So here are the Spring Flowers

As a bit of instruction, clicking on any of the images in this blog will bring up a bigger image (still not full size I shrunk them before loading, so do not worry about download speeds).  If there is a particular picture that you would like to see full size, let me know (and I can either post it, or send it to you).  Just open a comment at the end of the post.

Since its spring I figure its time to pretty things up a bit.  With that, the best chance I have is to use some pictures from the recent trip to Mohonk.  It was late spring and the flowers were really in bloom.  As we were really there to relax and enjoy the outdoors, I did not carry the Rebel, but only the SX210.  That worked out ok in this case.  Though I will admit that I am a little disappointed in the noise in this camera, it can be overcome at low ISO (this is why it is important to put some time into testing to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the equipment).  You would think that a little camera like this would not be good for macro (normally the small cameras do not blur the background, and get the subject to pop as do the DSLR counterparts).  However, in this aspect, for a small pocket camera the SX210 shines.  Note on all pictures below, only resizing of the image was necessary, I did not sharpen or otherwise alter (I did not feel it was needed).

The picture above was taken under harsh lighting conditions (mid day, and no clouds blocking the sun).  This forced the contrast up, but in this case, you can still see what I was looking for.  The nice pink circular pink flower (and some friends) above the much darker green (and the shadows were very dark).  If you click on the picture, you will see very good details and the camera really captured the image well.  This picture is still good enough, with enough data, that if you wanted to soften it and reduce the contrast in Photoshop, that would be possible (but I liked it punchy like it is).

This example did not work out as well as the one above (and that is why I include it).  Here you can see the problem with pictures with the sun bright and high.  The colors did not come out well at all, and everything is a bit harsh.  Detail is still good (you can click on it to see for yourself), but really not a pretty picture (which is what flower pictures are supposed to be about).  A good example of what to watch out for (and why to avoid harsh lighting).  Changing the angle of the shot or a little shade would have helped greatly).

Above is the best example (in  my opinion) of a single flower picture I took.  No harsh lighting, the flower is visible in high detail (click it to see it better).  The colors are really nice.  Also, the subject stands out nicely, while the background is blurred out.  Normally this is a difficult shot with a pocket camera (I could not have done this on the SD1100).  However, with 14X zoom, all I had to do was zoom all the way, and stand only a few feet back.  This really shortened the focus length, allowing only the subject to maintain sharp focus.

This is really a cheat (they look like flowers, but really are on more of a bush/tree).  I put this here to further demonstrate the above shrinking of the focus length (depth of field).  Here you can see that the flowers in the middle (at the prime focus point) are really sharp.  However, the sharpness fall off quickly (for a pocket camera) and the ones behind it are not nearly as in focus. 

Back to the real flowers, and here was a nice pair that I had to shoot together.  Again, the background is not that out of focus (but I was not trying as hard, as the leaves are part of the picture, and though the camera can have the depth of field shortened, it still is not as good as a DSLR).  

 

Well the gardens are all great, and I figured I would get a picture that included one of the workers.  I used the full zoom so I could stand back and not scare him off (this decreased the depth of field as above, which worked for this shot).  The detail in the flowers and even the wings of the bee were remarkable (click it to zoom in to see if you like).  This was definitely a busy bee (there were lots of flowers, and he was hitting all of them).  Though these are smaller flowers (and not nearly as decorative as those above), I really liked the colors.  The blue pedals with the yellow centers (with reddish spots). 

This was a fun trip for pictures (and I still have at least one more update from it - this time infra red).  The camera functioned quite well.  Though it did not perform as well as a DSLR with a good macro lense, I got many flower pictures that I was more than happy with.  I hope you enjoyed my attempt to pretty up this space with a few spring flowers.  Until next time keep snapping pictures.

Pictures to Calm the Soul

Spring (and Fall) are normally higher stress times for me. It is the time to prepare for the coming season (Summer or Winter - funny Spring and Fall really do not require any preparations). There is always alot going on in the Spring and Fall (kids sports, needed work around the house etc). So it is a good time to sit back and make sure that some time is spent enjoying a hobby. In order to advance this theme, I am including some pictures of just that, calming and relaxing scenes. I do not know why, but for me (and many others) water tends to have a calming effect, so I will begin there.

This first picture was taken along a stream during one of my youngest's baseball practices.  Though I watch the games, I tend to wander around the field for the practice (its either that, or sit there and wonder why he is dancing in the outfield etc, taking some relaxing pictures is definitely better for the soul).  You can see, the foliage is not full yet at the time this was taken (a few weeks back), but is really coming in now.

