Well, you would have more MP to be able to digitally zoom afterwards by cropping, and it has a 20x optical zoom.... With that being said, I'm not generally a fan of putting that many MP in such a small chip, since noise will be more apparent in the pictures. ; However, with noise reducing software that might not be an issue.
Yes actually. ; The Digic4 is a really good chip, and you have 67% more MP, plus a substantial more optical zoom (75% more).
One quick little caveat here, just to make sure you're aware: The "12x" vs the "20x" zooms on those two cameras isn't all at the telephoto end. ; That multiplication number is based on multiplying from the widest setting... In other words, you're S3 IS starts with the widest angle being 36mm. ; So the 12x zoom means you get a maximum optical telephoto reach of 432mm. ; If you were to add the 1.7x telephoto extender to that, you'd stretch your optical reach to 720mm. The SX10 starts at a wide end of 28mm. ; So the 20x zoom means you get a maximum optical telephoto reach of 560mm. ; Now, don't get me wrong - that's a lot more telephoto, plus a significantly more useful wide end too. ; But the actual gain in telephoto shooting isn't quite "8x"...it's more like 3.5x difference...or the equivalent to a 15.4x zoom on your S3. Just wanted to make sure that's understood...the telephoto extender, even the 1.7x, will get you more reach than the new camera alone will. ; Of course, you can always add the 1.7x extender to the new SX10, and get a crazy 952mm optical equivalent!!
Okay, the Kodak gives you 2 more mm on the wide end and 64 more on the telephoto end. ; I'm not sure how much of a factor the 64 would be....(35mm equivalent)
Here are roughly the same pictures with the SX10. Today was much more humid than when I took the other pictures.
So I've gone through all this work taking pictures of the lighthouse for nothing. I forgot that I had my S3 with me when I visited KSC 2 years ago. There was no shuttle on the pad but I believe this is the same pad it will launch from this weekend. This version was resized for web hosting a while back and lost it's exif data. I have the original at home. I'm assuming I was zoomed in all the way on this.
Is that the NASA Causeway? ; If so, here's what you can expect: ; http://www.themagicinpixels.com/forum/h ... ;msg=33269
Yes, that's from the Causeway. Thanks Dennis. I just hope I get my camera settings right or I'll be one po'ed person.
Good luck, and remember that the SRBs burn VERY brightly, so take that into account if you're doing a manual exposure. ; I liken it to looking at a 100-watt light bulb. ; And if you have time, check out the tips at http://www.launchphotography.com/
I have been in contact with Ben from Launch Photography, he is the one who gave me some settings. Although someone on another forum disagreed with him.
I agree with the person who disagreed. ; DSLR and P&S are different settings, with F8 on P&S being minimum aperture, and therefore too small and subject to diffraction. ; I'd definitely stay within the F5.6-6.3 range, ISO100 if possible, and try to keep the shutter speeds around 1/400-1/500. ; The manual exposure is probably a good idea with the extreme difference in lighting when the flame is on...but be ready to adjust it a bit, or the EV, if you find the flame blowing out or causing flare. ; Personally, I'd underexpose a bit for the rest of the scene in order to preserve the bright highlights in the flame plume.
Unfortunately the shuttle was scrubbed so I didn't even get to see it. I'm hoping they push it back to July and we can try again. Our tickets are still good for whenever they reschedule.
Too bad. ; Sadly, that was always the pattern when I missed a launch. ; It was never a weather scrub, it was always a hardware problem that would take weeks to fix. It could be worse. ; I once met a couple who came all the way from Austria because they were friends with a European astronaut. ; That flight was scrubbed a couple of days before the launch and finally got off a month or two later.
