Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Canon Powershot S100 studio comparison samples

By dpreview staff on Nov 18, 2011 at 23:32 GMT

Just Posted: JPEG and Raw studio samples from the Canon Powershot S100 and Nikon J1. In preparation for our forthcoming reviews, we have shot our standard studio test scene with both the Canon Powershot S100 and Nikon J1. To allow easy comparison with their peers, we have now added these shots to our comparison tool. Both the S100 and J1 can now be selected from the pull-down list within any review or in our standalone comparison tool.

Note: We have shot our standard comparison scene with two S100s, and selected the sharpest set of images overall. It is obvious though, from close examination, that the right-hand side of these sample images is slightly soft compared to the center and left-hand side. We are expecting a third S100 sample very shortly and we will revisit this studio comparison at that time.

Click here to see the Canon Powershot S100 in our studio comparison tool

This is our standard studio scene comparison shot taken from exactly the same tripod position. Lighting: daylight simulation, >98% CRI. Crops are 100%. Ambient temperature was approximately 22°C (~72°F).

JPEGs are shot at default parameters and raw files are converted using Adobe Camera RAW. Because Adobe Camera Raw applies different levels of sharpening to different cameras we use the following workflow for these conversions:

  • Load RAW file into Adobe Camera RAW (Auto mode disabled)
  • Set Sharpness and Noise Reduction to 0
  • Open file to Photoshop
  • Apply a Unsharp mask: 100%, Radius 0.6, Threshold 0
  • Save as a JPEG quality 11 for display and download.

Click here to see the Nikon J1 samples in our studio comparison tool

Comments

Total comments: 134
12
S2ISSA
By S2ISSA (Sep 14, 2012)

I have an S95, and have never had a focussing issue, except for the occasional user issue. It produces exceptional images. I know S100 is CMOS and S95 is CCD, but this will not make too much difference. The images in this test are poor. DPR should have re-tested.

0 upvotes
ItIsWhatItIs
By ItIsWhatItIs (Dec 6, 2011)

Wonder how we'll know if and when they fix the focusing problems? Not surprisingly, I have been unable to find any indication Canon has even acknowledged a problem exists.

0 upvotes
avgcitizen
By avgcitizen (Dec 3, 2011)

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!

0 upvotes
Camera5
By Camera5 (Nov 29, 2011)

Guys
Something is obviously seriously wrong here. DP Review have slipped up. Let's just wait a few days and see what unfolds.
Camera5

0 upvotes
v2005t
By v2005t (Nov 21, 2011)

Dear DPR,

First of all, Thank you for the great job!
Is there any chance to repeat the test at 85mm Equiv. for direct comparison with S95? Probably you have tried that already. If so, please let me know what you see. Thanks.

0 upvotes
tomboyter
By tomboyter (Nov 21, 2011)

I believe that the S100 image is out of focus. Other early adopters have noticed that the camera has trouble with focus on close subjects, and looking at the text lying on the table it appears to me that the problem is one of critical focus rather than resolution. If cannot believe that Canon would release an inferior product and call it progress.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 24, 2011)

there are always tradeoffs. some people may become happy, some others not. but Canon marketing thinks more people will be happy.

S100 may be a good news to those who are not happy because to me, it looks Canon downgraded the line to a lower class, mass production segment then a logical thing could be a new higher class camera is around the corner. maybe.

0 upvotes
Lensjoy
By Lensjoy (Nov 29, 2011)

I'm happy I bought the S90. I was thinking of upgrading to the S100, but these images clearly show that's a mistake. Let's hope Canon fixes the problem; I'm shocked they would release something that makes a two-generation-old camera look better.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bzanchet
By bzanchet (Nov 21, 2011)

Hey guys please help me out: I only take pictures in widescreen mode. In this mode, this problems on the corners of the photo will not show up right? Thank you!!

0 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (Nov 21, 2011)

Dear bzanchet,please ignore this whole test, it's not representative at all, something is seriously wrong and nobody knows what it is exactly at this moment. People are speculating but it can be a million things from a pure technical point of view. As I posted before: look at other reviews (TechRadar-WhatDigitalCamera-B and H Photo etc), test it yourself risk free with an online purchase and only then decide if you want to keep the camera. And something else: do you really only take pictures in widescreen mode? Buy yourself a 7D with a Sigma 8-16. Best price-quality wise!

