Canon Ixus L-1 2.8/26mm APS

TAo2 · Joined: 09 Mar 2012 Posts: 319 Location: Scotland

A tiny camera with a very big lens. Probably the only worthwhile APS camera. Most of these in panoramic setting

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Wow, what a beautiful place you live and you have captured it wonderfully here. Some have a bit of a magenta cast, but it doesn't stop the beauty shining through.

TAo2 · Joined: 09 Mar 2012 Posts: 319 Location: Scotland

ahum, Ian... ah don't really live there....ie Wallis + Futuna, assumed everyone would get that as a website thing? Ah was in Mauritius though for two weeks at my niece's wedding several years ago now. These shots are from then. Embarassed

yinyangbt · Expire: 2012-12-27

You were fortunate to be there , TAo2 ! Thanks for sharing these beauties ! Can you tell me more about the scanning of the films? I am interessed in APS films and cams these last weeks .I found out that very often the poor results from APS come from inadecvate postprocessing (especially scanning and PP of the file) .

TAo2 · Joined: 09 Mar 2012 Posts: 319 Location: Scotland

Hi YY,

These were developed/printed in the local pharmacy (Boot's the Chemist). Scanned up prints to my PC via the scanner on my Canon MP640 all-in-one. Ah use Picasa as my storage medium and normally do a batch sharpen (5% edge) whilst storing. Very minimal processing as ah find that APS converted files do not lend themselves well to digital processing.

The slight, magenta cast pointed out by IanG is, ah think, the seaside factor and no filter available. It's been my experience that any/all outdoor shooting on APS is very good (on the Canon, anyway). Ah find indoor and flash shots disappointing. Drab colours and smearing.

Ah used and badly abused this camera for years on football trips, it now looks like it was used as a football Crying or Very sad

. It still works. Ah'll track down some more examples and post them.

yinyangbt · Expire: 2012-12-27

Interesting points . The L1 is one of the intersting APS cams because it's the second and only alternative with 2,8 to the applauded and quite pricey Contax Tix.
Your experience with poor ability to be digitally processed must be related to the poor scanning . If the 35mm film doesn't give best results on flatbed scanners ,but only on dedicated , you can imagine APS is 40-50 % more susceptible to get mushy pictures so ,for getting best results it must best tools. I am curious how would compare these beautiful landscapes scanned on Nikon coolscan 5000 at least and why not , a drum scanner. In my very limited and recent beginning of experience with APS I found out that it is possible to get at least useable files , much crisper than I've seen on the net . Not quite as the 35mm ,but much closer (of course ,smaller enlargements than 35mm allowed ) than most samples I have seen posted . this , by combining dedicated scanner for film and more elaborated PP to get more sharpness and less noise . I have two more films at the lab ,I am anxious to see scan them and see the results outdoor , and if I can confirm these preliminary impressions (I hope so) .
See my first processed samples here : http://forum.mflenses.com/aps-film-t53576,start,15.html
As for the little cam that you presented here , I can say that is one from wich I've seen good samples on flikr : here :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bart_/8064299817/sizes/h/in/set-72157621962391619/ This one and all from this user bart_ taken in Italy with L-1
And I don't think it was heavily digitally processed , but probably processed on a dedicated hardware/software for APS .As we know , these were much too pricey , so the majority of the labs didn't afford to buy these .