You can see that this is a nice wandering stream.  We are at a quite bend in the river, and can look quite a ways down stream.  The picture below is a slightly zoomed in to show the ripples in the water as it works over the rocks in the bend. 

This final one from this stream is a close up of an interesting rock.  The SX210 does a nice job of being able to zoom in and pick out details.

This picture just shows some of the rocks sitting in the stream, getting continually carressed by the current in the stream.

In addition to Baseball Games and Practices, the little guy also gets me out to other things.  The pictures below were taken along a stream at the Woodlands.  The little guy was there for some testing, and I figured I would take some pictures while he was hard at work.

This stream was nice, you could hear the water rushing over the rocks.  It was still peaceful (probably due to the size, not thundering).  The Stream Meanders around the back of the woodlands (were there are a few places to sit and watch the stream - as I said water has that calming affect). 

This picture is just a close up, a little bit more up the stream.  Both of these pictures were taken from the same small walking bridge going over the stream (a nice place to hang out).  I took a few pictures from the bridge (using the stream as a nice background) as well (but those are for the web page).

Finally, a calm sky also gives the feeling of relaxation.  So to not make it feel left out (and have our focus only on the water), I will include some sky pictures.  Both were taken at Baseball games between ininnings.  I did modify these pictures slightly (a little Photo Shop Shadows-Highlights to put some color into the foreground).

In this picture, the sun had just gone down.  The sky was becoming more blue, but the sun was getting under the clouds (see how they are lit up on the lower edge away from us).  I thought the contrast in colors was nice (the sky goes from light to blue, with bits of grey and pink clouds fluffed in).  I did not overdue the lightening on the shadows, here, but just enough so the trees were not fully black (digital cameras have lower contrast capability and can not always distinguish between light skies and dark trees, so if exposed for the sky (as I did) the trees will be dark).

This final image was taken from the rain game (same one I got the picture of the rainbow through the cemetary I posted previously.  I think the lightening of the trees is a little more obviousl in this picture, but felt I needed to do it.  You can see the street light in the foreground was not yet on (and they were still playing baseball), so I wanted to have some light in the foreground.  However, the sky was really bright.  Was a nice sky to look up into while waiting on the game.

All of these pictures were taken with the SX210.  It pays to have a camera in the pocket.  Though I really like the quality out of the Digital Rebel more, I do not like it that much more to carry it around everywhere.  I will get some pictures up here with that eventually.

Enough for this post.  We have recently taken a  visit to Mohonk Mountain.  I will post some pictures from there next (I even took a few IR photos, so we can see how those come out). 

Thats Why You Should Always Carry a Camera

I have been taking alot of pictures lately.  Most of the little guy playing baseball, but some more general ones I will post here as well.  I will post them over the coming week or so.  The SX210 is working out very well for me.  Small enough to carry, and a nice boost in quality and the zoom is very nice. 

After taking the picture below, I thought it was important to update the blog.  I think this is a very interesting picture.  Even beyond interesting, it shows that upgrading the everyday carry camera (vs the special DSLR) definitely has it advantages.  We were at a little league game, and it started to pour.  Though the clouds were severe, they were also patchy.  The storm only lasted about 15 minutes.  Interestingly two rainbows followed it (but moved quickly). 

I had to snap quickly (for my second picture, the rainbow was already out of the graveyard into the woods).  The long zoom of the SX210 was very helpful, as without it, I would have either had to crop greatly to get this picture, or run out into the field (and as the rainbow was moving faster than I can, that would not have worked out well).

You can see from the tree in the foreground (and the shadows) that it became light very quickly.  You can also see the second rainbow in the top right of the picture.  These were full rainbows, but the other side was not nearly as interesting.  Catching the rainbow coming down into the cemetary was an interesting combination of pictures you do not see together often.  Here we have the brightness from the sun and the colorfulness of the rainbow offset by the somber emotion evoked from the cemetary and the menacing dark sky in the background.  Without a little camera in my pocket, I would never have gotten this one. 

There is always alot going around us, and if we want to be able to capture it, we have to be ready.

A look at the SX210 Quality

Well we compared the SX210 to some more lofty type competition and found it is not really a replacement for a DSLR.  We also looked at the usability of the SX210 and found that it can be carried and used fairly easily.  There were a few issues pointed out, but none that really affected me (but it is up to the individual).  Now we might as well look at the quality.  Below is my test picture.

 
This is a good image.  Light quality in the corner is challenging.  Also there are alot of textures and colors.  You can see that overall quality is good.  Overall there is no complaints with this image. Alot of colors, and they all came out good.  The texture in the luggage showed up well as well as that on the couch.  Sharpness was good as well (wording on the books and the fish food).  However, this is small for the file size, and if printed you would get to see much more pixel depth.

