|
|
|
|
|
These 4-megapixel cameras vary in size, with the most compact being the Canon S40 (far left). Left to right, the other digicams are the Kodak DX4900, Minolta DiMAGE S404, and Toshiba PDR-M81. Oddly enough, the most compact digicam is also the most feature-rich in the group, followed closely by the Minolta. The Kodak model is the simplest and easiest to use, but didnt appear to be as durable as the other three. | |
Shootout At The 4-Mp Corral
Canon PowerShot S40/Kodak EasyShare DX4900 Zoom/Minolta DiMAGE S404/Toshiba PDR-M81
With few exceptions, all evaluations were made with the camera in situations typically encountered by the average consumer. While mounting to a tripod is an option on each model, we chose to operate these cameras handheld (using the best means to stabilize the camera under these conditions, beginning with a firm, two-handed grasp). No situation was tailor-made. We took what we found and made the best of it.
|
|
|
The back of the camera says quite a bit. The smallest, the Canon S40, had the most confusing array of buttons and switches. Not only does the Kodak have an undemanding interface, it has a menu to match. | |
Performance assessments are based on each camera operated at the highest non-interpolated JPEG quality settingat highest resolution, lowest compression level. (TIFF or RAW capture wasnt prudent, since this option wasnt available on all camerasand is not one the average consumer uses.) Variables were limited to the parameter/feature tested, while keeping the others constant, except that exposure compensation and/or autoexposure bracketing may have been employed (as outlined). Flash was used sparingly. Cameras were operated in the following mode:
Program mode; autofocus, auto WB (unless a specific WB setting was tested), multi-pattern exposure metering; drive at single-frame rate, unless autoexposure bracketing was employed (noted), flash off (flash on in only one test).
The key parameters/features outline the test subject and procedures, followed by a rating and explanation of the results. Additional parameters/features simply discuss strong and weak points.
|
|
Exposure
The Test: Each camera was confronted with a garden scenewhat might be considered a typical setting encountered on a vacation or family outing, with blue sky and clouds in the background, shrubbery and flowers in bloom in the foreground. Each camera was set to multi-pattern metering. Where available (all except the Kodak DX4900), autoexposure bracketing was used. Auto-bracketing was set at +/- 0.5 EV increments, except on the Canon, which could only be set in 1/3 EV incrementsso this was set at +/- 2/3 EV. The base exposure compensation setting was +/- 0. Exposure judged as Acceptable or Unacceptable.
|
|
The Results: Each camera produced acceptable results at the base/normal exposure, with one exception. The Canon S40 delivered its optimum exposure at -2/3 EV. In another situation, we uncovered a problem, which might have been due more to the hard-to-read LCD data display, with exposures consistently over, reflecting that perhaps a setting was altered (by inadvertently hitting a button) and not detected on the display. Despite this, the graphic exposure compensation display on the Canon was easy and quick to use, but not as easy and quick as setting exposure overrides on the Toshiba PDR-M81, which followed a one-step procedure. Setting and confirming exposure overrides on the Kodak DX4900 required the menu, but with such a readable menu at our disposal, we didnt mind. The Minolta S404 made the task slightly awkward, by the inconvenient position of the compensation button and the two-step process: The rocker switch alone would have sufficed (as on the Toshiba and Minoltas own DiMAGE X).
|
|
Contrast
The Test: The garden scene also brought to light the cameras ability to handle high-contrast scenery. We then moved from bright daylight to a scene in the shade. Contrast was judged as Acceptable or Excessive. No in camera digital contrast overrides were applied, although previous experience illustrates this could affect results.
The Results: Each camera produced acceptable results. However, contrast was modestly excessive on the Minolta, but not to the point where it ruined the picture. We could also see a contrast buildup in other images taken with the Minolta S404, for example, on a building façade in shade with a recessed doorway in deeper shadow (deeper than on images with the other cameras). The Canon, Minolta, and Toshiba models also score extra points for having a contrast override feature, lacking on the Kodak cam. Both Canon and Toshiba score additional points for making this feature more readily accessible, without re-sorting to the menu.
