Today my Cats Can’t Read photo was posted to Reddit by PaperLess. I don’t think it made the front page, but it did do well on the Pics page, making it up to at least number 6 today. Back on February 16, 2008, this shot had 3,676 views and 33 faves which I thought was pretty good. When I first learned of it being on Reddit on March 10, about eight hours after it was posted, it has 24,176 views and 44 faves. Now, around 13 hours since it was linked, it is up to 32,022 views and 47 faves. According to Flickr, there have been over 28,000 views from Reddit users in just over half a day. Thanks for posting it, PaperLess.
I do have one request though of anyone who posts links to photos. Please link the post to the main photo page, not the original size or the JPEG itself. I often find posts directly to JPEGs, that is not allowed by the Flickr TOS and is rude. The photographer gets no credit for the image that way. Linking to the larger size pages is better because the photographer’s name and copyright information is there, but the viewers won’t likely see the caption under the photo or the photographer’s other work. Reddit users don’t have a reputation for exploring a site that has been linked. Even though I have had over 28,000 views on this photo alone today, views on the rest of my photos and my Photostream are maybe at most very slightly above average. I do have a lot of other good stuff people would enjoy and usually so do other photographers that get linked.
If you ever do come across a JPEG only photo on Flickr’s servers, this bookmarklet will take you to the photo page (if I can figure out where I got it I will add a credit). I use it frequently. Often you will find other interesting work by the same photographer.
For those that don’t know, Reddit is a site like Slashdot or Digg. You have to be a computer geek to have heard of them, but they are huge in the world of computer geeks and programmers. I get most of my news and interesting links from them. On Digg and Reddit, people post links they find interesting and they get voted up or down so the really interesting ones make it to the front page. As new stuff becomes more interesting they move down the list to make room. Unless its really good, most stuff doesn’t stay near the top for even a day. The amount of traffic these sites produce if you get linked and are popular can be enormous. Frequently it is enough to knock a site temporarily off line or at least make it unusably slow.
Update: One week later and I get another shot on Reddit thanks to digital. It got about 5,000 in the first three hours it was there.
March 10th, 2008
I am pretty excited about my new Canon Powershot S5 IS. Since it is so new and there are few reviews of it around I thought I should post my “review.” If you skipped the S3 waiting for a big improvement like I did, this might be what you have waited for. But it is still not a huge improvement. If you have an S3, it might not be worth it at least till the price drops a bunch.
Major updates since I originally posted are in blue. Last updated November 24.
I was very happy with my Canon Powershot S2 IS and it still works fine (except for some grinding noises sometimes). So I was having trouble deciding whether to get the S5 or not and a lot of the early information about it was killing my excitement for it. I had been looking at alternatives in case I decided not to get the S5, but I didn’t see any that really stood out. And after finally getting to look at some of the other SLR-like cameras in person I decided just to go for the S5. There is always eBay or the 15% restocking fee if I just can’t stand it.
You can see a growing number of samples of my shots with the S5 here. Hopefully they can help you make your own decision on image quality.
The S5 is available now at Best Buy where I over paid for mine. I normally would only buy a camera online since you can find it cheaper, usually pay no tax, and likely get free shipping. But I was impatient this time and I had a gift card I was tired of carrying around.
Circuit City’s website has the camera with an unadvertised low price ($25.00 off). I don’t know how long that price is good or if it will be good in store. But the camera isn’t available yet in the store anyway and the employee I talked to said it isn’t in the computer yet and usually things show up in there about a week before they get them. Best Buy seems to have got an exclusive release date. I called Circuit City and asked about the camera, they said they are shipping them now if you order online, but he didn’t know when they would be available in stores. Checking again on June 23 on their website, Circuit City now says it is available in stores and that lower price is still listed.
