Just Posted: Canon PowerShot S100 hands-on preview

I do have another camera with a big lens that I take when I plan to take photos. The S90 isn't a perfect camera, but as far as I can tell it's the best quality image for it's size. It would be exciting if S100 is actually an upgrade, and not just GPS and more noise due to cramming more megapixels...

I do have another camera with a big lens that I take when I plan to take photos. The S90 isn't a perfect camera, but as far as I can tell it's the best quality image for it's size. It would be exciting if S100 is actually an upgrade, and not just GPS and more noise due to cramming more megapixels...

"Am I tired of all your negative chat. This is by all standards a very good camera. "

Agreed. There have been a major shortage of pocketable (read: no Pana LX3/5) 24mm enthusiast cameras so far. If IQ is at least as good as that of the S95, this will be a real killer. And the GPS is the icing on the cake - this is the perfect combination I've been waiting for.

(Too bad it's only capable of 24 fps at Full HD...)

I'm sure it is good camera. But there are other options out there that are just as good. All the naysayers are probably somewhat miffed that Canon didn't really raise the bar and instead went the more megapixelly and more gadgetty route...

"Taking a definitely not perfect but good S90, then improve it to a better S95, and then this year all but fire a flare gun to alert the public that "Hey guys, we've used a cheaper & historically lesser overall I.Q. sensor, we've overstuffed it w/ MP's, and oh yeah, btw, we've also graciously out of the goodness of our hearts given you more zoom!!!(you'll excuse us though if we don't trumpet the fact that the f value @ the tele end of this $400+camera is worse than that of a cheap bridge camera). Shut up about I.Q.? HELL NO!"

Do you have any sources on the camera's IQ? You seem to be calling the S100 a camera with an inferior IQ compared to S95. While I personally don't think Canon would be fool to release an enthusiast(!) camera, meant mostly for pixel peepers and the like, with lower IQ, let's wait for some real IQ tests. Currently, NOTHING is known of the IQ of the S100.

I.Q. of the S100 specifically? Of course there isn't any to review...YET! But there are PLENTY of examples of the switch from CCD to CMOS sensors (BSI or otherwise) resulting in OVERALL degraded image quaity ("low light iso" images may be "better", but "better" than "what", and if it's at the cost of degraded image quality at the much more frequently used more "daylight" iso's? No Thanks. Sensor changes and dubious "bells and whistles" touted as "improvements" have resulted in "good" cameras being critical and marketplace flops, and it may well happen again, if "portability" turns out to be even more the reason people buy this year's S100 than in years past. And if "negative talk" really does turn you off, might I suggest you alter your choice of forums that you choose to cruise instead of one that almost exclusively deals w/ serious amateurs and professionals seeking the BEST tools w/ which to pursue their hobby & craft. Maybe The Puppy, Rainbow, & Unicorn Forum's more your speed?

I'm quite sure this camera will be better than the GX-100 (which I also want to replace) in many ways, except for one thing: The GX-100 Time-lapse feature.

A hotshoe wouldn't be necessary if the existing flash was reworked to make it more powerful & adjustable. The addition of a quality gps unit that actually *works* wouldn't have been questioned as a real "improvement" to the S100 if they had also done things like leave the sensor alone & not "gone cheap" by going the "bsi-cmos w/ more MP!" route over CCD in a very small camera body, & by making a brighter zoom lens instead of just increasing zoom for the sake of increasing zoom, by giving the shooting capabilities of the S100 a boost, like longer shutter speeds than last years S95, but they didn't. Improve the AF, the color accuracy, the I.S. . They cheaped out in comparison to the competition & largely took the safer & often times more dubious "bells & whistles" route to gloss over what they hadn't done to really improve I.Q. & camera versatility. As far as Pany's gps units being "great", that absolutely was not the case until a firmware update came along, months into the model run.

"if they had also done things like leave the sensor alone & not "gone cheap" by going the "bsi-cmos w/ more MP!" route over CCD in a very small camera body"

It still isn't know whether the IQ will be better than that of the S95. I don't think it's worse – they too know what happened to e.g. the Pana FZ100 and the TZ20/ZS10 and won't repeat the major mistake Pana have done. Let's wait for the reviews, though.

ecka84 is correct, of course. I tried the S95 to achieve some results not normally possible with the larger camera. I wasn't concerned with where it fit but rather what it might do. Its liabilities far outweighed its portability or fit advantages, which is why "enthusiasm" is about all it has going for it. As for archiebald's insulting assumptions, without seeing what I am doing with either camera, he hasn't a clue what he is talking about, but, then, that never stops people from posting on the internet.

Hey Tommy boy, all folk are saying is that they've got S95s and D300s /60Ds for different tasks. So maybe YOU'RE being a bit hypocritical in making arrogant assumptions about their choices. Of course.

c'mon, give he guy a break, would you say this to his face in such a way! He was not commenting on either the Canon or Nikon, but the use of the term 'enthusiast' which is certainly not correct for an S95/S100.

The fact that we all want the holy grail of a pocketable camera with the IQ of a medium format camera does not justify the abuse when Tom says it a canon s95 cannot reproduce the results of a D-SLR.

This should be obvious, and neither does he seem to expect it - just that the use of the term 'enthusiast' implies this to somebody who may not know anything about the subject!!

Kevin

What a ridiculous comment. Silly man!

I compliment my D5000 with an S95 and the picture quality between the two (without enlarging or getting into BROKEH debates) is more or less the same in general use. Most importantly, my S95 is always with me, so 95% of the time its the S95 that gets the shot.