So lets look at this a bit closer.  All the pictures below are at 100% magnification (so you see the individual pixels).  I will start with the picture as taken (with flash) so the lighting was at its best.  There will be three pictures.  The first will be from the SD1100 (as a comparison - remember I have always been happy with the quality of this camera) the middle one will be the SX210 at a reduced resolution (9MP mode) and the bottom one will be the full resolution (14MP).  I will get to why I chose to do this.

You can see that the SD1100 does a good job.  It is well saturated and the colors are good.  You can see a little noise in the cushion on the couch, but it is not bad.  This will be our baseline. 

The SX210 at 9MP above looks good as well.  The saturation is not as full as the SD1100.  However, if you like the deeper saturation, that can be set in the options on the SX210 (in the "manual" modes).  Noise is not bad, it is about the same as the SD1100.

The SX210 at 14MP above looks similar in color and saturation to the 9MP picture.  However, more noise is noticed in both the cushion and the blue book.  This is why I wanted to show three different pictures.  One being the SD1100 (8MP), one being the SX210 at 9MP and one the SX210 at the full 14MP. 

What is not determined by this test is the cause of the noise.  Does Canon average pixels, does higher resolutions just show the noise more (more detail means more noise).  And the real question is why do I seem so concerned about noise.  Well, I have found that a large percentage of my pictures are taken in low light situations (kids concerts, plays, ceremonies etc).  As such, noise has always been sort of a focus for me (and I have multiple ways to reduce it) (and I am not that concerned, but I like to understand the limitations of my hardware as with this knowledge, I can get the better pictures).  

Above we have the SX210 at 9MP on the left and 14MP on the right (I left the SD1100 out in the dark test it was slightly less noisy and less sharp than the 9MP image).  Note, if your screen is not wide enough, the 9MP might show above the 14MP.  Both of these were shot in reduced light, no flash (ISO 400).  At higher ISOs the noise starts to really stand out.  In fact one might argue that the noise in the higher resolution picture reduces the effective resolution (the 9MP image looks a bit sharper). 

My complaint here is that 14MP looks really good on a spec sheet.  However, a printed enlargement from a 14MP is not that much larger than a 10MP, but the more pixels on the small sensor make noise a bigger issue.  This might make one of the competing cameras (with slightly less resolution) a little more attractive to some.  If this is a concern of yours, take a memory card into the store, and shoot some pictures and compare the cameras.

Well enough looking at noise.  With a good processing work flow, noise can be cleaned up (with little quality degradation).  The next picture shows the real reason that I picked up the SX210, and the reason that I really like it (and I keep it in my pocket).

Yes, there is a little actually quite a bit more noise in this picture than I would have with the Digital Rebel, but you really need to look at the pixels to seem them.   This is a picture I could never have gotten withoutt Rebel and a long zoom lense (so the SD1100 was not even an option).  Being able to pull a small camera out of my pocket and get a picture of the little guy on second base is what this camera is really about.  Granted, I will still carry the Rebel at times, but now as long as I have the SX210, I can get the picture (and it is still a good quality picture). 

Conclusion -

So what is the point.  If you look closely for noise you will find it (in any image).  However, Canon really tried to stretch the numbers on this camera.  It has the highest zoom with the highest pixel count of any camera in its class.  This camera takes good pictures (look at the entire image on top - and at the pictures I will be posting to this blog in the future).  However, if you are looking at getting one of the extended zooms, I do not know if I would put alot of emphasis on a few MP.  Even a 10MP image can be blown up larger than most people print (and might have less noise). 

At some point, stuffing more pixels on the same size sensor will start to degrade performance (point of diminishing returns).  Looking at the pictures I have above (and others, but I did not want to make this too long), I believe that Canon has crossed into this region of diminishing returns.  Not sure a 10 or 12 MP camera would not return just as nice pictures.

To Canon's credit, they seem not to try and reduce the noise very much (I have seen examples from the site I mentioned in an earlier post of other cameras that apply too much noise reduction, and remove data from the picture).  This is good, as it maitains more data (so we can pull the data out in post processing).   

As far as quality goes, the camera is still a Canon.  As such (as with most of there camera) you get very good pictures.  Though this is listed as an advanced camera, the quality is on par with there PowerShot line.  Though this is not a bad thing, you will have to decide if the camera is worth the extra money.  For less money, you can get similar quality (without the zoom).