|
|
Color Balance & Saturation
The Test: White Balance tests were made in auto WB in all cases, and while also employing the cloudy preset setting with a subject under overcast skies/ shade. The garden scene again came into play when judging daylight color balance and saturation (at the optimum exposure), with auto WBagain, a typical use of each camera. We also applied our tests to the aforementioned building in shade, to compare results ob-tained with auto WB and the cloudy WB settings. No custom WB settings were used. We were shooting for a Neutral color balance. No in camera digital saturation overrides were ap-plied, although previous experience illustrates this could affect results.
|
|
The Results: Color balance under daylight, with auto WB in place, appeared most Neu-tral with the Canon S40 and Minolta S404. The Toshiba and Kodak models each had a very slight magenta color cast, but not enough to spoil the picture. Both Canon and Toshiba score additional points for making WB settings more readily accessible, without resorting to the menu. Canon and Minolta get extra points for a custom WB setting, useful when confronting unknown light sources. The Canon, Minolta, and Toshiba models also score extra points for having a saturation override feature, lacking on the Kodak cam. Without alteration, the Kodak images appeared the most saturatedperhaps excessively so, the Minolta least. Saturation on the Canon was more to our taste in the garden scene with auto WB, but excessive when cloudy WB was applied to a building in shade.
|
|
Parallax Error
The Test: Focusing on the same garden scene, I planted the lamppost in the upper left-hand corner of the frame, within the optical finder. The post was aligned fairly parallel with the left edge of the frame. The lens was set to its widest setting. Rated as Acceptable or Unacceptable.
The Results: Each camera showed more or less the same degree of parallax, which by default, well rate as Acceptable. Obviously, for macro mode, the color monitor is mandated, and it wouldnt hurt to use this monitor whenever practical for the most precise compositions. However, in all cases, the color display is difficult to read in very bright light but fairly usable in the shade. That problem is even more pronounced when trying to read data on the color monitor of the Canon S40, since there is no top panel display.
|
|
Apparent Optical Sharpness & Digital Tele/Zoom
The Test: We should point out that differences in apparent sharpness could be attributed to mathematical algorithms used to enhance sharpness (as set at the factorysans user adjustments). So we need to temper our assessment with this knowledge in hand. Also, different compression ratios will affect how sharp we see the image. Moreover, optical contrast might be a factor contributing to an increased apparent sharpness. We used various targets, but found a church frieze most revealing, as it was a relatively flat target, given the shooting distance. If the camera was able to resolve detail and present us with a usable image, without excessive pixellation, sharpness was deemed Acceptable. Anything less was Unacceptable. Each camera was zoomed to its maximum, first optically, then digitally.
|
|
The Results: At normal viewing distances, images employing optical zoom proved Acceptable. Differences were most apparent when digital zoom was used. With digital zoom, the Kodak fared worst, exhibiting the most pixellation and artifacting. Minolta yielded good digital zoom results but not in the way wed expect: the digital tele option merely crops the image, without enlarging it back up to the original maximum resolution.
|
|
Response Time
The Test: Responsiveness was determined simply by the visual evidence: Did the camera capture the moment or not? To test how well each camera could capture a moving subject, we set up a fan to rotate at the high-speed setting, several feet away, with the fan filling the frame vertically. I pressed the shutter button to first lock in focusaiming at the near edge of the fan, on the grill, as it was about to start its rotation. With focus achieved, I pressed the button down all the way the moment the central logo was facing the camera. Flash was set to On. The idea was, if the flash would be fully reflected off the center of the fanshowing that it hit the fan squarely, then thats a Hit. Anything else is a Miss, with points scored for a Near Miss (hitting on logo peripherally, not squarely). I made a handful of exposures with each camera. The reason for shooting so close was to exaggerate the effect of a faster rate of movement, simulating movement at normal distances.
|
|
The Results: The real crusher here is each cameras inability to lock on to our test target with any sense of immediacy. While its always good practice to focus first, then shoot, these cameras practically mandate this approach, or risk losing the picture. The lesson to be learned? Anticipate your subjects movements, and be ready. Once focus was achieved, only the Canon S40 scored consistent Hits. The Minolta S404 and Kodak DX4900 showed they could get at least one Hit, achieving Near Misses most of the time. The Toshiba only achieved Near Misses.
|
|
Other Parameters/Features Evaluated
LCD Monitor: Composing in Subdued Light. The Minolta S404 and Canon S40 proved their mettle, with enhanced visibility in low light.