0 upvotes
bzanchet
By bzanchet (Nov 21, 2011)

Hi Rubenski thank you very much for the support! I will check it myself with others models I'm considering (but not pocketable): x10, gx1, gf3 and nex 7!

0 upvotes
LucianB
By LucianB (Nov 21, 2011)

Check this:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_S100/high_ISO_noise.shtml

I think that S100 has slightly softer-looking results than the earlier S95.

3 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Nov 21, 2011)

I wonder whether high ISO comparisons mean anything at all, particularly in reference to a 1/1.7" sensor camera. In practice, shouldn't the real test be the margin of advantage one gets with a hand-held shot in low light, relative to a 1/2.3" sensor camera? Noise at super high ISO is likely to be bad in either case. The DSLR size sensor will always win that contest, scoring "least ugly" at >36k ISO. But what one really wants is a compact device that, with ISO at 1200 or less, will deliver non-blurry hand-held shots in a dim setting, or slightly higher DR in high contrast settings.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 21, 2011)

many use compacts to take photos of their children which demands fast speed (like 0.1s AF, 6 fps) and ISO 1600 or higher.

ISO doesn't directly mean image quality without taking into consideration of sensor size and technology. then ISO100 on a 1/2.3" sensor is about equivalent of ISO150 on 1/1.7", and ISO3000 on 35mm FF. they all translates into same amount of light (regardless of the format), and same image quality if the sensor efficiency are same.

0 upvotes
peterpainter
By peterpainter (Nov 21, 2011)

Doesn't the 'having to send for a third sample because the first two are, well, not very good,' suggest that buying one of these would be rather a bad idea? If the third one turns out to be rather good and gets high marks etc. people may end up buying a dud one and being rather disappointed.
*edited to make more sense (I think, anyway)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
fberns
By fberns (Nov 21, 2011)

The bad quality is a surprise, above all because the smaller sensor Powershot SX230 did very very good recently (better than almost all the same size sensor cameras before) and I thought they would port the advance to this bigger sensor camera...?
PS. Oh,the problem seems to be the lens.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
evshrug2
By evshrug2 (Nov 22, 2011)

From what I saw, it looks like the fault here on the S100 is the lens. The center target was kindof soft, but sharper than anywhere else in the frame, purple fringing is rampant, distortion is higher... basically most things I can think of as a lens flaw are visible here. Shocked, really!

0 upvotes
avgcitizen
By avgcitizen (Nov 21, 2011)

Can anyone download the RAW from here? I get an XML error. I like to roll my own in ACR....

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 21, 2011)

They should now be available, sorry about the delay.

0 upvotes
PaulRivers
By PaulRivers (Nov 23, 2011)

I just wanted to comment on how much I like dpreview's new, more responsive attitude. :-) From redoing the nx200 shots (and perhaps more importantly, posting the raw conversion pics), to looking into these s100 shot problems, I just want to say - thanks. :-) So much better than the old days of "well, if the studio shots aren't right that's just to bad" like with the (much older) Samsung tl500. :-)

Also love the "will respond to legitimate questions and concerns" thing to! I would never expect a response to everything, but an occasional response to honest questions that can be responded easily to is great! :-)

0 upvotes
forzanopaolo
By forzanopaolo (Nov 20, 2011)

I compared LX5, S100 and J1: this latter seem a lot better in resolution. In facto looking al file info J1 picture is at 300 pixel/" and the other two at 180 pixels/".
The total pixels in the three picture is almost the same. Where is the trick?

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 21, 2011)

J1 has poorer resolution becasue Nikon made a bad decision to go with only 10MPs, and J1 has better resolution at higher ISOs when everyone's resolution go down to less than the shame 10MP, and J1 wins out with its larger lens (caliber, not f-number).