Image quality seems to be a slight improvement over the S2. It may be a tiny bit softer, but not by much (if any) and more small detail is visible. You can see noise reduction effects sometimes when “pixel peeping,” but for regular viewing and printing it isn’t an issue. The noise reduction isn’t horrible and I have seen much worse samples from other cameras. Without moving up to an SLR, you aren’t really going to improve much no matter what. The sensor size and lens of the S5 are the same as the S2 but the megapixels keep going up since most people believe megapixels are everything. Canon had to increase it or it wouldn’t sell, and they seem to have done a decent job getting a bit more detail from this small sensor. I took a set of images comparing noise at different ISOs between the cameras. In those well lit indoor shots, the S5 always appear a little better. Outdoor shots are harder to determine. I have seen a small bit of purple fringing in a few of my outdoor max zoom shots especially around overexposed areas but not enough that it bothers me. Indoor zoom shots, even not so well lit, show the same minor improvement over the S2.
The feel is good, though I don’t like the minor changes with button placement. They moved the customizable button to the left side of the camera where it is basically useless. If the LCD panel is out, getting to the button with your left hand is not convenient. Since they moved that button they moved all the others down. The buttons are slightly less easily pressed compared to the S2. I guess that could be a good thing or a bad thing. You are less likely to accidentally press a button, but you will have to get used to pressing harder.
Color saturation is a bit better than my S2. Low light focusing appears slightly better but still can be trouble. Focusing in regular light on even a moving target seems improved. The view finder is brighter (and bigger too I think) though the resolution still isn’t great. And the larger LCD screen is brighter and amazing. I can’t believe I have been happy with the S2’s panel before now that I have used this giant.
ISO 400 seems ok. Some people will claim it is still unusable. Others will say it’s decent. Going higher than ISO 200 is still something to avoid if possible but I would rather have a noisy image than a blurry one or none at all. Noise reduction software can do an amazing job even on ISO 1600 images.
I really like the hot shoe for using an external flash even though I probably won’t use it that often. I have an old 1980’s Canon flash that isn’t able to talk to the camera so I had to set things manually on the camera and flash, but it is nice to have a very powerful flash. There is an annoying delay between hitting the shutter and the flash firing though. If you are shooting a fast moving target, you have to track it or won’t be in the shot by the time the flash fires. Before you use an old flash you should read this and check this chart, certain old flashes have very high trigger voltage which will over time burn out your hot shoe.
The old flash stopped working with my camera after a few months (it’s connector was nearly broken when I started using it) and I liked having the extra flash power so I bought a Sunpak flash which should have worked fine, but for some reason didn’t so I exchanged it for a real Canon flash, the Speedlight 430EX. Much more expensive, but now that I have it I am glad I didn’t stick with a cheap flash. The refresh rate of the 430EX (until the batteries are low) keeps up with the speed of the camera’s continuous shooting mode (compared to several seconds between shots with the other). So far I use it mostly for macros which it is not well suited for (the 530EX is). But a home made diffuser/reflector helps a lot. So it turns out, I do use the hot shoe a lot. Since I got the new flash, I hardly shoot macros without it.
The S5 has several new features that I like in theory, Face Detection, Continuous Shooting AF, and Safety Manual Focus, but I will have to wait and see how useful they really are.
I have not yet tried Face Detection much but it sounds like it works well for other people. It is on by default for the more automatic modes, but it must be activated manually for P mode and higher. Unless you turn off FlexiZone, face detect is not very useful. Once detected, the auto focus box would stay on the position the face was when detected. If you turn off FlexiZone, Face Detect can be activated all the time with the set button and is just like in the automatic modes.
Continuous Shooting Auto Focus seemed to work ok but is not perfect. The speed isn’t too much lower than the regular continuous shooting. But there is no focus box to aim to help keep focus on your subject so some shots may be focusing on the subject and some on the background but it will be nicely in focus. It is not hidden away in a menu option so is easy to activate, it is right there as a choice next to regular continuous shooting when you hit the button.
Safety Manual Focus is a feature I think might be extremely useful. I have a Raynox DCR-250 macro adapter and at its maximum magnification, focusing is extremely difficult so manual focus is almost a must. But even then I miss a lot of shots just slightly due to the very narrow DOF so I hope safety focus help. I haven’t yet really put this feature to the test.
The lens cap does seem like it will stay on better than the S2, it is now a sort of clip on lens. But it still pops off so it doesn’t put any pressure on the lens motor if you forget to remove it. So it may still not stay on all the time, but I have not knocked it off accidentally yet.
The plastic tripod mount threads on the S2 have been replaced by metal. That was a common complaint with reviewers but I didn’t find it that bad. But now that it can have an external flash it does need the better thread.