For me, getting the long zoom was what I really needed.  On the Rebel, I use the long zoom (at 300mm) most of the time.  Helps me capture the kids on field or stage (even rides at the fair etc).  Having something I can pocket that does this makes it very useful.  You will have to decide if it is worth it to you, or is a less expensive camera (with less zoom) that takes as good of pictures good enough.

As an Appendix, two extra features of the camera (one I love, one I hate).

Continuous mode pictures.  I use this alot to capture our little leagure (or whatever sport).  However though the SX210 has this mode, they might as well have left it off.  It takes more than a second between pictures (so not a couple pictures a second, but a second and a half a picture).  This means the action is moving.  Making matters worse is the fact that the screen goes blank in this mode (so you sort of have to hope your still pointed at it).  Not a mode I will be using (so when I want this, I will have to bring the Rebel).

Movie mode.  I am very happy with this mode.  I normally do not use my camera for movies.  I never really liked the quality (thats what a camcorder is for).  However, the quality of these movies is really good.  Having the zoom work during recording is great (previous Canon camera did not do this).  Some complain they can hear the zoom motor in the recording, I have not really noticed this.  I will say that if in the wind, putting a rag or something on the microphones will help (picks up alot of wind noise without it).  The quailty is great.  I have recorded the little guy batting, so we can check his swing together.

Canon SX219 IS review - general usage

This is the second section of my review, and it deals with general usage.  I will go over things like portability, feature use etc.  The third update will be a more detailed look at performance.  I do not plan on doing a complete performance comparison (my look is more as I use the camera) as those reviews can be found elsewhere (like http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX210_IS/index.shtml is a good review - note they did see the same noise issue I brought up in the comparison). 

So as this is my daily camera to catch those unexpected pictures, and allow one to always have the ability to capture the picture.  My previous camera that fit this requirement was the Canon SD1100IS and it made me very happy (the only reason to upgrade was for a longer zoom so I could get some shots that I was not getting with the SD1100IS).   Since the SD1100 made me very happy (except for the zoom), there will be alot of comparisons to that camera here.  In order for this camera to be usable everyday, it has to be something that is easy to carry so that I would carry it every day.

The SD1100 did fit this bill very nicely, and I normally carried it in my left pocket (sometimes in one of my cargo pocets, but I always had it with me).  So lets look at the two side by side:

You can see the SX210 is a bit longer than the SD1100 (it is actually slightly higher and deeper as well, but those differences are much more subtle).  It is also a bit heavier.  Probably the biggest difference is the lense dial sticking out a bit (to get caught on stuff).  However, I could still easily slip this into my shirt pocket (between shots), or carry in my palm (like I often do at a park or other fun spot).  So from that perspective, the SX210 gives up some heft to get the 14X zoom, but still usable.

The next problem is that I do not just put the camera in my pocket.  I like to put it into a case to protect it (scratches or bumps if something hits my pocket).  In addition to just the camera, I always carry a spare battery and memory card (sometimes people accuse me of excessive complusive tendencies)).  I also like a case that fits well enough that the zipper does not rub the camera (don't want to scratch it up).  The first case I tried was too big (it was a Swiss Army case).  Though everything fit well, it would be difficult to carry that load everyday.  Then in Staples, I found a small Case Logic case.  This fit just right.  So lets compare the SX210 inside the case with the SD1100 inside the best case I had found for that.

Now, the differences are not as large.  The SD1100 case I was using is still a little shorter, but also a bit deeper (because the larger outer compartment to hold the battery/memory card).  The nice thing about the Case Logic case is that the outer pocket is flush (and so the camera still slides in and out of the pocket very well). 

I have added one other picture of the camera (who wants to see the camera, we want to see pictures from the camera) inside the case to give you an idea how it all fits.

You can see the memory card and battery are in the front compartment.  When zipped up the zipper actually slides under the flap, so the front is competely flat.  I put the camera in upside down (so the lense is towards us in the picture).  This keeps the lense away from the battery, and keeps the entire case flat.  Note I did add a piece of plastic to the back of the front pocked (to protect the camera).  If you look closely at the camera  pictures you will see a little ding on the front of the lense (this happened before I added the plastic, it seems very secure now). 

So, one problem is solved.  I can carry the SX210 almost as easily as the SD1100.  So I will have it with me when I want to take pictures.  So how about usabiliy once I decide I want to take a picture (not discussing quality, that will be in the final update, just how usable it is). 

From a speed perspective, the SX210 is a little slower than the SD1100.  When turned on, it is ready to take a picture within 3 seconds (closer to 2, but just over).  The SD1100 takes about half a second less.  For most pictures this is not a huge deal (half a second does not mean much to me, normally I have it on already getting ready for the picture).  Both the SX210 and the SD1100 have similar delay after pushing the shutter to snap the picture.  The SD1100 shows the picture taken preview a little quicker than the SX210. 