0 upvotes
evshrug2
By evshrug2 (Nov 22, 2011)

yabokkie,
Did you notice the LX-5 and Nikon J1 also have "only" 10 MP? Clearly, the S100 is let down by a lens that cannot deliver 10 MP of resolution (at least in this sample) and many other lens flaws besides.
Also, what's "shame" about 10 MP? At what size screen is this gonna limit you, or what size print? I have no problem printing posters from 10 MP photos, I did it for room decoration and recently for a graded senior art exhibit. Until cameras are made with a totally different method of capturing light, more than 8 or 10 MP is pointless in relatively cheap P&S cameras when image processing, lens quality, and low-light capture prevent that much resolution in most situations.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 24, 2011)

> more than 8 or 10 MP is pointless

the same amount of light, there is no problem you go more pixels until you hit the 1+ micron limit of the current technology.

the same amount of light, the image quality (noise only) is about the same no matter you have 1MP or 18MP on a 1/1.7" sensor.

about the lens, f/2.0 on 1/1.7" sensor is about f/9.2 on 35mm FF, and you can make lens that works near perfectly at open.

I talked things in general, not exactly the conditions set by forzanopaolo. and even for S100, I guess there should be a place in the focal range where the lens performs well.

0 upvotes
Arkka
By Arkka (Nov 20, 2011)

Obviously something is wrong, is it in the S100 or something has happend during the shot. There are a lot of good elements in the sample of the S100. Hope we can get some answers soon.

I just notice a one posibble cause. If you compare the studio scene wich have been taken earlyer, for example with S90, so you can see that the Martini botle has been opened. Is that the reason for the soft sample of the S100. Please can anybody confirm that ;)

0 upvotes
evshrug2
By evshrug2 (Nov 22, 2011)

Clearly, the DPR staff are drunken-style martial arts masters when it comes to photography, and they need more wine to compensate for the poor lens in their sample S100. Donations would probably be welcomed.

0 upvotes
MGJA
By MGJA (Nov 20, 2011)

I am surprised at just how badly the S100 fares compared to its immediate predecessor. Frankly, even if a third copy is better, a 2/3 bum rate is simply unacceptable QC. It seems Canon sacrificed IQ at the altar of wide angle and megapixel.

Pity. This series used to be the one to get for real compact shooting.

0 upvotes
MisterPootieCat
By MisterPootieCat (Nov 20, 2011)

Well, numerous replies here suggesting it must be a faulty lens BUT DPR staff indicates the images we're seeing are the best from 2 different samples of the camera AND they're waiting for a third copy to test. If the third copy doesn't improve by a huge margin over the other two it looks like Canon stepped in it.

I'm thinking the S95 might be worth snapping up for less than $300 before the supply starts to dry up.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Kuturgan
By Kuturgan (Nov 20, 2011)

So new Canon S100 seems to underperform.
I compared S100, LX5, S95, with TL500(EX1), and "old" Samsung seems to provide better results in RAW and jpeg than others.

1 upvote
Rachotilko
By Rachotilko (Nov 20, 2011)

I am not happy seeing that there is yet another marketing driven madness going on after the infamous megapixel race fell out of favor. It's the unrealistic wide-end focal lengths requirement that ruins the great potential the current models of compact cameras certainly have. I realized this after seeing the true, unbaked RAW output from Fuji F550exr. The soft sides are inevitable results of software correction of vignetting, chroma aberration and (especially) extreme barell distortion.

Yet I didn't expect this happening to Canon's ethusiast compact flagship. I feel really sorry for the camera engineers with their most briliant ideas and research effort wasted by marketing departments once again.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (Nov 20, 2011)

Check out the review on TechRadar as well, it totally contradicts what we see here. But, as always, I'll check it all myself in real life, no review can beat that. Thanks to the 'online bought return policies' it's risk free! So, don't conclude just yet, it may be the only real portable camera with just enough IQ to bring a smile on your face because you know that the picture you just took would never have been taken with your 4 lbs weighing DSLR+ Lens. Why not? Because it's still at home!

1 upvote
juztfurfun
By juztfurfun (Nov 20, 2011)

When I preview the s100 what easy to do instore test or tests would you recommend to do to screen out a bad lens or focusing or combo of things prior to purchasing. Thanx

0 upvotes
evshrug2
By evshrug2 (Nov 22, 2011)

Take a picture of someone's hair. Like, have the back of someone's head fill the frame, perhaps with a light source visible against the outline of the person's head so you can check for purple fringing in high contrast areas and soft, mushy texture instead of distinct hairs on the back of their head.
Kindof look lame aesthetically, though.

