BTW the Powershot S100 is now available for $250 (amazon).
I bought one to replace my S90 and I am really appreciating the wide end and video quality.First thing I did was test lens sharpness across the frame and it was fine. Best buy!
avgcitizen: Looks pretty marginal even at ISO 100...my Powershot S100 is leaps and bounds superior, which begs the question: when will Android provide for RAW file saving? Most of the bad in these Samsung shots are compression artifacts or noise that can be nicely post-processed out.
BTW, the outgoing S100 can be had for US$250. You can put it in one back pocket and your Android phone in the other with just a little compromise to your drag coefficient.
Looks pretty marginal even at ISO 100...my Powershot S100 is leaps and bounds superior, which begs the question: when will Android provide for RAW file saving? Most of the bad in these Samsung shots are compression artifacts or noise that can be nicely post-processed out.
Really, I'd like just look at something and to be able to record a high res image of it.
But assuming today's tech....
Square sensor w. vertical and horizontal aspect ratio overlays in EVF via thumbwheel; no need to rotate camera.
Ultra-res articulating EVF, removable w. wireless to be used as remote or visor/glasses mounted viewfinder.
I want to be able to compose in bright daylight and frame my subject accurately and comfortably.
Maxi-compact so to always have on hand, even if requiring fixed lens w. 24mm equiv. wide end. Bright w. sharp corners wide open (this apparently will require new lens technology since everyone seems to suck at it).
If removable lens, stabilization on sensor and open source lens pin electronics so 3rd parties can innovate and classic glass is more usable.
Plus the best of all current smart tech such as focus peaking, WiFi, RAW and low noise at high ISO of course, etc.
Yikes, how is this an improvement? DPReview has fallen upon hard times, dumpster diving for a sad new test scene. I'd hoped y'all would use the scientific method as your guide, not Pinterest.
Don't most pixel peepers just want to peep for fine detail and shadow noise, especially at high ISO? These seems to be missing in the new scrapbook look. You can fix color in RAW but you can't recover detail, so where is the shadowy stuff from the old scene like behind the paper clips and at the bottom of the Bailey's bottle?
From my perspective if I can't put it in my pocket and it doesn't have a real viewfinder (optical or electronic) then I might as well have the real thing = DSLR.
As a long time Canon loyalist, this is the last straw...I will go with Sony or micro 4/3rds for my next purchase...especially since my S90 broke (EOS is OK tho)...
Canon has been falling behind the curve for some time now with it's reactionary, non-innovative religion. Buh bye now...
avgcitizen: For pixels peepers on the fast track to evaluate sensor noise, why don't the gallery thumbnail view provide rollover exif info so one doesn't have to open pic after pic hunting for high ISO samples?
(replies = informal poll....)
HowaboutRAW: Raw Raw! U R correct. I guess what we have here is a failure of technology to keep up with our need. Sadly though, the work RAW to most casual snappers conjures up images only of sushi and salmonella, so JPEG is probably what we are going to be stuck with for a while. So at least let us have thumbnail rollover exif!
For pixels peepers on the fast track to evaluate sensor noise, why don't the gallery thumbnail view provide rollover exif info so one doesn't have to open pic after pic hunting for high ISO samples?
DrugaRunda: they appear to have eliminated all chroma noise in Raw even at ISO 12800, suprising.
Yes, I'm impressed too. No chroma noise yet not more grain or loss of detail. For once, too, a look that is not a clone of everyone else's.Actually, I'm amazed!
I like the idea of a test with low level light to better map with real-world use, but this scene is far from useful. Too many similar smooth surfaces, no indicator of focus point, etc.. I'll bet most peepers are looking at the furry rat and trying to figure out what is noise reduction and what is just out of focus. Please, someone at DPReview, explain the use of this scene? Is parent company Amazon.com keeping you on a low budget diet?
avgcitizen: To my eye, there are some very strange Noise Reduction artifacts in some of the shots- NR does not appear to be applied consistently throughout the frame.
Check the extreme ISO 3200 IMG_0434; sections of the floor and stone walls are almost cartoon like with NR, yet the painted ceiling panels look remarkably clean and detailed. I thought I saw the same kind of weirdness in some of the recent Powershot S100 samples.
I think Canon has some demons to work out of their in-camera JPEG algorithm. Other observations?
Y'all are pretty much convincing me to cease and desist on noting my observations. I only 'nitpick' because I am a 30 year loyal customer of Canon, and I am seeing their edge on the competition rapidly eroding due to heavy-handed market positioning, and conservatism and that is no longer directly linked to image quality. Nonetheless, I hope y'all buy three each because I'd hate to see Canon go pixels up any time soon, as they are a great foil for Sony, etc.
To my eye, there are some very strange Noise Reduction artifacts in some of the shots- NR does not appear to be applied consistently throughout the frame.
Is this DPReview's new ISO test subject?
Where's the variety? Where is fine text and smooth gradients to evaluate for noise reduction tricks at high ISO?
This French site has a better test target: http://www.focus-numerique.com/test-1354/compact-canon-g1-x-powershot-bruit-electronique-12.html
How about a DPReview Challenge for best test scene?! Winner gets used in all reviews!
(It does look like Canon has succeeded in beating the Four-Thirds competition for IQ, but not the larger NEX-5)
While I'm sure the image quality out of this camera will be very high, the rest of it comes across as quaint and clunky. This new format for Canon will hopefully pave the way for future models with desirable features, but this one misses the boat and reveals how behind the innovation curve Canon has fallen.
If Sony can follow Panasonic's cue with a collapsible zoom lens for its NEX, and/or if Olympus can match Panasonic's sensor quality, then after so many years of devotion to Canon, I will be ready to jump ship in the small-scale high image quality camera sector.
It's actually reassuring that dpreview is not so cozy with Canon that they wouldn't already have a perfect S100 tester from them with which to erase the shame of two bad copies!
Can anyone download the RAW from here? I get an XML error. I like to roll my own in ACR....
Also, I cannot download the RAW S100 files to process on my own in PShop CS5.I get an XML error when i try...
I have an S90 which has unacceptably soft corners at telephoto. I regret having not replaced it or sent it to Canon for warranty service. Lately (after 2 years) it will not focus at normal-to-telephoto range, whether manual or auto, and it is now sometimes struggles to find enough contrast to focus at any focal length.
My older EOS 450 still performs admirably, but its EF-S 55-250 lens has always suffered from extreme softness at various focal lengths.
It looks like dpreview has gotten two bad copies of the S100, which further suggests that Canon has quality control issues. Is it so costly for Canon to perform basic lens tests on their higher end products before the consumer is stuck to deal with it?
I wanted an S100 but now I am seriously researching my options...