Just Posted: Canon PowerShot S100 review

Because there are some cameras in this segment of the market, and indeed lower in price that offer longer zooms...?

Dec 28, 2011permalink

Bomple

Hi, there's a very annoying restriction in the s95 which limits the use of raw to the P/A/S/M modes. Unfortunately this wasn't mentioned in the review of the s95.

Does anyone know if this restriction is still present in the s100?

Dec 27, 2011permalink

Bomple

I downloaded the manual of the s100 and the restriction is still there.
That means no raw in full auto or scene modes.

I think this should have been mentioned somewhere in the review, as this is a major flaw of the camera and severely limits the use of raw.

Jan 9, 2012permalink

leopold512

After you preview of this camera I thought that I will upgrade my S60 to the S100 (much better video skills and larger lens range). But after your test I am a little bit confused. How can the image quality be better than the S95, when the optic is not so good. Are the pictures of the S100 as sharp as the pictures of the S60? Is the S100 worth to update from the S60 or will i be disappointed? What compact camera would be ok?

Dec 27, 2011permalink

Rubenski

Upgrade from S60 to S100? Simply check the net for other reviews and you'll be convinced. S100 is the best real compact out there and certainly beats all it's predecessors in IQ and range of features. DP is in fact the only website that apparently wasn't so lucky with the cameras provided to them, all the others rate the S100 highly!

Dec 27, 2011permalink

yabokkie

I would suggest average the results of all the tested cameras if possible better without introducing errors or difficult to understand statistical methods (which may be inevitable). but becasue the best results are chosen for each camera, a near-real world test will have to average all the shots and cost a lot more without automation.

it's statistics, distributions, deviations ... buyers' chances.

Dec 27, 2011permalink

Grisby

Will DPReview now be using the best results of 5 cameras for all their reviews of just for the the Canons? Also, if test results are not relevant in the real world why post them at all?

Dec 26, 2011permalink

oldhappycat

While I appreciate the candor about problems with the S100, it does raise some questions.

The studio shots comparisons are a defining element of the DPR reviews. The S100 review suggests that a camera with so-so studio performance can produce excellent real-life performance. Does that not call in to question the usefulness of this central part of DPR's reviews?

Dec 26, 2011permalink

Studio testing is invaluable for nailing down the pixel-level IQ differences between similar cameras in an increasingly mature market. They are repeatable, easily graspable and because of the fixed shooting parameters we an create a database of images (see our studio comparison tool). But because our studio isn't exactly a 'typical' environment we augment our studio testing with a lot of real-world shooting. That's the way we've always worked. Fixating on either type of testing exclusively wouldn't give the full picture.

Dec 26, 2011permalink

DemonDuck

My own opinion is that any camera with a sensor smaller than APS-C is dated and a waste of money. You can get two NEX 3 bodies for the price of one S100.

But that's just my own slanted viewpoint.....

Dec 26, 2011permalink

AkinaC

Well, the NEX 3 is also dated(in terms of year). Plus, all the smartphones are wasted of money as their camera sensor is much more smaller.

You know this is a slanted viewpoint, the why bother post your message up anyway.

Dec 26, 2011permalink

DemonDuck

Just to give people like you something to snark about....

Dec 26, 2011permalink

zxaar

@DemonDuck, agree with what you say.

Dec 27, 2011permalink

JWest

And you can fit a NEX-3 in your pocket with a lens of equivalent zoom range fitted? That's amazing!

Jan 2, 2012permalink

Graham Meale

A bit disappointing that the camera doesn't align HDR bracketed shots. A bit silly to have to carry a tripod.

Dec 25, 2011permalink

RLPhotoAndImaging

Before selling my LX5, I found myself reaching for my wife's S95. Now, we can't wait till our preordered S100 arrives.

Dec 25, 2011permalink

keeponkeepingon

DPreview missed a con:

ISO is fixed at ISO 80 for any exposure greater than 1 second.

This may not be an issue for many folks but if you are paying top $$ for manual controls, you would expect the S100 to have a wee bit more control of ISO.

Dec 25, 2011permalink

Earthlight

This is indeed surprising. Thanks for the heads up!

Dec 26, 2011permalink

Hobbit13

Yeah, that limitation bothers me allot with the S90! I'm often fideling with the exposure controlls at night, not getting the picture brighter, because it's stuck at 1 second exposure time.

Dec 27, 2011permalink

Jun2

Still think Olympus Pen E-PM1 is hell of a bargin, although it's a bit bigger than S100.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

OneGuy

Agree. It seems there was a conscious decision to make the flash a push-on module in keeping with the "system" image. Yet, an in-body flash as found on compacts would put PM1 nicely in with P&S's while showing off its cool-premium qualities.
A bargain is relative. Those that wish to use the S100 for prints may not be all that happy. Would be interesting to see if the used S100 prices bring the new ones down to the fair level.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

lomo3108

using the epm1 with the panny pancakes and new x lens, that may be a good idea to keep the size down.