0 upvotes
oselimg
By oselimg (Nov 20, 2011)

It simply looks like a faulty lens not a focusing or a focus plane curvature problem. Left side is sharper than the right side. Check out the kodak test paper towards the right side (not only the extreme corners but right side is altogether softer) then compare it to the left of the picture. But I like the new approach to image processing which creates fine grains rather than color blotches maybe due to stronger chroma noise reduction.

0 upvotes
Digital Suicide
By Digital Suicide (Nov 20, 2011)

Doesn't look good.

0 upvotes
Rubenski
By Rubenski (Nov 20, 2011)

What's going on here? Consider this:
1. If these pictures are really made with a s100 that's not flawed, unfocussed or mistakenly not handeled well at times or in any other way corrupted then it's a big dissapointment and absolutely not worth buying.
2. This camera gets 5 stars with B and H photo in the USA and has eight reviews so far. Some other reviews and experiences mentioned here suggest a totally different IQ as well.
If this really is such 'a big website' how on earth is it possible that canon provides DPreview with a camera like this to be tested! They must be sleeping and apparently it's the second camera as well! Double shame on you canon! I'll receive my s100 in a few days, will test it accurately together with my 7D and you'll now the outcome soon.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Thomas Wasser
By Thomas Wasser (Nov 20, 2011)

I agree.

But I really hope that dpreview doesn't allow Canon, or other manufacturers, to "supply" them with any cameras. If so, the reviews would most likely be based upon a copy of a camera that is pretested to be absolutely “best in the batch”. When QC is what it is, such reviews would of course not have any real value to the consumer.

3 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 21, 2011)

If that were true, I'd expect us to receive fewer decentred and oddly-behaving cameras than we do.

1 upvote
Haim Hadar
By Haim Hadar (Nov 20, 2011)

Dark goob, saying the same thing over and over doesn't make it true. If DPReeview test were so "flawed" how come they are so consistent throughout other ISO values and cameras? Such an ambitious lens in a tiny package, as admirable as the effort is, is prone to inaccuracies, and cramming more pixels requires a heavier-handed NR (noticed the feathers?).

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

Because they didn't change the focus between the ISO changes.

I agree that the wider range of the lens and higher pixel count would lead us to expect it to not be as sharp, but there is still the fact that the Queen of Hearts and Dime are sharper and have way better detail quality. I'm just not convinced that it's not the focus.

Sorry to repeat myself so much, but I guess I got carried away after seeing people continually repeating how terrible they thought it looked.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
michi098
By michi098 (Nov 20, 2011)

I think we figured out what you think about this review, dark goob...
Overall, from what one can take from this review, is that the S100 is not a revolutionary marvel. However, considering its wider range lens, it seems to be doing fairly well, even in the corners. ISO performance seems to be, I don't know, a tad better than its older siblings. I have the S90 and was thinking about upgrading. After seeing this, I will wait for some more reviews to be published.

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

This test is simply flawed.

Look here, the S100 looks just fine in the background of the image. That's no surprise, because that's where it's focused:

http://www.prismnet.com/%7Ejjj/flawed-s100-test.jpg
http://www.prismnet.com/%7Ejjj/flawed-s100-test2.jpg

Of course on the "default" positions (wristwatch etc.) the S100 looks soft. Duh, it's out of focus!

2 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

Also, just to show that the softness is not from any "corner softness" of the lens:
http://www.prismnet.com/%7Ejjj/flawed-s100-test3.jpg

The grid pattern in the upper left shown here. It is in the background plane of the test. This supports my argument that the S100 is more in focus on the background than it is on the foreground, whereas the S95 was more in focus on the foreground where the "default" test areas are.

I hear crickets chirping, and I know it is because I am right. Because I have tested both of these cameras in real life, in my own hands, and the S100 is really better. Even at 83° it didn't show much aberration out in the corners inside a building with lots of windows in that area, with sunlight streaming in.