That is it for the speed advantage for the SD1100.  In setting up the picture, the SX210 far outshines the SD1100 (more than making up for the slight slower responses noted above).  Having a dial on the back to change mode means I can quickly change to a portrait or a landscape shot (night shot etc).  Also the auto mode on the SX210 really works (it does a nice job picking out the scene type it should be using and getting a good photo).  The auto on the SD1100 is more like the easy mode on the SX210 (no settings, it does it all).  I do not particularly like this mode on either camera (and do not seem to get consistent good results with this mode). 

So the SD1100 takes more time to configure than the SX210 (if needed, but more likely if you set it to auto, you will not need to configure anything).  The SX210 also has full manual modes (something I like as I am used to using the Digital Rebel).  So if you want to use a slow shutter (to blur moving water etc), you just set it that way.  The SD1100 (like many compact cameras) does not have this capability (as compacts are supposed to be point and shoots, and this capability is deemed not necessary). 

There are two quirks on the SX210 that you will have to get around (as far as usability).  First is the LCD screen is wide screen, but pictures are not (except for in movie mode).  So the screen is fully used in movie mode, but only the middle of the screen is used when taking pictures (there are some indicators in the black bars on the sides).  This seems to bother some people, but honestly I did not even notice it (until I read it in another review).

The second quirk is the flash pops up everytime you turn on the camera.  You can push it down, but it pops up at startup even if not needed.  Actually the weird location of the flash causes me to have my finger on it (not tight) when I turn it on.  I feel it push a little, then it closes (my finger pushes it down).  Then if I want the flash, I have to manually pull it up.  Its a bit weird, and this bothered me at first, but now I barely notice it now.  Both of these issues might turn you off (and affect actually usability), so its something to consider.

The final usability issue is the strap that came with the camera.  I do not like it (it is too big, and there is no slide to get it tight around the wrist).  If I am carrying the camera in my palm (as brought up above), I feel that if I drop it, the strap will just slide off and offer no protection.  My work around was to take the strap off of the SD1100 (nice smaller strap, and it had a little pry tool (to open the side) which could be slid up to make it tight on the wrist (excessive compulsive again? not sure).

Next update will be some pictures and a discussion on quality.

Some Pictures from Virginia

While I am working on the review of the SX210, I figured I would put up some pictures I took while in Virginia (using the SD1100).  The first is just a covered bridge which is not far from our station in Mt. Jackson.  It is interesting in that it only has one lane (so you have to stop and look through it).  There is a little parking area off to one side (the bridge probably generates enough interest - hey we stopped).

I found this bridge interesting as it is a bridge in more than 2 aspects.  First it is a bridge over a small stream for traffic to flow.  The second is it is almost a bridge back to what this area is about.  There is alot of old farm land there.  However, on one side of the bridge, there is also 3 larger satellite uplink sites, an industrial park etc.  The bridge is not really all that practical (the road is 2 lanes, the bridge 1, and there are no stop signs etc), but it does add a bit of the past to it.

We also stopped at my parents house.  They just moved into the place, and one item of interest is a fountain in the back yard.  Not sure how long for the world it is, but it made an intersesting picture.  I find the fountain interesting as it was really created as the central piece to the backyard.  If you look at the rest of the picture (and trust me, the area outside of the picture matches the rest), it really seems out of place.  However, that out of placeness also makes it interesting.  It would probably be nice to see it running once before it is torn down.

It looks like it has seen better days (could use a coat of paint etc).  However, upon doing this, I figured I would give my infrared setup a try.  Note the picture below looks a little different as I am processing it differently, but I think this shows some more promise.  The light swatch in the middle that was seen in the SD1100 messes it up a bit (so I can not get it as I want easily (see a previous post going through infrared -  as a note initial testing shows that the SX210 does not have this issue, so those pictures should work out better). 

The light spot (which actually has a little blue in it) sort of makes it impossible to get the image right, though I think this method (not converting to BW, but changing the value of the sliders) does have more possibilities (I like the potential false color) in the future.  I needed to leave an overall blue tone in order for the spot in the middle not to show up (I could have converted to BW at this point, but we will see where the SX210 takes this).  The picture below is processed the old way (convert to BW, use sliders to remove the spot in the middle.

Obviously this is not the best subject (grass comes up white, but prefer to get trees with big leaves as they come up better than pine trees).  Also, had the fountain been running, the water would have given a good response.  Figured I would just throw it out there.  The fountain is an interesting subject, and as we get more into spring, I am more ready to play with the infrared some more.