A professional (or enthusiast) can get the most out of any camera; and for a P&S (which DOES HAVE its place in photography), its top of its game. So, theres nothing 'dubious' about this category ... but any comments you make can hardly be taken seriously; I mean, you obviously consider yourself some sort of camera specialist yet you use a basic camera like a D3000; so you've hardly the right to diss any user of a P&S!

To all sensible posters, given the choice between an SLR or S95, I'd plump for the S95; I don't know about anyone else but mine takes great shots and as its always with me, who cares how good the SLR is when its sat at home missing the moment!

The results from a S95 do not be compare favorably to a D300 (not 3000). In the end the S95 is a compromise choice, providing RAW support and portability instead of the higher quality of a fine DSLR. The ability to stick the camera in your pocket and still have RAW capabilities (though not complete aspect ratio choices it should be noted) is why I was seduced by the S95. After shooting with it for months (and knowing what I was doing technically), I now enthusiastically take my S95 to all family reunions. This is my last word on the subject though others may feel free to carry on.

An S100, of course!

NEX has an APS sensor?

Yes the OP is wrong you can have the AF point in the center, but sadly you can't then move it

""My real dream is an EVIL with APS-C sensor, all the external physical controls of the G12, the tilt screen of the 60D, and 2.0 or faster 24mm or 28mm pancake lens (OK some telies, too).""

Maybe we'll see that in the G13????? Wishful thinking I guess, it would eat too much into the low end DSLR sales.

""My real dream is an EVIL with APS-C sensor, all the external physical controls of the G12, the tilt screen of the 60D, and 2.0 or faster 24mm or 28mm pancake lens (OK some telies, too).""

Maybe we'll see that in the G13????? Wishful thinking I guess, it would eat too much into the low end DSLR sales.

The 24mm eq. lens is a great move, but I'm wondering how much distortion that entails, and how much software correction is needed and thus how much of the image is lost. The LX3's raw images looked almost like golfballs without correction.

Let's not forget that this is still a point & shoot camera. I see no reason why the S100 will not be at the top of the competitors - the S95 is already there and this will be the improved version! The others, incl. Fuji X10, Pani LX3/5, Nikon P300, Olympus XZ-1, and so on, are all on a dif scale. They are all bigger in size, they have operational problems, (see video focusing on the XZ-1) they need frequent firmware updates just to get rid of bugs, or improve their op systems and features. If the S100's spec's and presumed IQ isn't enough, then one is unlikely to get satisfaction from any smaller premium P&S. I'm willing to bet that the S100 (though not perfect) will be the standard by which the rest will be compared.

"Fuji X10, Pani LX3/5, Nikon P300, Olympus XZ-1"

You can't really compare the IQ of the P300 to the LX3/5 at low(!) ISO's. The Pana is way better. (Of course, over ISO400, there isn't much difference any more because of the smearing / noise in Pana's JPEG mode.)

24 fps is the speed most videographers like because it has a more film like feel.

I would only care about 24 for cinema look, and 60 for slo-mo. I think the Canon 1080/24 spec is totally acceptable for such a compact camera, though I would like to see 60.

Of course, if you're caught up in mere numbers, then I suppose Moar Higher iz Betteh...

24p is good for the cinema feel, but if you're aiming for a cinema look, it's likely that you'd be using a better camera. For P&S use, I'd prefer the 30p or 60p smoothness. You can slow things down, which is a plus. Say you see someone make a great catch at a ball game, or something spontaneous - the 60p is much more useful.

I'm sure Canon had a technical limitation that resulted in the limited 24p though.

... and at 85 mm, f/5.0 ...

... and 24 mm f/2 ... ;)

... if so, then how did dpreview get the 50 mm, f/4.0 measurement?

I have an LX3 and while the S100 is nice, I might still upgrade to the next LX series. I shoot in less-than-sunny conditions a lot and for the S100 to be F/5.9 at 120mm equivalent is almost the same as saying it's useless to me.

The LX5 would give me f/3.3 at 90mm equivalent, so it's probably worth just shooting the LX3 at 90mm and f/3.3 and cropping down a little, to get a better-exposed shot than I would get out of an S100 at 120mm and f/5.9.

Crazy would be 14-25MP. 12 is grudgingly acceptable, but I'd rather they held at 10 too. Saves card space for one thing.

"Music's rubbish nowadays. I'm white and 14yo and I love Curtis Mayfield! People should stop talking about Justin Bieber, especially me."

I think it's fine. They have something called the PowerShot and they just increment the number up. I started with a PowerShot S60. The S90, S95, and S100 are very clear to me as to the progression.

What would be your suggestion? Make up a name like Pentax *ist D, Kodak Easyshare, or something? I don't mind a letter-number name as long as it's clear.

Looks 'soft' because they didn't go crazy with sharpening by default.

And it is slow shutter speed of 1/13, 16mm and using IS. To help show what you can do in lower light levels even at base ISO without a tripod.

Doesn't look so good. Microcontrast is non-existent.

The Manual says it supports
16:9
3:2
4:3
1:1
4:5

So is a DPR fault.

'supports' that's funny.

Hi Redfox88, personally I have nothing against Canon, I was an owner of some for the past 11 years and have my wife still has her trusty ixus50. I switched last year to the LX5, and in comparison Canon haven't raised their profile enough to produce a camera like it or the Olympus XZ-1.

No the S95 looked a lot better actually, even black compared to black. The slightly glossy top plate made for a good contrast with the matte front that is now both matte, and the now flat featureless front plate of the lens makes it look like one of them cheapest point 'n shoots imo. Small details, but make for a big difference. The look of the grip doesn't even bother me actually, if they had only kept all other design features the same.

redfox88 it clearly doesnt look like the s95, part because of the terrible looking grip and part because of the new shiney trigger button. S95 was better designed.