| |
I have been
an amateur photographer for about ten years now, and have a serious
obsession with gadgets and technology. In my experience, this
combination poses a lethal risk to my bank account, especially
in light of what is currently available on the digital photography
scene.
One is forever
searching for the next best thing, and the digital camera of your
dreams always seems to be just around the next press release.
As I write this, most of the major manufacturers are introducing
the first generation of consumer digicams with 3+ megapixel resolution,
once again seemingly relegating current models to the insatiable
dust-bin of obsolescence.
It's a game
of catch-up that one can never hope to win. In the time it takes
you to adequately research and decide upon the camera of your
dreams, it's already a has-been. Or else you find out it costs
$5,000.
In fact, it
takes so much work these days to keep up with all the latest developments,
sometimes you forget that all you want the damn thing for is to
take pictures.
Well, the
good news for me is that I've finally found a digicam that reminds
me why I got into photography in the first place. Since getting
my new toy, I've taken more photographs in the past month than
I have all last year!
Why I bought
this particular camera
For those
of looking to buy a digicam right now, the Pro70 seems like a
silly choice. It's already over a year old (which is like dog-years
in the world of digicams), it's got a wimpy little 1.6MP CCD,
it doesn't have a built-in flash, it connects to your PC by a
serial cable, and worst of all, it takes over 10 seconds to record
a single image in the maximum resolution mode. And then there's
the lack of manual exposure control, manual focus, shutter-priority
mode and spot meter (all things I would expect in a "prosumer"
digicam.) All in a package that costs as much as most of todays
top-end consumer digitals.
So why indeed?
Well, the answer became pretty clear when I started pulling the
first images off the CompactFlash card. Professional cameras aside,
the Powershot simply produced the nicest images I've ever seen
come out of a digicam. Exposure and white balance are consistently
spot-on, and whatever the CCD may lack in resolution, the wonderful
Canon lens makes up for in clarity and punch. I'd read a ton of
reviews on the Pro70 which extolled it's virtues along these lines,
but you really have to see it to believe it.
The other
reason I chose the Powershot is for it's SLR-like handling. I've
been using Nikon and Canon 35mm film cameras for almost a decade,
so I'm used to a heavier camera. Using a point-and-shoot feels
more like playing than picture-taking to me, and that's the way
most consumer digicams felt. Like toys. This rig actually feels
like a real camera. The controls are somewhat similar to my EOS
5, and the overall layout of the buttons and LCD's feels more
familiar. None of the other cameras I tried felt nearly as good.
Ergonomics:
It feels Good
The Canon
has a nice solid heft, though it doesn't feel like it's carved
from a solid chunk of metal the way Nikon's F100 and F5 do, but
surprisingly, it does feel more solid than my EOS 5. It's an all-plastic
body, though the finish on the lens barrel makes it almost seem
like metal. The buttons have pretty good action, though some of
the smaller ones take a pinky or fingernail to push.
Most of the
controls and buttons are located on the top of the camera, to
the right of the lens. These control most of the camera settings,
in both Record and Playback modes, with three buttons having separate
functions for those respective modes. There are also three buttons
on the camera back, where your right thumb usually goes. I've
found one-handed operation of the camera pretty quick and painless,
for both recording and viewing. The handgrip itself has a matte
finish which makes the camera less slippery, though a rubberized
finish would have been nicer.
The menu system
is decent, but not great. It seems like there was a little too
much button-pushing to get to basic functions, like the aperture-priority
mode. And it was sometimes awkward to use the +/- buttons together
with the menu button. Also, a zoom on the playback mode would
have been nice, so you could take a closer look at shots before
ditching them (like the Coolpix).
To shoot a
picture, you basically hold the camera like a 35mm SLR, with your
right hand covering the controls and shutter-release, and the
left hand steadying the lens barrel. There's a funky little lever
on the left side of the lens where your thumb goes, which operates
the zoom. Strangely, you push it up to zoom out, down to zoom
it. I think they should have switched the axis on the lever, so
you push it forward to zoom out, and back to zoom in. That would
make more sense. In any case, it doesn't take too long to get
used to, though the zoom is insufferably slow (more on that later.)