Canon SX210 Review and DSLR Comparison

Well I picked up a new Canon SX210.  I have put sometime into taking some pictures and getting used to it, and have some comments.  I am not going to go through specs and numbers (those are available in a myriad of other locations), but provide my feedback on the usage and quality.

This review will be split into a few different sections.  As 2 posts ago, I questioned whether as someone who tries to be a hobby photographer, I should look for a 1 camera solution, or maintain 2 cameras (a small one to carry around and a DSLR for getting special pictures).  Though I felt I should stay with the 2 camera solution, seems the voting public was leaning towards the single camera solution).  So to close out on this topic, my first section of the review will be a comparison.  I will compare output quality of the SX210 with my Digital Reble XTi and my SD1100 (my previous daily camera).  

For quality, I took some pictures our youngest baseball player with the three cameras.  All pictures were taken using the portrait settings on the camera with the flash on as a fill flash.  There were no adjustments performed in photoshop (no sharpening etc, these are as they came out of the camera).  I really wanted to use the camera in there most auto mode, so the pictures would come if anyone else had taken them.  Here they are below. 

This picture is from the Digital Reble XTi.  Notice the nicer "boca" (blurring of the background - it is more prevelant in a full size photo or the blow up below).

This is the new SX210.  It is a bit brighter.  The background is sharper, and the colors not quite as good (the hat is more muted and some contrast lost).

This is from the SD1100.  You can see that the flash was not as powerful (all pictures used fill flash to cut the shadows).

Granted the above pictures are small (blow ups are below), but all three cameras seem quite capable.  As expected, the Rebel provides the boca (background blurring) that you would look for in a portrait like this (who wants to draw attention to the trees).  However, this is expected.  The bigger sensor means that for a given apeture, the focus depth (the distance of the photo that is in focus) is smaller.  Obviously, if you are looking for sharpness thoroughout a larger portion of the frame, the smaller sensor is for you.

There is also a difference in overall tone for the images.  The Rebel is more muted.  The colors are full, but not as punchy.  To see this, look at the background, the hat and the shirt. The next set of pictures are blow ups of the face from the pictures above.

The above is from the Digital Rebel XTi.

The above is from the SX210

The above is from the SD1100

The blow ups of the face start showing some more of the differences.  First the boca in the Rebel starts to stand out (as stated above).    Secondly, the contrast and colors look a bit better in the Rebel.  This is mostly evident in the hat and the shirt. 

Finally, you can see a bit of a noise difference between the Rebel and the other two.  He might look a little more pasty in the picture from the Rebel, but that is more realistic (hey its spring, he has not been out much yet).  In the other two, a little noise shows up.  In order to demonstrate this a little better, one more set of images is in order.  These are blown up to 100% so the size of the image below is as it is out of the camera.  This is the area under his right eye along the same mark on all the pictures.  Note, as the size of the files is different (10MP for the Rebel, 14MP for the SX and 8MP for the SD), the size of the skin taken is different.

The image on the left is from the Rebel, the one in the middle from the SX, the one on the right from the SD.  As these are all 100% blow ups, we are seeing each picture pixel for pixel.  Here you can see that the SX has more noise than the Rebel (though maybe not as much as the SD). 

Obviously 14MP is alot and will allow for printouts as large as 10X14 at 300dpi (without any editing).  Obviously, this could be even larger if the resolution were lowered (many people print at 200dpi with no noticable loss in quality) or the size enlarged.  However, this leads one to ask when enough is enough.  A smaller sensor would probably still have given the sizes that we need (note, that I print large often, and 10MP from the Rebel has been fine for me).  Had canon reduced the number of pixels they could have probably also reduced the noise a bit.  If this is important to you, you might want to consider a slightly lower pixel count in future purchases (I do not have others for comparison, but as of today, the Canon is the highest pixel count of the pocketable super zooms).

So what is the point of this review.  Of course the Rebel takes better pictures than the SX210.  It is quite a bit more money, larger to carry etc.  I do not think I needed to write this to convince people of that.  However, what I did want to show is that the SX210 is closer to the SD1100 in quality than it is to the Digital Rebel.  Though the SX takes better (and bigger) pictures (with more zoom that allow you to stand further away) than the SD, in the end, it has alot more in common with the SD than the Rebel.  For me, this answers the original question as I suspected.  Even with a higher end pocketable camera like the SX210, for the real special pictures, stepping up to a DSLR (if possible) is appropriate. 

This does not mean that I am unhappy with the SX210.  I still think it is important to have a good quality camera that can be carried around daily.  The SX210 does fit this bill.  In the next posting, I will go over some of these details (ease of carrying, and a bit more on the funcionality and quality).