Focusing in Subdued Light. The Canon S40 wins hands down, because it is the only camera here to employ a focus-assist beam. This camera was able to lock focus in total darkness! The Kodak DX4900 fared worst, with the Toshiba not much better. The Minolta S404 performed marginally better than these last two under similar conditions.
|
|
Interface & Menu. The Kodak DX4900 had the simplest interface, with the easiest to read and use menuespecially without eyeglasses. For the other cameras, reading glasses were practically mandatory. Minolta and Toshiba tied for second place, although I didnt much care for the rocker switch on either. The Canon S40 had the most confusing interface, with rocker switches positioned too close to each other, buttons all over the place, and a scrolling menu that seems endless. Plus, I found it especially difficult to get the hang of the key rocker switch on the S40.
Look & Feel. With the notable exception of the Kodak DX4900, each camera had a solid feel. The Canon S40 not only felt solid, it was stylish and compact. However, the S40 was the slipperiest one in the bunch, and I strongly recommend using the wrist strap when using/carrying the camera. The Canons clamshell cover gives you almost immediate access to the cameraanother plus. The other two cameras looked like typical point-and-shoots, but felt good in your hands. The Minolta scores high marks for the best grip, but I often found myself fumbling with the lens cap. The Kodaks electromechanical lens cover had some bounce to it when closingnot a good sign, and the docking station terminal cover didnt stay closed, leaving room for damage when the camera is set on a dirty or wet surface. Of the two cameras employing clip-on lens caps, the Toshiba scored for sensing the lens cap was in place; the Minolta would take the picture regardless. None of these cameras was particularly eyeglass-wearer friendly, lacking a rubberized eyecup and diopter adjustment.
|
|
Battery Usage. Of these cameras, the Canon is the only one to employ a proprietary rechargeable lithium pack, but it appeared to hold up well. The Kodak cam seemed to drain batteries at a faster rate, although, in its favor, it does require only two AA cells or one non-rechargeable (non-proprietary) CR-V3 lithium pack. The four AA Ni-MH batteries in the Minolta and Toshiba held up well.
Downloads & Driver Software. All four cameras support USB connectivity on PC and Mac (verify OS version compatibility at time of purchase). For our tests, all downloads were made from the camera directly, via USB, on a Windows Me Pentium 4. The Canon S40 wins by a mile, both for ease of downloading files and for its ZoomBrowser EX (ImageBrowser on Mac) software, which is the most informative software Ive come across in this bunch (if not, in my experience)and the most fun to use. It not only provided all capture data I could ever need, but also showed that Canon carries the most extensive header data (exposure info, WB, etc.) of any of the cameras tested, leaving little, if any, need to take notes. Kodaks software was the slowest overall and least useful where header data info was concerned. Toshibas software didnt fare much better. The Kodak proved the most trouble to connect, owing to the rubber flap that kept barring access to the USB terminal, by springing back in place too readily. However, once the process was initiated, Kodak came in second to the Canon for ease of downloading. Toshibas USB terminal was fully exposed, making it easier to access but subjecting it to contamination. The Minolta and Toshiba cams each required termination of the USB connection via the computer; a step bypassed by Canon and Kodak.
Overall Response to the Camera. I would give my vote to the Canon S40, for its features, overall performance, and softwarewere it not for the fact its the most expensive digicam tested. Weighing in price, I would split my vote between the Canon and Minolta S404. The Toshiba PDR-M81 didnt have the sizzle of either camera, but still is no slouch. Whats more, after a while, I found the Toshibas opening screen with audio irritating, with no way to shut it off. As mentioned, the Kodak didnt impress me as very durable, but it did perform on a par with the more feature-filled cameras, while being the simplest to operatea strong point in its favor.
Target Market. The Kodak DX4900 is designed and priced for teen-agers and people who easily get intimidated by technology. It should make a great family camerabut treat it gently. The remaining cameras appear to be able to tough it out (although all digicams should be treated gingerly). However, a tough exterior reflects potentially complex operation on the other three cameras, unless you opt for the simplest shooting modes. The Canon, being the smallest and most expensive in the bunch, also offers the most extensive array of features and would seem to fit in with travelers, business folk, or people into chic.
Contacts
Canon USA
(800) 423-2366
www.usa.canon.com
Eastman Kodak Company
(716) 724-4000
www.kodak.com
Minolta Corp.
(201) 825-4000
www.minoltausa.com
Toshiba America
(800) 288-1354
www.toshiba.com | | |
|