There is now an ISO Speed field in the EXIF that Picasa and Flickr both read now so you don’t have to look in the Maker Notes fields to find it.
Canon got rid of the intervalometer and the high speed continuous shooting mode, but I suspect the majority of users never even knew either of those features existed. I will miss the high speed mode’s 2.4 fps. Regular continuous mode is the same as the S2 and S3’s 1.5 fps.
Actually comparing regular continuous shooting on the S2 with the S5, both cameras do seem about equal though not exactly the same. The S2 seemed to start off faster I think but over a minute slowed down slightly a few times in my first test. It was on an older smaller card but both were SanDisk. Neither had been formated recently and both had images already on them.
|
shots |
size |
time |
fps |
| S2 |
89 |
66 mb |
1 min |
1.483 |
| S5 |
91 |
102 mb |
1 min |
1.517 |
I did some further tests comparing the speed of the two cameras. The S5 is a tiny bit (one shot per minute) faster than the S2’s normal continuous shooting mode. I used the same memory card in both cameras this time and included low level formatting it as a test for each camera which made no difference. Having the LCD panel open or closed also made no difference. I set the cameras to manual on ISO 80 and the fastest shutter speed I could at F2.7, 1/1600s. I also tried shooting with the S5 in lower resolutions, which slows it down slightly because it must resize.
|
shots |
size |
time |
fps |
resolution |
| S2 |
92 |
40 mb |
1 min |
1.533 |
2592×1944 |
| S5 |
93 |
36 mb |
1 min |
1.554 |
3264×2448 |
| S5 |
89 |
22 mb |
1 min |
1.483 |
2592×1944 |
| S5 |
91 |
1.8 mb |
1 min |
1.517 |
640×480 |
In regular shooting there is a longer black out moment right after you hit the shutter. On the S2 it was so short I didn’t even realize it was there until now. The S5 seems to double the length of the blackout which is still extremely short and certainly not measurable by me, but seemed odd until I realized the S2 did it also.
The memory card slot is now under the battery door which is probably good for retail marketing since they can leave a card in there now and not have it stolen. That is good for trying the camera in the store which used to be difficult with no memory, but it is annoying for owners. I prefer to use a card reader so I take the memory card out frequently. Now I have to worry about not turning the camera over or I have to close the door so the batteries stay in. I found that if I left the door open on the S2 I was less likely to forget to put the memory back in. Going out to shoot with no memory card sucks. The door now opens different, instead of front to back like the S2, it opens to the side. And thanks to the extra strong springs on the batteries, closing the door is difficult. I wonder if I will download images less frequently to avoid using that door. Maybe it will improve with use as the springs get softer, but closing the door is my biggest complaint about the camera.
I have read some places that claim that the focusing on the background problem has been improved. If it is, its still far from gone. Just ask the blurry bird I shot tofday. The camera liked the leaves behind him better since they were lit better and higher contrast even though the bird took up more than 90% of the focus box on the screen. Five out of nine shots focused on the background or at least tried to. Some of those the whole shot was blurry but the leaves were less blurry. I finally had to go into Digital Zoom so there was very little background visible to get the shot. It doesn’t actually look too bad. Even with the S2, the background focusing problem was never a big issue. It is annoying when it happens, but it isn’t common and can usually be worked around by adjusting your angle or focusing on a nearby object.
Even though the flash is a tiny bit higher than the S2, it is still partially blocked by the lens when in Super Macro mode. But that can be easily overcome with a home made ring flash diffuser. It is made out of a Styrofoam bowl and called the CCRRFD. Once I learned about it, I have used it for most of my macros.
DCResource.com has up sample photos from the S5. He says the review probably won’t be up till July though. These aren’t completely controlled studio shots so it is difficult to compare them, but his S3 gallery has three very similar shots between the two cameras.
CNet has a review up. I prefer DCResource and DPReview’s more in depth reviews but since they aren’t out, you have to decide without them if you can’t wait.
DCRecource and DPReview posted their reviews. Here are a couple other informative reviews that have popped up recently: dpinterface.com, photoreview.com.au, mycanong7.com.