Don't listen to DPReview.. go take a memory card to a real camera store and test it. Buy it there too, since there's not going to be any price difference on the net anyway.

1 upvote
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Nov 20, 2011)

II think you're wrong about this test shot.

If you look at the items on top of the black box (jewel, measuring tape, Mickey Mouse), they are in focus. Yet some of these items are clearly in front of the watch, which ruins your theory that the watch is out of focus because it is in front of the point of focus.

The image is degraded at the edge of the frame everywhere, and especially in the corners.

And if it is a bad copy of the camera, so what? That is valid information to include in a review. It speaks to the quality control of the company.

I hope this helps.

4 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

Actually I think the measuring tape etc. is slightly out-of-focus already. The watch is more out of focus because it's on the periphery. There are certainly lenses where the focal plane can be sharp across the board, but the DOF has curved boundaries. I suppose that would be useful information to know, but given that the angle of view doesn't even match between the two shots, then I don't see how we can expect them to have gotten the focusing right, either.

Either way the fact remains that the Queen, dime, etc. are still sharper on the S100. Why do you suppose that is? I'm going with the focus points, but who knows. Given that the shots aren't even taken at the same AoV or the same position, and things are in somewhat different positions between them, then I'm just not that convinced myself.

But to be sure when I'm at work I'll test both again for myself.

0 upvotes
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (Nov 20, 2011)

Goob, I don't think the test is flawed - the guys surely know how to focus a P&S. I guess they focused on the white cross in the middle. At F4.5 the whole scene should be sharp and clear.
Still, the front is out of focus, as you can see on the card board ramp with the fine lines.
I think the focusing mechanism is faulty (maybe a software bug).
The lens also suffers from low contrast: Look at the top of the paper clips, they are on the focus plane, but are very "foggy".

Canon simply should have kept the same lens and sensor resolution. The much improved ISO and JPG performance would have made an even greater little camera than the S95. Damn marketing!

1 upvote
Philip Goh
By Philip Goh (Nov 20, 2011)

Those shots show that the S100 lens has a high degree of field curvature, not that the test shots are out of focus.

1 upvote
photoPhlow
By photoPhlow (Nov 21, 2011)

The bottom of the image (which is also the closest) is terrible, while the top of the image, even all the way to the top corners, is very sharp -- likely sharper than the 3 other cameras.

I can't tell if this is a back-focus issue, or a decentering issue.

0 upvotes
avgcitizen
By avgcitizen (Nov 20, 2011)

Also, I cannot download the RAW S100 files to process on my own in PShop CS5.I get an XML error when i try...

0 upvotes
avgcitizen
By avgcitizen (Nov 20, 2011)

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...

0 upvotes
sigala1
By sigala1 (Nov 21, 2011)

"I have an S90 which has unacceptably soft corners at telephoto."

And my S90 has really soft corners at wide angle. And really bad contrast at ALL focal lengths. But then the S90 tested by dpreview also has really bad contrast.

I think that the S cameras just have a cheap P&S quality lens.

0 upvotes
andy bp
By andy bp (Nov 20, 2011)

I have an s95, and when i saw the s100 i was a little jealous (mainly because of the gps functionality. I needn't have worried- it looks pretty poor!

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

Look at the Queen of Hearts' face or the US dime. The test is flawed. The S100 is focused on the background more than the watch and stuff in the foreground. Maybe because it did face recognition on the faces on the stamp and card? LOL.

I don't know about you but I think a camera that focuses on the faces first, by default, is better.

The S100 is really better, it's just that DPReview does not do a very good job making sure the cameras are focused on the same place in these tests.

1 upvote
Daniel Lowe
By Daniel Lowe (Nov 19, 2011)

Wow, the price of the S95 just went up.

Cramming in more pixels, increasing pixel density and slowing down the lens, isn't this just a predictable result?

Buy an Lx5 or S95, the S100 is a dud.

Oh, and looks like it was made by Fisher Price.

1 upvote
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

Look at the Queen of Hearts' face.

Look at the US dime and the old woman's face to the right of it.

On both of those the S100 appears much sharper and better at RAW, ISO 100. Also at JPEG, ISO 1600.

Meanwhile the watch-face looks clearer on the other cameras.

