to be fair, no one is buying an SX1 expecting to use it at 800 ISO.
It's not a D-SLR.

Rich

unread,

Mar 30, 2009, 12:40:53 AM3/30/09

to

SMS <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote in news:aSXzl.22355$c45.21484
@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com:

Once you drill-down, it's not even a DSLR at 100 ISO.

Mark Thomas

unread,

Mar 30, 2009, 1:37:25 AM3/30/09

to

Jokin'..!! who woulda thort. don't they know everyone needs dslrs???