Dec 25, 2011permalink

The idea that m43rds competes directly with the s100 is - ridiculous. It competes at the same level that a Canon XS competes with the s100. The camera body alone is larger than the s100, put the kit lens on it and it's huge. Here's a picture from imaging resource with the kit lens on it -
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/EPM1/ZYLEFT-MD.JPG

Yeah, you can make it smaller with the pancake lens, then it's "only" about twice as big. For an additional $350, on top of the initial cost of the camera.

m43rds might compete with cameras like the g12, lx-5, xz-1, etc. But they're in whole different size class than the s100 - even with their smaller and doubles-the-cost lens.

Dec 25, 2011permalink

CNY_AP

I wish they'd include neckstraps - so much nicer for walking around places and keeping your hands free, and much less chance of dropping it. I also wish they'd include an intervalometer (full szie pics) and time lapse mode (in-camea movies) like my old nikon P5000 has. The P5000 (the timer) will only shoot at 1/30s at the fastest setting though - a bit too slow for most things.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

Richard Ryan

Try and find one right now. Everything is sold out.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

keysmith

When (small) size matters, S100 is unbeatable.. LX5, XZ-1, X10 could be a little bit better, but also bigger. In my opinion the only TRUE compact (fits in pockets) is Canon S100/s95.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

(unknown member)

I agree. The "bit better" is what many forum participants say. Yawn! Are we all pros or semi-pros that "a bit better" is so crucial to our photos? There are many fine cameras, all with their pros and cons. If you need or want an premium camera that fits in your pocket, their are only a few choices: Canon S.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

(unknown member)

I would not advise keeping a camera in your pocket as dust can get into these cameras (read countless postings in DPR) and you are likely to end up with scratched lcds/lens or jammed lens protection blades if the camera does not have a cap. Best to buy a small case and put it on your belt.
The lens seems very slow at full zoom for a newly released camera. It seems now you have a trade off between extra wide angle and wide aperture at long zoom. So there is no single solution.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

keysmith

I think you can put it in your (empty from coins, keys) jacket pocket after you place it in a soft bag (cheap sunglasses bag/pouch like). Compact means small, and s100 is the smallest..

Dec 26, 2011permalink

solman

Agree with Amin1. The Fuji X10 has the photo world on the edge of their seats.
Bring it on ... soon!

Dec 24, 2011permalink

Armin1

Where is the Fuji X10 review? I've been waiting for a month. It seems DPReivew completely forget about the X10.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

many information that i get from this web

Maybe you missed the raw-shooting compacts roundup? Lots of original content in there. But a review will follow in early 2012 :)

Dec 24, 2011permalink

well in my pocket is a 8 MP phone camera 24/7..... that is compared to most P&S models not bad.

i take my DSLR with me when i want to MAKE a picture.. when i just want to TAKE a picture the PEN offer fantastic IQ and is no burden to carryCanon PowerShot S100 review

Dec 24, 2011permalink

Tom Goodman

My sentiments exactly!!!

Dec 24, 2011permalink

NIK11

Am a little disappointed you've said nothing about DR, something many would be interested in.

I asked Andy Westlake in the S100 Preview comments section if DPRE would be comparing DR between S95/100, he replied 'of course'.

What happened?

Nick

Dec 23, 2011permalink

zxaar

DR is not forte of canon so they may have left it out as favour to canon.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

Simon Joinson

we don't generally test DR on compacts

Dec 24, 2011permalink

NIK11

Maybe someone should tell Andy!

It's a pity, I think you are missing an important trick with DR measurement, especially with premium compacts aimed at enthusiasts.

Thanks for listening.

Nick

Dec 24, 2011permalink

The way we test DR isn't really that well-suited to testing compact cameras, and we're looking at improving this in 2012.

Dec 25, 2011permalink

OneGuy

I think of S100 as what Fuji F200 EXR should have been-- and that is what keeps my interest in Canon squeezing small sensors to deliver competing image to m43 and up. Possibly that is why Nikon has chosen a smaller sensor for their Sys1 as well. Yet, perhaps, there are manufacturing tolerances that are offering the greatest resistance.

DPR should not have explained away the quality variations with "practical considerations," simply because the DPR Studio setup is a unique and most helpful evaluation tool. (I can go to CameraLabs.com and get exactly the same center and corner crops just as DPR did for the S100 -- and then defer to raw for improvements.)

DPR members, moreover, are perfectly capable reading between the lines and I for one am not going to buy any and all cameras getting the DPR recommendation rating. But now I also know I am not getting an S100 new OR used. DPR was the first to talk about the variations (as far as I know after a short search) and three cheers for that.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Penponds

Significance of lack of viewfinder in the +40 age group...?! (long-sighted...)
My wife and I, (both in that age group) have been debating a discrete, easier to carry alternative to the 550D with a std zoom for her work purposes which last involved trips to boondocks of northern Afghanistan. Initially the S100 and SX230 HS appealed because of the GPS and the former's 24mm.

