PDA

View Full Version : Problem with SD780, SD880 and SD870

danpass
17th of April 2009 (Fri), 15:15
The problem is that these two new ones have some nice features, so do I sell my SD870 and get one of these two and if so which one LOL.

Seems that the 880 glass is a bit better ..........
dan j
17th of April 2009 (Fri), 21:24
I'm pretty happy with the wife's 780 IS on P mode. Not 50D quality, but it's a P&S. The HD video is also really good, not as good as my HD videocamera, but still very good. It's much easier to carry which means I'm always carrying it.

I guess it depends how much the new features mean to you.

dan
danpass
29th of April 2009 (Wed), 11:48
well I sold my SD870 and ordered up an SD880. Pic quality was the main factor.
DeCeccoNET
29th of April 2009 (Wed), 12:09
I did the same thing, and honestly with the exception of the 880 shooting video in the .mov format as opposed to the 870's .AVI, I actually prefered the older model's controll layout. (the wheel on the 880 is going to annoy the crap out of you when you realize how easy it will change your settings without you realizing).

In the end, they are both great cameras, and I found the picture quality to be identical. If video is important to you, I would say go for the 880 but otherwise the upgrade really isnt worth it if you are happy with the 870.
danpass
30th of April 2009 (Thu), 13:12
Just got it (from B&H).

Some sample shots.

Straight from the camera, iContrast active, one notch more sharpness using the in-camera custom function.


http://www.danpassaro.com/img/v8/p554039745.jpg


http://www.danpassaro.com/img/v7/p789754453.jpg
primosanchez
29th of July 2009 (Wed), 05:00
Just got it (from B&H).

Some sample shots.

Straight from the camera, iContrast active, one notch more sharpness using the in-camera custom function.


http://www.danpassaro.com/img/v8/p554039745.jpg


http://www.danpassaro.com/img/v7/p789754453.jpg

Those are from the 780? Much sharper than my photos. what settings were they taken on?
dan j
29th of July 2009 (Wed), 13:12
No, those are from his 880. If you're having trouble, post a picture with the EXIF intact.

dan
primosanchez
29th of July 2009 (Wed), 16:57
No, those are from his 880. If you're having trouble, post a picture with the EXIF intact.

dan

Not sure if the JPGs contain the EXIF but if they do, heres a few. Havent touched the settings, everything's just been on auto.
http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/2002/img0124d.jpg
http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/9845/img0066u.jpg
http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/3248/img0351.jpg
dan j
29th of July 2009 (Wed), 18:07
The walkway photo looks like it's focal point was infinity, right? I think it looks good as long as you don't pixel peep.
The hotel room shot is high ISO and low SS. Not a good combo on a P&S.
The last one? What do you not like?

You're looking at full size photos and comparing them to postcard size photos on the web. I do that too, pixel peeping is a PITB, especially with a point and shoot.

dan
primosanchez
30th of July 2009 (Thu), 03:10
The walkway photo looks like it's focal point was infinity, right? I think it looks good as long as you don't pixel peep.
The hotel room shot is high ISO and low SS. Not a good combo on a P&S.
The last one? What do you not like?

You're looking at full size photos and comparing them to postcard size photos on the web. I do that too, pixel peeping is a PITB, especially with a point and shoot.

dan

Thanks for the input, I guess im being too critical when I blow them up. Appreciate it.