There are
three panels which open to reveal the I/O ports, the CompactFlash
slots, and the battery compartment. The door covering the I/O
ports is sort-of rubberized, to seal those connections when not
in use. The battery compartment is on the bottom of the camera,
below the handgrip, and is designed so you can open it up when
the camera's mounted on a tripod. The CF door is the most flimsy-feeling
of the three, and has a *very* fussy design that requires that
you flip a "safety-lever" out of the way before inserting/removing
cards. I'm pretty sure I'm going to break that in a couple of
weeks. And because the door wraps partially around the back and
bottom of the camera, right where your hand sits, it makes that
corner of the camera seem pretty weak.
The LCD panel
on the back has a pretty clever design which allows you to flip
it out and away from the camera body, like many hand-held camcorders.
The advantage is that you can almost always position it go get
a good viewing angle, even turning it completely around to take
self-portraits. And when you're not using it, the LCD is closed
against the body, preventing breakage or scratches, or even smudges
from your nose while you're looking through the viewfinder. This
is not one of those features that'll make or break a camera, but
it sure is nice. The LCD itself is pretty bright and sharp, but
a bit too contrasty for my taste. I prefer the LCD on Nikon's
950 and 800, assuming it isn't too bright out, but I can't complain
too much about the Canon.
One thing
I can complain about here is how long it takes to get the LCD
going, whether it's when you turn the camera on, or when you switch
to playback mode. This camera is s-l-o-w. And since digicams use
so much juice, the camera shuts itself off pretty quick. And when
that perfect photo-op arrives, you're waiting for the friggin
thing to power up. But hey, it's over a year old, so I guess you
can't beat a dead horse.
The viewfinder
is, alas, not a true TTL like the SLR's I've come to know and
love. But for a rangefinder-type device, it's pretty damn good.
It sits directly above the lens, so parallax errors only occur
along the horizontal axis. It shows 85% of the image (not nearly
enough, in my opinion), and is clear, bright, surprisingly pretty
distortion-free, and provides fairly high eyepoint.. Probably
the nicest non-TTL viewfinder I've used. There's dioptor adjustment(which
I don't use since my vision's far worse than any in-camera device
can correct for) and a nice rubber eyecup surrounding the viewfinder
which helps protect my glasses.
Mechanics
The lens is
a high-quality Canon 6-15mm (28-70 equivalent in 35mm) f/2-2.4
variable aperture zoom built with 13 elements, two of which are
aspherical. This is important. I'm surprised by how many digicam
owners are completely ambivalent about the lenses on their cameras.
Perhaps this is because CCD's have so far to go before they'll
match today's film capabilities. And since interchangeable lenses
aren't available on *any* consumer digicams, it's pretty hard
to compare lenses from different manufacturers, the way you can
with film cameras. But owing to my days with 35mm SLR's, lens
quality was of paramount importance.
In the case
of the Canon, the lens is certainly more than a match for the
CCD. It seems to be completely distortion-free throughout it's
zoom range. I'm especially impressed by this at the wide end of
it's range. Most other digicams only offer a 35 or 38mm equivalent,
and they typically display a significant amount of barrel distortion.
With the Powershot at 28mm, lines along the edge of the frame
are straight as a ruler. There is some fall-off at the corners,
but less so than most other comparable lenses I've seen. I'm also
quite happy with the zoom range. Many people have complained that
the telephoto end isn't long enough, and I generally agree (especially
when shooting portraits--I prefer shooting at 80-105mm), but I
greatly prefer having more wide-angle than telephoto, because
I do a lot of indoor and architectural photography. My main lenses
for my Nikon and Canon 35mm cameras are also 28-70 zooms, so I'm
rather adapted to that range. Using a Nikon CoolPix 950, I was
always wishing for more than it's 38mm wide angle. With the Powershot,
I have it.
The lens ain't
perfect, but it seems to complement the camera's available resolution
very nicely. The only complaint I have is with the physical design
of the housing. The lens actually sits inside the camera's odd-looking
snout, and moves completely inside the housing. Unfortunately,
this makes accessory lenses virtually useless for telephoto applications,
due to severe vignetting, especially from 6-10mm. It doesn't seem
to be a problem with close-up adaptors.
Autofocus
with this camera is a mixed bag. Canon calls it a "phase-differential"
system, and I have absolutely no idea what that means. The good
news is that it locks onto subjects extremely well. In low light,
there is a focus-assist light that helps the camera achieve focus
even when it's pitch black. Unfortunately, having it turned on
you makes you feel like the proverbial deer-in-the-headlights.