I FIRMLY believe these tests to be flawed. I think that the focus point is slightly different sometimes in these tests. I think the S100 focused slightly behind the others. It's a three-dimensional scene with many objects. It's not a scientific test.

I am really getting tired of these tests being treated as though they were the word of God. Get an S100 in your hands and take some pictures, take the same ones with an S95. In all my personal testing, the S100 beats the S95... it's just better.

And further the S100 is thinner. The front ring turns much easier, allowing better one-handed operation. The relief on the buttons make them easier to press. The S100 a better camera in every respect. The video is better too.

2 upvotes
satureyes
By satureyes (Nov 19, 2011)

Am i missing something here - but the ISO shots of the S100 at 1600 look crap. At 3200 unusable. The S95 is better? Weird.

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

It's not. It's just that DPReview focuses the cameras on different places. Look at the Queen of Hearts' face. Or the US dime. The S100 looks much better there.

0 upvotes
Lightabuser
By Lightabuser (Nov 19, 2011)

Looks like handheld to me - dpreview should replace this pic... ...is there no quality control?

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 19, 2011)

You are so, so wrong...

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Nov 19, 2011)

It's just softer towards the corners, that's the price of more reach. Edit: Actually it looks like there is more to it than that, this seems to be a very bad copy. And it better be, because if this is it i'm not buying.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
PanaNewbie
By PanaNewbie (Nov 19, 2011)

Pretty sure DPR knows more about photography and testing methodology than most of us could ever hope to learn. Especially me. That's why they are trying a -3rd- camera on the million to one chance that the 1st two were defective which I highly doubt. Fairly certain the DPR quality control is the exact same, which makes this site the most trusted site for exhaustive and extensive reviews, otherwise you would not be here right now. This really sux for me cuz I want to love this camera, but now looking at X10 and LX5 reviews (ruling out the XZ-1 due to horrible video quality).

4 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

Well the focus point is slightly different on the S100 shot.

I saw the same thing on their test of the E-P3... the NEX-5N was tested at 50mm, F/8, whereas the E-P3 was at 50mm, F/6.3. Of course it's going to look slightly softer with slightly less DOF, and with the cameras at different distances to the subject matter.

You just can't expect tests like this to be very accurate when they are changing the distance-to-subject, F-stop, focus point, and other factors, to where the cameras are not even on equivalent settings.

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Nov 20, 2011)

'could ever hope to learn.' ? Now that is a bit over the top isn't it, but yes it sure is their specialty like few other.

0 upvotes
LiveFromPhilly
By LiveFromPhilly (Nov 20, 2011)

dark goob, the EP-3 is 2x crop and the NEX is 1.5 crop. You need a smaller aperture to get the same depth of field on NEX that you get on M43 cameras.

0 upvotes
BetsyR
By BetsyR (Nov 19, 2011)

Hard to wait for the review, especially of IQ to see if there is an improvement over these samples! I am looking to replace a stolen LX3 (I have a G12 but want something pocketable) - and am tempted by the Olympus except that it does not have the AEL/AFL that I find useful.

0 upvotes
mjdundee
By mjdundee (Nov 19, 2011)

WOW - 24mm on a S100 was a great idea - but Canon should have added that to a S95 and nothing else - all the high priced gimmics and the 2 more megapixels on a CMOS sensor only effected a higher RSP - and the sad but true conclusion that LX5 offers the a much IQ and value with a 24 mm lens in just a slightly larger body.

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

The S100 has a Canon-made sensor whereas the S95 had a Sony-made sensor. Guess where Sony's sensor plant is? Hint: it's underwater.

What were they supposed to do?

Either way read my other comments. It's the test that's flawed, not the camera. The S100 did just fine. Look at the US dime in the background. The focus points are different. The angles of view are also different between the two shots.

These tests do not represent "the truth" or "reality." They are just a one-off test. To achieve a statistically valid sample size of the S100 you would have to test a lot more than just two or three of each model. To assume there is no manufacturing difference between models is very ignorant.