There is also a Flickr group for the camera and you can view photos taken with the S5 in Flickr’s Camera Finder. When I first posted, the group only had four photos and they were all mine. Now we are nearing 200 photos. In the group, I started a discussion of things that annoy users about the camera.
Overall I like the camera. It’s not perfect, but no camera is. I would recommend it. But I also recommend you find it online for less than $500. It isn’t hard if you can stand to not have it right away. If you aren’t already an S series user, you should look at the S3 too though. You can find it for about half the S5 price online. If the new S5 features don’t interest you, the S3 is a much better deal and there is likely less difference in image quality than there was from the S2. Don’t focus on the megapixels, six is plenty for most people.
I will keep this post updated as I learn more about the camera. I have had it for less than 24 hours so far so I am sure there is a lot more to learn. I bet reading the instruction book would help. I have now read some of it. It did help.
June 20th, 2007
On Flickr, a common thing to do is invite or award images you like to groups you belong to. Some people don’t like these images cluttering up their photo’s comments. I don’t particularly like lots of image invites and awards either, but if you don’t submit your photos to the aggressive award/invite groups you don’t get flooded with images. A few small images aren’t that bad, its when they get huge and blinking that is annoying.
I read someone who didn’t like these tried to hide them with Adblock but it wasn’t working well. It wasn’t the first time someone has found this problem. I had an idea. There is another Firefox extension that with the right rules can hide any image posted in comments. It is called RIP or Remove it Permanently.
Once you install the extension, here are three rules to import depending on where you want to remove image comments from. If you plan to delete them on your own photos I suggest only hiding them on the Comments You’ve Made page so you don’t miss deleting any.
Firefox’s Tools menu should now have a RIP Options choice. Select that and at the bottom left of the next screen there will be a button for Import Rip. Import the file you just downloaded and three new RIPs should show up that are named as Flickr {page name} Invite Image. Try them out and disable the ones you don’t need.
If you have problems using these I won’t be able to help much. I plan to remove RIP since I am not that worried about removing the images and I don’t like having unused extensions. I just wanted to see if it was possible.
Download Flickr RIP Comment Images
Update June 19: Its been several days and I haven’t removed it from on of my computers and I hardly even notice it. It is kind of refreshing not to see all the image comments. Mostly I only notice something odd when I use my laptop and all the image comments are still there.
June 10th, 2007
I found a Flickr user’s photostream full of those odd text images that have been popular in spam lately. At first I thought it was some project to collect the images for some antispam purpose. Then I thought it must be a spammer hosting his images on Flickr. Then I realized what had happened.
Flickr allows you to setup a special email address to mail images to that are automatically posted. That is a very useful feature. That allows you to post directly from your camera phone or Google’s Picasa. For security they choose pretty good random unique email addresses (similar to hyper91bat at photos.flickr.com) to prevent spam or people posting to unauthorized accounts.
But there are ways spammers might get these secret addresses. Random luck is unlikely but could happen. They could also get them from compromised computers. Anyway, it seems to me that Flickr is posting images from spam emails being sent to this secret address. If you check out the oldest page you will see this guy hasn’t been active on Flickr since October 2006 and the spam started in February 2007 so he probably has no idea this is happening. Currently he has 92 photos, of those only 11 are not spam.
These photos contain the text and subjects from the spam so I did some more searching to see if I could find any other signs of this, but it was futile. Image spam is designed to get around spam filters by including random or stolen text that is not full of the usual spammy words. Those go in the image. So having nothing to search for means there is no way of knowing how wide spread this problem is.
If this happens to you, go to your Uploading by email settings page under Your Account, Email and hit the Reset button. This will give you a new unique address and should stop the spam. I would also be sure to check your computer for spyware and viruses since the spammers had to have found your address somehow.
Update May 22: By searching spam and flickr I was able to find two more users who have experienced this problem. Spygirl got hit by this, though only two image spams were posted before she stopped it. And thegentlemanfarmer got several of them. Both changed their upload address and don’t seem to be getting surprises in their photostream anymore.
Update June 7: It took a while, but the spam on baxter.1002’s photostream is all gone. I wonder if Flickr cleaned it up or if baxter came back. Either way, I am glad it is gone now.
May 21st, 2007
