B+H has the Canon PowerShot Pro1, any takers?

I am looking for a good in-depth review of this camera. I expect we will see a few soon. I held this camera at PMA in February and for a compact camera with a great lens this camera should fit the bill well. I am curious to see some images from it and what people think. I am tempted to buy one, but not at the moment. What photography finances I have set aside will go towards a 1D mkII.

Originally Posted by patch29 B+H has the Canon PowerShot Pro1, any takers? I am looking for a good in-depth review of this camera. I expect we will see a few soon. I held this camera at PMA in February and for a compact camera with a great lens this camera should fit the bill well. I am curious to see some images from it and what people think. I am tempted to buy one, but not at the moment. What photography finances I have set aside will go towards a 1D mkII.

Steve's digicams has a detailed review here.

Originally Posted by rutt Steve's digicams has a detailed review here.

Thanks for a lead in the right direction. The link goes to a photo of a SEVEN bicycle. Is it yours? I have been looking to set a long distance touring bicycle, the Pro1 would be perfect to take along.

Here is the link to the review.

Originally Posted by patch29 Thanks for a lead in the right direction. The link goes to a photo of a SEVEN bicycle. Is it yours? I have been looking to set a long distance touring bicycle, the Pro1 would be perfect to take along.

Too much posting. Glad you found the review. My Seven is great. I've had it 5 years and riden it about 20k miles.

Sounds like it shares the same problem as the Sony f828. Lotsa noise at the higher ISOs.

Originally Posted by wxwax Sounds like it shares the same problem as the Sony f828. Lotsa noise at the higher ISOs.

The SEVEN shares almost no problems with any Sony product (except price, perhaps.)

The Pro1 probably shares a lot of problems with the f828; I believe they use the same sensor. In any case, the high resolution and small sensor are bound to be subject to noise. And too much DOF. Still, these things are great for what they are great for: traveling light, shooting in day light, landscaes, macro.

You'd think there'd be software that could fix the noise at the expense of resolution. After all the noise comes because individual pixels in the sensor are too small to get statistically significant reading in low light a short time. By combining information from adjacent sensors, you should be able to get back to the noise level of the 5MP prosmuers.

I thought the Canon used a proprietary sensor. DPReview doesn't Identify the maker. Nor does Steve's Digicams. The Nikon 8700 uses a Sony CCD sensor... is it identical to the one used in the f828?

There was a thread here not too long ago about the problems with packing ever-smaller pixels on a sensor. I'm not technically inclined, but what you say is consistent with what came out of that discussion. One thing that sticks in my mind is that all pixels are not created equal: I read that the pixels in the Canon 1D are fatter and produce a better image than you might expect for 4mp.

My 2 bob's worth...

The camera is right up there with the rebel in $ & size

....hmmm way too PUI to have an opinion so i'll back out now with a question. How does it line up against the rebel in CCD size ?

Oh...im glad you have all asked...my new 80 gig HD is running well, i chickened out & got a mate to put it in for me & use my old 40 gig as an extra. It was only back about 14 years that my brand spanker Amiga 2000 came with a 52 meg HD ..1 meg ram (paid $280 for another 2 meg ram) & friends were looking at it in awe asking "what on earth are you going to do with all that space?"

Originally Posted by wxwax I thought the Canon used a proprietary sensor. DPReview doesn't Identify the maker. Nor does Steve's Digicams. The Nikon 8700 uses a Sony CCD sensor... is it identical to the one used in the f828? There was a thread here not too long ago about the problems with packing ever-smaller pixels on a sensor. I'm not technically inclined, but what you say is consistent with what came out of that discussion. One thing that sticks in my mind is that all pixels are not created equal: I read that the pixels in the Canon 1D are fatter and produce a better image than you might expect for 4mp.

Waxie, why would a "fatter" pixel be better?

Originally Posted by Humungus My 2 bob's worth... The camera is right up there with the rebel in $ & size ....hmmm way too PUI to have an opinion so i'll back out now with a question. How does it line up against the rebel in CCD size ? Oh...im glad you have all asked...my new 80 gig HD is running well, i chickened out & got a mate to put it in for me & use my old 40 gig as an extra. It was only back about 14 years that my brand spanker Amiga 2000 came with a 52 meg HD ..1 meg ram (paid $280 for another 2 meg ram) & friends were looking at it in awe asking "what on earth are you going to do with all that space?"

I remember a few computers ago...the salesman told me that the 240 meg HD would be all I would ever, ever need. I think it had 1 or 2 meg ram. How things have changed.

Originally Posted by komet I remember a few computers ago...the salesman told me that the 240 meg HD would be all I would ever, ever need. I think it had 1 or 2 meg ram. How things have changed.

OI !! dont you be hijacking this thread. Hows elvis going ? cameras ..cameras...cameras....with everyone going to raw these days it wont be long before we need 5 gig in a camera...in 5 years maybe 100 gig. im going to stop now & go & sit on the balcony & watch the boats go past

Originally Posted by Humungus My 2 bob's worth... ....hmmm way too PUI to have an opinion so i'll back out now with a question. How does it line up against the rebel in CCD size ?

From what I can see, the Pro 1 has a CCD sensor, while the Digi Rebel has a CMOS sensor. CMOS is said to be better than CCD's.

Originally Posted by komet Waxie, why would a "fatter" pixel be better?

I'm just recapping what I read.... it's like a bigger bucket captures more rainfall. The bigger pixel gets more information. I guess that's one reason why those in the know look askance of the whole megapixel race for digicams.

Originally Posted by wxwax I'm just recapping what I read.... it's like a bigger bucket captures more rainfall. The bigger pixel gets more information. I guess that's one reason why those in the know look askance of the whole megapixel race for digicams.

Thanks...myself being naive re: digi-cams...it is so easy to fall into the "more megapixel is better" school of thought.