1 upvote
mjdundee
By mjdundee (Nov 20, 2011)

I am sure Canon didn't expect any plant to be radioactive or underwater when they decided to replace the sensor. I just express what I wished the S95 successor would look like and feature. As someone here alredy said: Never change a winning team - and I really like the ergonomics and manua controls of the Powershot S series but I definitelly prefer the S95 IQ - sharpness, colours and low light performance with plenty of detail. Nevertheless I will give the S100 a hand and do my own real world test in 2012 - hopefully after the construction plants are back to the standards they had before mother earth hit them.

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Nov 19, 2011)

dpreview should take this down until they get a replacement S100, as this one is clearly defective.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 19, 2011)

We've shot with 2 samples of the S100 (see my comments further down this thread) and we're expecting a third. We will update the samples if there's any IQ difference but remember that this studio scene is hyper-critical, and not always representative of everyday use at various focal lengths and subject distances.

4 upvotes
my-2-cents
By my-2-cents (Nov 19, 2011)

Curious...does Canon provide the sample cameras or does DPR buy them from stores at random?

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

Given that DPReview is owned by Amazon.com... I highly doubt they have a problem acquiring test cameras. LOL.

0 upvotes
SETI
By SETI (Nov 19, 2011)

Heh, most ppl are so brand-addicted =) Canon... Olympus XZ-1 is much better than S95 and S100

1 upvote
JackM
By JackM (Nov 19, 2011)

S95/100 fit in a pocket better. That's the main appeal. Otherwise everyone would buy the XZ-1 of course.

5 upvotes
ijustloveshooting
By ijustloveshooting (Nov 19, 2011)

XZ-1 is placed at another class...a s100/95 can never match XZ-1...

0 upvotes
BetsyR
By BetsyR (Nov 19, 2011)

But what about the video quality?

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

I did some of my own testing. I found the RAW files from S95 (especially macros at wide angle) to have just as good of detail as the XZ-1. Of course Olympus' "superfine" JPEGs are legendary. But they are also huge. Every camera has its strengths.

0 upvotes
stoneage
By stoneage (Nov 19, 2011)

There might be a centering issue. But there is most certainly a focus issue. Everything at the back is sharp. Look at the playing card and the gray scale card. No problems with sharpness there! And the more towards the front you comes the blurrier it gets. So either the cameras have been focused at different points or this S100 has a back focusing issue.

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Nov 19, 2011)

The S100 camera is broken - must be. Its totally soft on the right side and rather soft on the left. Really, really bad.

1 upvote
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

They just didn't focus the cameras on the same spots.

Giving DPReview the benefit of the doubt, I'd say that sometimes you can get one part of an image in focus but you've only gotten it focused in the front of the focus field, rather than in the middle or the back of the focus field, depth-wise. So that where you were trying to focus is the same on two different shots, but in one shot the background is more in focus where on the other, the foreground is more in focus. I believe that what DPReview has done is to focus on the background with both cameras, but on the S95 they got the foreground in focus better than they did on the S100.

I feel like I've seen the same thing on a couple of other tests, like the E-P3, which also looked a hair soft on the foreground parts.

Just to prove that it's not corner softness of the lens, look at this area of the upper-left corner of the image:

http://www.prismnet.com/%7Ejjj/flawed-s100-test3.jpg

The S100 kills the other guys up there.

1 upvote
Michael_13
By Michael_13 (Nov 19, 2011)

Hm - I guess the best thing about the S100 is...
... that the price of the S95 will drop.

I really do not understand Canon:
Why 12 MP and more zoom?
Although the JPG engine was improved, the paperclips are a misty, blurry mess.

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

It's because they're out of focus! Look at the background, where the S100 was really focused on. The US dime is sharper than the S95's. Etc... see my other comments about these flawed tests.

0 upvotes
Rickard Hansson
By Rickard Hansson (Nov 19, 2011)

bump up iso a notch and you will see the canon models fall behind real quick.
The nikon Ji/v1 have very good high iso compared to the canon S100 and S95.

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

LOL they better have... considering that they cost a minimum of $200 more! Lets not forget that. The J1/V1 are a totally different category and class of cameras. (Sensor is also much bigger, along with the rest of the camera!!)

0 upvotes
Alberto de Harenne
By Alberto de Harenne (Nov 19, 2011)

after this test, I have a question for the Canon people:

Hi Guys, are you Kidding?

look at this !!!!!