It's really really *really* bright. You could probably use it
to signal low-flying planes in a pinch. And in some cases, it's
extremely annoying, since it will ruin many attempted candids.
And you can't turn it off. Aaaargh.
The autofocus
is also pathetically slow, which makes it difficult to track moving
subjects. And since it doesn't offer focus-tracking, you'll have
to get pretty good at prefocusing. And since there's no manual
focus, you can't use the tried-and-true preset focus trick. Trying
to photograph moving subjects can be a tremendously frustrating
experience. Especially if you're using the flash, since the 380EX
relies on a pre-flash to determine exposure, which will blow your
exposure on shots where you pre-focus and re-compose. Aaaargh.
Don't even get me started on the shutter lag.
On the other
hand, for slow and non-moving subjects, it can't be beat. The
autofocus will even lock onto extremely low-contrast subjects,
the bane of most autofocus systems. In general, if the focus-confirmation
light is on and you've pointed the camera at the right subject,
you're golden. Just hope the subject doesn't get up and move in
the next five seconds. . .
Using it
with a Flash
I mentioned
the flash briefly earlier, but let me expand a bit here, because
this is one of the things that makes this camera pretty unique,
and a great deal more useful. First off, the camera doesn't have
a built-in flash, which probably put off a lot of folks. But hey,
there ain't a built-in flash on the F5 or EOS 1n either. Why?
Because built-in flashes generally suck. Granted, there are times
when they'll do in a pinch (any flash picture looks better than
the ol' "black bear in a cave at midnight" shot), but
for the most part, they're underpowered, harsh, too close to the
lens, and don't provide adequate coverage. And they suck a lot
of juice from your precious batteries.
Since the
Pro70 is labled a "prosumer" digicam, and is aimed at
photographers who should know how to use a flash, they took it
off the camera and provided a hotshoe instead. Sure, they coulda
thrown a little one on, but I for one would just as soon have
a sturdier less-espensive camera instead. What they offer instead,
is basically a choice between two flashes: the 220EX and 380EX.
Which at first seems like just a way to gouge you for more of
your hard-earned cash. But the actual reason, I found out, is
because traditional TTL just don't work the same way with digital
cameras. TTL relies on the reflectance of film (the meter actually
reads off your film, not directly off your scene) and, surprise,
CCD's don't reflect the same amount of light! So the Canon flashes
use a pre-flash to determine exposure information, and I imagine
the 220EX and 380EX were designed with this purpose in mind. Perplexingly,
Canon's newer and far more sophisicated 550EX is unsupported.
Nevertheless,
I use the 380EX and find that it's a pretty capable unit. The
output rivals other shoemount flashes I've used (Vivitar 283,
Nikon SB-26, Canon 430EZ), and the exposure is typically quite
good. It has a rotating head, so you can bounce the light. Using
the TTL extension, you can move the flash off-camera for use with
grips, or in the studio. The flash also has an auto-zoom head,
which will match the camera-selected zoom, giving it much greater
coverage and range.
There are
some annoying limitations with the flash though. It doesn't have
a swivel head, so you can't bounce off walls. There are no manual
controls to adjust the output. There's no second-curtain sync.
There's no high-speed sync. There's no direct flash exposure compensation
(this is the one I miss the most). And you can't manually zoom
the head. And worst of all, you lose automatic exposure control
if you switch to aperture-priority mode on the camera. Apparantly,
this is because the Pro70 uses the CCD to control the "shutter
speed" during automatic exposures, and a mechanical shutter
in conjunction with the aperture diaphragm during aperture-priority
exposures, so the Program and Aperture Priority modes are physically
unrelated (I think I got that right). In any case, the end result
is that you end up Program mode whether you like it or not.
Fortunately,
if you don't like it enough, you can still use a plain old manual
flash if you need to use the aperture priority exposure control.
Hooking it up to my Metz 45CL3 with an EOS SC-300 module worked
just fine (though Canon warns against using other flashes), and
I was able to control exposure using the flash's manual controls
and the camera's exposure compensation. A pretty kludgey solution
for such a modern camera, but it works. And it beats the pants
off on-camera flash.
Interface
Issues
Once you take
a picture, you gotta get it out of the camera. On previous occasions,
I just used a PCMCIA adaptor, which I found out is a real luxury.
