| I like my sd9. Couldn't ask for a better camera. It's lousy in low light situations, but when I have even just barely decent light, it takes perfectly detailed (real detail not artifacts from sharpening) pictures without having to sharpen at all in post processing. That is the reason I bought it and that is the reason I love it. It is perfect for studio work, has a somewhat sturdy build(mine's ac port finally went out after it was dropped off my desk about 15 times while it was plugged in)has enough weight to know you're holding a dslr, has all the glass I will ever want, is inexpensive. Bad points are if you're going to shoot pro football or other fast sports it's fps could be better, you have to be confident about color management, only one useable iso for the sd9, and two sets of batteries for the sd9 but one set can be rechargable. I've regulated mine to the studio so it's plugged in all the time. I don't use any batteries now. Most people that like this camera, like it and purchased it because of the quality of the picture it produces. And most are very vocally loyal to it. All I can say is it takes pictures that, to me, closest matches results you would get with film. |