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-jj8cZYJqWT4/TsfGeA6XboI/AAAAAAAACaI/xhdZzU7y3Wg/s1017/Canon_s100_test.jpg

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (Nov 20, 2011)

No, it's just because the S100 is out of focus at that point in the scene. Want proof? Here.

http://www.prismnet.com/%7Ejjj/flawed-s100-test.jpg

0 upvotes
SamTruax
By SamTruax (Nov 21, 2011)

I think though the question is WHY is it out of focus. Should we assume that DPReview performed the test wrong more than once even though they have done it a thousand times correctly?...or is there some focusing issues with the S100? It would be nice to get a fair comparison but if they can't manage to get the camera working properly then there is a bigger issue than just simple edge softness with the lens.

1 upvote
Alberto de Harenne
By Alberto de Harenne (Nov 23, 2011)

Then the Dpreview Test is wrong, because they are not considering the depht field of the camera lens.

0 upvotes
Alternative Energy Photography

I love that studio tool, and I am considering an S100 as a gift for a friend.

But my eye could not really tell any major differences between the two Canon powershot models. I did see that the S95 appeared to have some slightly richer darks and blacks, but was that really a significant difference in models, or could it have just been an individual anomaly for either the S95 or the S100 sample camera?

The Nikon seemed poor in comparison to the others, but between the two Canon PS's, I'm not sure.

Maybe I'm just not skilled at looking for lens aberrations.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 19, 2011)

looks like the lenses on S100, J1, and V1, they all have some problems?

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Nov 19, 2011)

i thought there's a problem with the lens since CA is found throughout the image. selecting jpeg removed the CA, similar to s95. s95 has a better lens, though very slightly.
i didn't remember the olympus xz-1 this good.

0 upvotes
meyr
By meyr (Nov 19, 2011)

xz1 is clearly better hands down

1 upvote
SETI
By SETI (Nov 19, 2011)

Absolutely right !

0 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Nov 19, 2011)

The amount of smudging and flair(?) really suggest a faulty sample. I could hardly believe that Canon would screw after so many years with their experience with the compact cameras.

0 upvotes
Kirppu
By Kirppu (Nov 19, 2011)

Kind of weird that older model S95 produces sharper photos than the newer cousin. According to the studio comparison tool.
Any change of faulty camera...?

0 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Nov 19, 2011)

With the same spec sheet but with sensor from Sony and lenses from Leica this would be a killer but...
anyway sensor seems to be slightly better then the rest of the bunch and lenses are sharp in some parts (center : Mickey, on the globe, Queen etc. ) but the corners are too soft for high-end camera

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
NiallM
By NiallM (Nov 19, 2011)

The Olympus XZ-1 and S95 easily outperformed it; although it is possible that the camera used in the test was faulty...if not then Fujifilm will have a very merry Christmas because the X10 does seem to do the biz..

1 upvote
grox776
By grox776 (Nov 19, 2011)

still can't believe!! luckily I still have time to cancel my pre-order.

0 upvotes
AvanGarde
By AvanGarde (Nov 19, 2011)

This camera is a joke.Not even close to LX5 quality/sharpness but price is about same.It doesnt matter you can fit it in the pocket if sharpness is so lousy I would better use my phone camera then and not bother to carry S100.

Sharpness is much worse than S95 BTW, looks like lens is broken which is not good sign for quality of S100 batches or maybe its supposed to be so blurry ? Then its a failure.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jettubby
By Jettubby (Nov 19, 2011)

I compared many many samples of the S100 RAW with the S90, S95, and 7D RAW. It really depends on where in the image you sample. The watch for instance looks horrible on the S100 compared with the others but other places such as the upper left hand corner of the Queen of Hearts looks better on the S100 versus the S90 or S95. Pixel peepers will always have something to complain about. Just the difference in each copy of S100 can make that much of a difference. just something to think about.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Roman Korcek
By Roman Korcek (Nov 19, 2011)

Just wanted to comment the same. The watch is worse on the S100 compared to the S95, but for the other place sit seems equal or better. Wonder if this a problem with the sample's lens or a more general problem.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 134
12