In Canon S95, why the largest size for JPEG is only 1.6MB?

Started Aug 23, 2011 | Discussions
Mark Ma
New MemberPosts: 8
Like?
In Canon S95, why the largest size for JPEG is only 1.6MB?
Aug 23, 2011

I just got my Canon S95, but I found the largest size for JPEG (L and lower compression) is only 1.6MB. I called Canon support and the tech support guy checked the manual and said it is indeed about 2MB for the largest size. I still doubt about it. My 18-meg T2i produces about 10MB at its largest JPEG. If the calculation is based on proportion, then this 10-meg Canon S95 should produce 6MB at its largest JPEG. I need fellow Canon S95 users to tell me whether the technicial says is right.

archiebald
Senior MemberPosts: 1,496
Like?
Re: In Canon S95, why the largest size for JPEG is only 1.6MB?
In reply to Mark Ma, Aug 23, 2011

Mark Ma wrote:

I just got my Canon S95, but I found the largest size for JPEG (L and lower compression) is only 1.6MB. I called Canon support and the tech support guy checked the manual and said it is indeed about 2MB for the largest size. I still doubt about it. My 18-meg T2i produces about 10MB at its largest JPEG. If the calculation is based on proportion, then this 10-meg Canon S95 should produce 6MB at its largest JPEG. I need fellow Canon S95 users to tell me whether the technicial says is right.

There is no right or wrong because a JPEG varies in size depending on the content.

From my recent vacation, my S95 has JPEGs varying from 1.4MB up to 4.8MB, all shot at the same size and compression (highest).

My 60D has a set of JPEGs on it that vary from 1.1MB to 11.7MB, again all shot at identical highest quality settings.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Revenant
Junior MemberPosts: 49
Like?
Re: In Canon S95, why the largest size for JPEG is only 1.6MB?
In reply to Mark Ma, Aug 23, 2011

I have a G12, which, apart from the optics, is basically the same camera as the S95. With the JPEGs set to Size: Large and Quality: Fine, my pictures typically vary between 1.5 and 3 MB, with a few turning out even smaller or larger.

I've read somewhere that Canon chose to leave out the Superfine setting from their cameras, since you couldn't tell any difference between Superfine and Fine at normal print sizes anyway. I think you should ask yourself if you're happy with how your pictures/prints are turning out. If yes, then it doesn't really matter what size the files are, does it? You even save space on your HD If no, then I suggest you shoot RAW and fine-tune the JPEGs to you own liking.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PaulRivers
Senior MemberPosts: 7,404
Like?
Re: In Canon S95, why the largest size for JPEG is only 1.6MB?
In reply to Revenant, Aug 23, 2011

Yeah, Canon got rid of Superfine, and there was a lot of bitching, moaning, and complaining - but I saw several people post that they reenabled it with CHDK, took a bunch of test shots, and...couldn't tell the slightest difference. Assumably they found a clever way to implement the jpg encoding algorithm in a way that led to smaller files without giving up anything.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
steve ohlhaber
Regular MemberPosts: 383
Like?
The megapixels is the same, the compression will determine your file size
In reply to Mark Ma, Aug 23, 2011

If you check the dimensions of the photo, they should all be the same at the max jpg size. The number of pixels is going to be the same. Since jpg is compressed, the compressed size will vary. So, dont think that you are missing megapixels in the image, you should not be.

If you worry at all about jpg quality, which you should, shoot raw, its the best image you are going to get from the camera. You can convert into jpg later.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads