Does anyone have any SX40.............
Aug 19, 2012 20:48:51 #
grusum wrote:
quote=prestonphoto lol lol lol What did I get sta... (show quote)
That is too funny. lol lol Setting here lmao. Thanks
Aug 19, 2012 21:03:48 #
CanonJC wrote:
I was told that Canon will announce in Nov.1st.
They usually announce this line in September, and then it's about a month before us ordinary folks can get their hands on one.
Of course, they can do it whenever they want. Pretty sure they want those dollars coming in as soon as possible.
Aug 19, 2012 21:11:03 #
Do the major companies ever release sales figures to us normal people? I would really be interested in how the SX40 sales were this year.
Aug 19, 2012 22:30:39 #
Carioca wrote:
They usually announce this line in September, and then it's about a month before us ordinary folks can get their hands on one.
Of course, they can do it whenever they want. Pretty sure they want those dollars coming in as soon as possible.
CanonJC wrote:
I was told that Canon will announce in Nov.1st.
They usually announce this line in September, and then it's about a month before us ordinary folks can get their hands on one.
Of course, they can do it whenever they want. Pretty sure they want those dollars coming in as soon as possible.
Sound good! Thank you:)
Aug 19, 2012 22:52:51 #
pinkycat wrote:
Here's a few ... These are at full zoom, probably at least 1 mile or more away ... No editing on Rushmore photo, and only minor lighting adjustment on the others.
GREAT pics!!
Aug 19, 2012 22:54:03 #
I checked out both cameras and they each have some nice features. But they are both built on a hobby platform. That means they have plastic bodies and cheap lenses. I have seen cameras like this in the stores. They look like their big brothers that cost $1,000 or more but they are really very cheap cameras. They may have fantastic specs when it comes to zoom but you know as well as I do that Canon and Nikon cannot build a quality lens for that much money. It just can't be done. These are cheap knockoffs for people who want to shoot Canon and Nikon on a budget. You would be very sorry if you bought one of these cameras and thought it would perform like the big boys.
Aug 19, 2012 23:00:01 #
prestonphoto wrote:
quote=Wahawk quote=prestonphoto .......photo whe... (show quote)
I have the SX30. The SX30 and SX40 are nearly identical in performance. The major differences are the SX40 has a much faster 'burst' rate 10 frames vs 3 but the sx40 limits the ISO on long shots (3+sec) to 100iso while the SX30 you have control on the ISO.
Also you can't get a printed copy of the SX40 manual (you can't even print the PDF file without "COPY" printed across every page). I went around and around with Canon on this attempting to get a copy for my father who is not computer literate, and discovered it was a corporate decision in Japan (to be 'eco-friendly') not to allow printed copies.
Here is a comparison of the two http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_sx40-review
BTW if you get either get a back up battery or two, but don't buy a Canon battery. They cost $70 vs $17 for a non Canon battery and they are made in China where the other brands (at least the ones I've bought are made in Japan-much more trustworthy in my book)
Aug 19, 2012 23:05:28 #
prestonphoto wrote:
What?? No exact distance???? What is this?? lol lol lol lol Yes - your shot of the moon is a good example. And just so you know , the reason I wanted to know the distance of shots is because I'm paralyzed waist down and can't get close to some things being in a wheelchair. And sometimes I just like to set and try to draw things from a distance in close. The info everyone has given me with photos has been really great.
LOL!!! :lol: :lol:
I just couldn't resist the "no exact distance"!! I have other examples that I have taken just playing around. Driving down the street I will see something that would make an example, like a car or truck a couple blocks away and want to see what it will do, so I take a full wide angle followed by a full optical zoom. The first one you can just make out the vehicle and the next it almost fills the frame. I took one of a streetscape a couple blocks away, showing all the mess of signs, utility poles, etc, then zoomed in on ONE of the store signs. It continually amazes me at how good this camera does.
From what I have heard of the 'rumors' regarding the next version, it sounds like RAW capability may be included. I would sure like to see the capability of adding a wired remote, maybe some extended shooting speeds for long exposures, etc.
Aug 19, 2012 23:07:56 #
Wahawk wrote:
quote=prestonphoto What?? No exact distance???? W... (show quote)
RAW is really needed
BTW that camera I'm holding is NOT the SX30 (or 40). This just was the best picture of me that I had.
Aug 19, 2012 23:11:06 #
bvargas wrote:
I checked out both cameras and they each have some... (show quote)
And yet it's rated better than the FZ200 that you recommended earlier.
Don't know why you feel the need to post irrelevant stuff here, but if you'd like to discuss that particular camera, please start your own thread.
Aug 19, 2012 23:12:11 #
WxGuesser wrote:
RAW is really needed
BTW that camera I'm holding is NOT the SX30 (or 40). This just was the best picture of me that I had.
BTW that camera I'm holding is NOT the SX30 (or 40). This just was the best picture of me that I had.
You can have RAW, if you want: http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_in_Brief
Aug 19, 2012 23:29:56 #
Carioca wrote:
You can have RAW, if you want: http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_in_Brief
WxGuesser wrote:
RAW is really needed
BTW that camera I'm holding is NOT the SX30 (or 40). This just was the best picture of me that I had.
BTW that camera I'm holding is NOT the SX30 (or 40). This just was the best picture of me that I had.
You can have RAW, if you want: http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_in_Brief
Would be nice if the next version includes the capabilities of the CHDK to allow RAW, remote release, additional ISO and speed capabilities, etc.
Aug 19, 2012 23:33:58 #
Wahawk wrote:
Would be nice if the next version includes the capabilities of the CHDK to allow RAW, remote release, additional ISO and speed capabilities, etc.
Nice, and expensive.
Aug 19, 2012 23:45:40 #
Carioca wrote:
Nice, and expensive.
Wahawk wrote:
Would be nice if the next version includes the capabilities of the CHDK to allow RAW, remote release, additional ISO and speed capabilities, etc.
Nice, and expensive.
CHDK is free to ANYONE! The capabilities are there, the programming has been done, all Canon has to do is include it and with NO OTHER CHANGES, they can add value without changing the cost. It would NOT be expensive to do.
Aug 19, 2012 23:45:58 #
It is my understanding that the Lumix FX200 has a CONSTANT f2.8 at all zoom positions. Example: 600mm @f.2.8. If this is true, it is unheard of on any other camera to date. Maybe, I read the specs wrong, but again, if it's true, WOW, and of course, it is very expensive compared to other cameras of this class.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.