Infrared Games - First take with a new filter

Well, I recieved my infrared filter and decided to see how it worked.  It worked better than I expected.  Though exposure times were somewhat longer through the filter, they were not too long.  I could see hand holding the camera for these exposures in the future (though in this case, I used one of those little flexible tripods).  I figured I would post a few pictures to show about what I am seeing.  Note, very little work has been done to optimize these (standard camera settings in most cases, I did not really try to lower the ISO for noise etc).  I will post more pictures in a more controlled environment using a few more cameras (and a better subject than this one). 

As it was easy, I used my Canon Powershot SD1100IS and Autumn's Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS3.  Note I am not listing the exposure parameters here (that will be for the more thorough test).  Note, none of these cameras are designed to do infrared photography, so the results might be less than optimal, but buying a camera designed for this is outside the scope (and price).  Most cameras try to limit infrared energy from hitting the sensor (to protect the normal image) making this a little tricky. 

The picture above is from the Powershot.  Notice the hazy section in the middle.  I have come to find (from a few online resources) that this is a comon problem using Canon for infrared.  Note - since Infrared is outside normal visible light, this is not affecting the normal image quality.  However it is something to note for infrared use.  You will see below that it is not as big of a deal as it is here. 

The picture above if from the Lumix.  This looks much lighter, and if there is a haze in the middle, it is not nearly as pronounced (it looks it here, but not when editing them).  Note, I am not sure if the lightness is a result of the exposure settings or something else (but will find out when I run a more thorough test). 

After looking at outputs from multilple sources online, the color cast does seem to change from camera to camera.  Technically there should be no color cast (as there is no color in the infrared spectrum), but since the filter does let a very small amount of visible light through (using a Hoya R72) that would tend to fool the camera to red.  Obviously, this is not the final output.  To remove the color cast, one would change this to a black and white image.  The reason to record in color, is to allow the best flexibility in making this change (using the color sliders in photoshop to change the contrast and darkness of the final image).  You will see what I mean in the next image.

Here is the final from the Powershot.  Notice the haze in the middle appears to be gone.  In reality, the haze ends up being a bit of a blueish region.  So when converting to Black and white, I get the image to the contrast I want using the red and magenta sliders, and then match the middle with the blue slider (and when done, a nice black and white infrared image).

Here is the Lumix image.  It is again a bit brighter (not sure if it is due to infrared sensitivity or just the exposure, this will be investigated in the future).  You can see the infrared affect really well here (the green trees come out white). 

So this is the first cut at a few pictures.  I want to test out a few other cameras, and do them in a better test environment (I want to go down to the lake, get some water in the picture, and some sky and have trees with leaves on them - this best shows the overall affect and will be the best for comparison).  As I may have a few week wait on the leaves, I may play some other games in the mean time. 

I figure while I work this out, I will post a little primer on infrared photography next.  Though this can be found on many other websites, I will try and break it down into some simple discussion (might have to borrow a few others pictures while I do this.  I will go over my setup (which is a nice cheap first cut - if it works well, might try something a little better).

Let me know what you think. 

Upgrade the DSLR or the Pocket Camera

I am approaching that time again when upgrading of hardware becomes a question. I always look to find the weak part of my workflow, and upgrade it, so that I can put out the best pictures possible. I am set for computer and software. My printer is a good one (though with current resolutions, might consider a bigger one in the future if I step up pixel count on the cameras - currently 13X19, might want to go up 2 print sizes in the future).

That leaves the cameras, and I think that outside of me, they are currently my limiting factor. I use 2 cameras. I have a canon powershot SD1100 IS and a canon Digital Rebel XTi. The powershot carries around nicely, and I normally have it with me (as well as used it for vacations like Ocean City and Disney). The Rebel is used for tougher pictures. I use it for my pictures of Quinn playing sports (long lens, no delay etc) and for some portraits (the shorter focus distance blurs the background nicely (bocah)). Also have more filters etc do get some more interesting outputs.

For upgrading the powershot, I would go to the SX210IS (coming out any day now). The biggest reason it upgrade the powershot is for some more zoom. The old one had a 3X zoom, the new one (which is one of the advanced cameras, but still fairly small) has a 14X zoom. I sort of got a nice picture of Quinn getting his pinewood derby car setup on the track that would have been improved greatly with a little more zoom. The other major advances are in pixel count (14 vs 8) and sensor (Digic 4 vs Digic 3). 8 is not a bad pixel count, but 14 will blow up much better (and allow some sizable cropping though the zoom should make that less required). However the Digic 4 will get me better darker performance (seems that is always an issue). Though they both have the same ISO settings, the Digic 4 has an ISO boost which should get better performance in low light. Finally there is the intangible. The SX210 has a smarter auto system than the SD1100. This might really help me. It also has a complete manual mode (which the SD1100 does not). As I like to think in manual terms, I do not suspect I will get caught up as much in this (for example, to get reasonable group pictures in strange lighting on the SD1100, I have to use my own settings, however since there is no manual mode, I have to trick the camera – recently during a group shot at church, the trick was on me as I missed one – should not have this problem with the new camera).

