Tom Goodman: The manufacturers can invent new labels for cameras nearly as quickly as they can variations for existing ones. "Enthusiast" is perhaps the most pernicious of these labels. The S95 and its competitors within this dubious category are simply inadequate to make quality images (and here's the important part) for anyone who has more than "enthusiasm" for photography. Any time I have taken my S95 with me instead of my Nikon D300 I have regretted the decision.
Photography is not about putting something in your pocket.
rickspencer4: Reading all the reviews, the PROs are all the place with opinions. I want to know IF you are buying a P/S today, $500.00 to $600.00 dollars, what are you picking!!
Do yourself a favour - get a mirrorless.
johnparas11zenfoliodotcom: instead of built in GPS--- i wish it was a hot shoe :-) but then again having that small body with a huge flash attached-- negates the purpose of having a small body :-)
this S100 should have been what the S90 should have been in the first place :-) I think this is the ultra compact that I have been waiting for :-)
Why hot shoe? Wireless flash control would be much better :D
dave veneri: way to go Canon with the stupid 1080 24fps. Most better p&S are doing 1080 30 and 60fps. Way to go .
If Canon's 1080p@24fps video quality is better than Sony's new sensor, then 24fps is enough for me :).
rvalle: Well, as expected 24Mpixel is too much. I tried resizing some of the samples to 12Mpixel and then back to 24Mpixel, comparing side to side to the original image... and guess what? No difference.24Mpixel is ridiculous on a crop sensor.
Just did the same thing - resized to 12mp (4256x2837) and back to 24mp (6000x4000). There is almost no difference compared to the original image, even at pixel level. However, if you take any original 12mp APS-C sensor JPG image and compare it to the one from this 24mp sensor image resized to 12mp, the 24mp sensor image will look better (sharper with nicer details at 100%), IF you don't use small apertures like f/16.I'm not drawing any conclusions until I see RAW images from the production model and I suggest you do the same.
Catalin Stavaru: I have a Panasonic LX3 and view this Canon S100 as a nice possible upgrade. I think it will beat the LX5 which is only marginally better than the LX3. It is smaller, has 30fps HD video and stereo microphone, big zoom that can be used while filming, plus mpeg4 movie format. It really doesn't lack anything as an advanced point-and-shoot.
... and 24 mm f/2 ... ;)
Still no RAW? Unbelievable.
It has too aggressive noise reduction, but it's somewhat effective for such a small CMOS sensor. Low ISO images (ISO100-200) look very good when downscaled to 2000x1500 resolution, which is impressive compared to competition and similar to Canon SX30 IS (IMHO). 1600x1200 works for ISO400-800.Now, video quality is fantastic and it puts this camera at the top of my recomended superzoom list. :)
jpr2: alas, no OVF :( - no even EVF (although this is much less desirable); so, shooting at arms length negates most of possible advantages in IQ, etc.
I don't really understand this "shooting at arms length" concept. I can shoot with a P&S using its rear LCD at any length I want starting from about 15cm. Is this some kind of limitation for people with vision problems like hyperopia (farsightedness)?
ecka84: Well, it looks really nice, unlike the other Pentax toy DSLR cameras (K-x/r).
Yes, I meant the same :)
I hope it is going to be FF, M mount compatible and cheaper than the M9. But, probably, it will be yet another Panasonic's rebranded camera (GF3?), just like D-LUX/V-LUX compacts.
Well, it looks really nice, unlike the other Pentax toy DSLR cameras (K-x/r).
This might be a great lens for food, product and ... stuff photography.
Tomas_X: Very cheap, sharp & macro & close-up & near normal DX lens. Good arguments for existence of the lense. But I will not buy it. I have DX platform (D300) and I would upgrade from AF 85/1.8D to AF-S DX 70/1.6G, rounded aperture blades to have SWM lenses only for the motorless future and AF-C predictive AF for moving people small DOF shots. I would love AF-S DX 24/2G, AF-S DX 20/2G and AF-S DX 16/2G too. I would love some DX VR II f/2G in the range 30-50mm for very low light handheld shots. Or I would upgrade form AF-S DX 17-55/2.8G to AF-S 16-60/2.8G VR II. Many people would like AF-S DX 60-250/4 VR, as is Pentax lens.
What planet are you from?Welcome to Earth :)
"However, transfers of the respective adapter no mechanical or electrical functions, signals or data between S-Leica camera and lens, and that means working with working aperture."
€580 (~$800) for that? I'm sure there are cheaper solutions (~$100?). It's so ... Leica :))
Guidenet: Sounds to me like another great inexpensive choice for DX users. That is an extremely low price. What a bargain. It has the same field of view as 60 on full frame. Back in the old days, we really only had 55mm focal lengths for most macro lenses. I still have a superb pre-ai converted in 55 f/3.5 that takes encredible images on my D700. I also have a new 60 f/2.8 AFS G Micro.
The advantage to these shorter focal lengths is ease of tracking. Try tracking a flying butterfly with a 100mm or 200mm macro lens. The field of view is so narrow, tracking becomes nearly impossible. With this focal length, it will be much easier. I wish it were FX capable.
Nikon is doing a wonderful job meeting the needs of the DX shooter as well as producing superb optics at extemely low prices. We've now got the 35 f/1.8 at $199, the new 50 f/1.8 at $219 and this new Macro at $279. There's less and less reason to consider 3rd party or sub-quality glass. Here you get real Nikon glass and design.
These are exactly my thoughts :). Nikon is making the right move with those cheap DX primes.Wake up Canon! One EF-S prime isn't enough.
alwye: Three words:FULL FRAME MIRRORLESS
:) Four words:AFFORDABLE FULL FRAME MIRRORLESS(UNDER $3000?)