Since I don't have a laptop anymore, I got to experience Serial
Port download times with the Canon. It made taking images in Canon's
uncompressed CCDRAW mode almost painful. I didn't time it or nothin,
but take my word, it's slow. So slow in fact, that I went out
and bought a Sandisk USBImageMate card reader, and things improved
considerably. You have to use Canon's TWAIN driver to upload the
CCDRAW images, but it goes fairly fast via USB. I use ACDSee to
organize my images, but sadly, it doesn't seem to transfer image
and exposure data (anybody figure that one out?)
One thing
I didn't mention before about the Powershot is it's dual CF slots.
One of those two is Type II, so it accepts bigger CF cards, as
well as IBM's Microdrive. If you have more than one CF card lying
around, you can use both in the camera. You can even make copies
between them, if you're into backups. I did mention before that
the compartment door and thingamajiggy's suck, right? Well, it's
still nice to have access to two cards.
Apparantly,
Canon started to ship a new Image Acquisition plug-in with more
recent Pro70's, designed by the folks at LaserSoft Imaging. Which
is great, because LaserSoft makes SilverFast, which is an excellent
scan driver, and their software purportedly improves translation
of the CCDRAW images. What sucks though is that Canon is apparantly
not offering the software to previous Pro70 owners. It's just
infuriating. If you want it, you're supposed to shell out $250.00
to buy it. Nothing like turning your back on early adopters who
used and supported your products. Okay, enough of that. So far,
the TWAIN driver works just fine.
The Images
So then the
final question: How do the images look? Well, I always qualify
this answer with "digital cameras still don't look as good
as film", but given that, the Powershot is fantastic. I started
using digicams in the days of Apple's Quicktake 150, so my expectations
started adequately low. Since then, I've used the Olympus D450Z,
Sony Mavica FD51, Casio QV2000UX, and Nikon CP 950&800. And
in my considered opinion, the Canon's as good or better than all
of them. And from the-resolution images I've seen from other cameras,
it still knocks the socks off most.
And it isn't
because of the resolution. In fact, I regularly get better images
from the Powershot than I would have ever expected from the Coolpix
950. Certainly there's a great deal of subjectivity here, since
many folks swear by their 950's, but my opinions are my own, and
I've developed them with personal hands-on experience. And the
Powershot's images blow earlier digicams out of the water. No
contest.
There are
times though, that I might have wished for more resolution. Especially
for subjects with a great deal of fine detail (trees with or without
branches, bricks, etc.), where the Powershot exhibits lots of
artifacting or just plain blurriness. I'm especially disappointed
when compared to similar images I've seen from the Olympus C2500Z,
which has 1.5x the number of pixels. The Canon also has a tendency
to have a lot of artifacts in the blue channel, even with the
CCDRAW mode, and especially in low-light images. They're generally
correctable in Photoshop, so it doesn't bug me too much.
But I'm especially
impressed by now images are printable straight from the camera.
I've become fairly accustomed to spending time in Photoshop with
almost every previous digital image I've taken, but with the Powershot,
I often found corrections were just unnecessary. You can't overcome
the limitations of the camera, but if your expectations aren't
the equivalent of what you'd expect from a drum scan, then you'll
be pretty pleased.
The aspect
ration of the CCD is a bit different from most other cameras,
so the final images won't fit as well on an 8x10, but it fits
perfectly on 4x6. The images can be resampled to cover an 8x0
print at 150dpi, without a great loss of clarity. On an Epson
Photo 750, the results can be framed, though you wouldn't hang
it in a museum.
If you want
to see some sample pics I've taken, check out the gallery.
The Conclusion
The truth
is, almost every new camera from here on out will have a larger
imaging unit and faster processor than the Powershot. But then
again, few will have as good a lens, decent flash support, and
high build quality. Perhaps in the long run, this camera won't
make the grade as our expectations of digital media expand. But
that *is* the long run, and I plan to be using this camera for
quite some time, because it complements my current available technology
quite nicely. I don't plan to buy a microdrive, a better printer,
more hard disks and cd's, a faster processor, and all crap real
soon, and a new digicam will come after all that. But eventually,
I'll probably get the next Powershot when it comes out, or something
similar. But I'll still keep this one, because it's an enjoyable
camera to use. And if I drop this one off a building tomorrow,
I'll be on the phone ordering another one tomorrow night. Then
maybe I'd get the new software...
Gotta go take
some pictures now.
|
A Quick Review of the Canon Powershot Pro70