For upgrading the rebel, I would jump out of the rebel class, and move up to the 7D. This is still not a full frame sensor, but I am not ready for that, as I still have some nice lenss (especially the ultra wide) that only work on the smaller sensor. Again there are multiple reasons to upgrade the rebel. The primary ones would include increase in pixel count (from 10 to 18) and faster frames per sec (from about 3 to 8 – really make sure you get the right moment for those sports shots). This includes the same sensor upgrade as above (Digic 3 to a Digic 4), so those performance enhancements would be the same for this camera (biggest for me is the low light sensitivity). There is also an improved auto focus and metering system on the 7D which should make those respond quicker (faster auto-focus will be good, the metering system really is not as important to me in a digital (I can take some test shots before I start shooting to setup the exposure).

Both cameras will give me full HD video (though I do not do a lot with video). The current powershot does do some video, but the rebel does none.

So here is the problem. As money is an issue (it always is), upgrading both at the same time is not fiscally sound practice (or possible). In the end, either upgrade will help out some with my pictures overall. If I upgrade the Rebel, I will improve my “special” pictures. Basically, out of the 4 cameras I listed (the ones I own and the ones I am considering) the 7D will get me the best pictures (multiple lens options, highest pixel count (for enlargements), ability to really control the flash (multiple flashes etc). However, upgrading the powershot, will upgrade more of my pictures (about 90% of my pictures are taken with the powershot (might even be a little higher)). I find that I do not like to take the Rebel out all the time (so for bowling or just going out, I have the powershot). I also do not like to carry the Rebel on vacation (it is a pain in parks like Disney and even on the beach – were the littler camera can be protected and carried much easier).

Note, if I do upgrade the powershot first, it will nag at me to eventually upgrade the Rebel. Something would just bother me about having the smaller/cheaper camera have the higher pixel count (and other improvements) over my better/more flexible camera. However, that could be further down the road (and in the mean time the 90% use the powershot sees would be improved).

Adding to the confusion is the fact that I want to try some infrared photography (both outdoors scenes and some portraits). The best way to do this is to upgrade the Rebel, then spend the ~$300 to have the current one converted to Infrared. This would give very good pictures (however, the cost continues to spiral up). I have tested the current powershot, and it seems it would give reasonable results with just a filter (exposure times would be a little longer, but it should work). I suspect the SX210 would work similarly (I do not think that Canon upgraded the IR filter in the camera, but I could be wrong). For very little money, I can setup the powershot to do IR photography (and see what I think of it).

In addition to this, Denise got me a telescope last year. I do not get much chance to use it (I am in the woods with limited sky available). However, I did take some nice pictures of the moon. It seems the best way to take these pictures is to use the rebel with a mount for the camera. However (and this seems like a good idea, though my research has shown that it is of a lower quality), afocal pictures from the powershot through the lens would seem to work well (my moon pictures were me holding the camera up to the lens, a mount would have to be better). Either way I go, I will have something to try here.

So in the end, the answer is -------- upgrade the powershot. I still have the Rebel which is a fine camera, and can use it for the sport shots and where lighting is an issue (so I can control the flash a bit more). However, the new powershot seems to just get me more. As I use this most of the time, I will see the biggest overall improvement in my pictures. Also carrying around a camera that does high quality video might be fun (note current powershot does do lower resolution video, but the biggest complaint is that the optical zoom does not work while shooting video – which the SX210 overcomes (so the bowling movies should come out a bit better).

Also this choice will be a bit cheaper, and let me play at some of my other interests. I will be able to get a passable IR setup (that if I like, in the future, I can go the whole way). Additionally, I can start some astronomy photos. If I understand the limitations, I can see if I like it and move forward with that. In the end, there were just too many pictures I have taken with the powershot that I would have really liked to frame differently (zoom) or improved the low light. I tend to get decent results with the Rebel. Also as a side, I have taken so many pictures with the powershot, I feel that I have gotten my moneys worth out of it already. This is not the case for the Rebel (which cost more, but taken fewer (though better) pictures.

So what is your opinion on this choice.