But on trying these alongside the G12 was a revelation.

The first two cameras were immediately considered by my wife to be too small for comfortable holding - yet she thought her primary concern was pocketability. The next revelation was that no viewfinder meant no dioptric adjustment, and not being able to comfortably see the LCD screen at normal distances. We haven't made the final decision yet - but it looks like a deal breaker. All the fantastic innovations and features of the S100 receding in significance compared with the discomfort and supreme inconvenience of putting on and off reading glasses...

Dec 23, 2011permalink

D R C

Go on ebay and buy a Canon S70/80 and then wait until they make the perfect camera for your needs!

Dec 24, 2011*permalink

Rubenski

S100=
1. Test it thoroughly yourself before keeping it for years to come because you may end up with a 'faulty' camera.
2. HDR= tripod area anyway, in camera 'alignment' isn't sofisticated.
3. Did DP mention the 'exposure warning' on the S100? That's a great feature to become a better shooter. Expose for the highlights and watch your display. It's as easy as that.
4. Always carry it with you, Yes you can, because it fits in your pocket! And 'No, you can't' with your DSLR or MFT, so stop comparing it with these type of cameras and be honest: how many times did you leave your MFT or DSLR at home because...well you know.
And, may I say to all of you photo enthusiasts: Merry Christmas and a very happy new year, that all of you may shoot some stunning pictures! (sorry to post all of this text but I'm practising on my English as well, but still, I mean what I say). Greetings from Russia.

Dec 23, 2011*permalink

TrojMacReady

There are cameras that can do mutiframe HDR quite fine, using quite effective in camera alignment. Even my 2 year old camera can do it without the need for a tripod.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

JWest

The Samsung NX100 fits in my pocket just fine, has an APS-C sensor, and is always with me. Just because this is the right camera for you, do not assume it is the right camera for everyone. Happy new year!

Jan 2, 2012permalink

Ashley Pomeroy

It looks nice, but you seem to have left out the display / operation page - f'rinstance, the conclusion mentions the rubbish manual focus control, but the review otherwise doesn't mention it (or show us what it looks like).

Perhaps it was too close to the S95 to bother with (to be fair, that part of the review - the menu screen listing - always struck me as being a lot of work for very little return).

Dec 23, 2011permalink

bigdaddave

A good review thanks.
Nothing there to rush me into upgrading my S90 though, especially at the current price.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Sviz

Where is the Dynamic Range section?

Dec 23, 2011permalink

lovEU

I like your review and appreciated the reading. Anyway, I'd be interested in your answer on two questions:

1. What does the S100 lack in your opinion so you didn't provide the cam with dpr's Gold Award? What is missing i.e. compared to the XZ-1? (lens?)

2. Like the S95 the S100 got a score of 72%. But in the review you gave several hints which features have been improved. So I'm not sure ... did I missed something crucial and why didn't your score raise a bit?

Thanks.

PS: Sorry for having cross-posted this at Canon Talk but I only now realized the "Comments" are a better place for such questions.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Kirppu

I tought exactly the same, only thing I came up is that S100 should have had come out last year to get the gold award. Let's keep in mind that these reviews ain't the absolute truth. :)

...and Happy holidays.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Tom Goodman

Glad the review took the MF "window" to task. In the S95 it is virtually useless in most working conditions, especially outdoors. I assume there is no improvement in this version. Among other limitations, it has trouble focusing on close objects when the lens is wide.

Frankly, I own an S95 and consider it inferior in the most important respect, image quality, to an old Canon Powershot 870.

Dec 23, 2011*permalink

increments

Really liked the bit showing the real world effects of sample variation. I'd be interested in an in-depth article that shows how different kinds of variation affect different kinds of subject/scene.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

frosti7

Andy, well done review!
I appriciate the effort and time you guys take to go deeper into things like sample variation - it both serves a tool to keep track on the companies and explains the little-known phenomena to beginners,
your real-world tests give the artilce further justification,
Keep doing the professional reviews, you guys are ought to set new standards for photography tests!

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Kelcey and Andy (and me - a bit)

But thanks :)

Dec 23, 2011permalink

rickspencer4

I'm really appreciating mine. Shot a movie at a school function at full zoom, hand held and I was amazed at the clarity and steadiness considering I was holding it up in the air. https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=2355594855459

Here are couple pics : https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.2355743379172.2108678.1417849145&type=3

I'm leaving the EOS 50D home more often...

Dec 23, 2011permalink

frosti7

your facebook pics are restricted to anyone not in your freinds list,
btw, i replaced my 40D with M43 and happy about it

Dec 23, 2011permalink

rickspencer4

I edited the Facebook setting,

Dec 24, 2011permalink

Steen Bay

Guess it's a typo/mistake that "Image quality (RAW)" is lower than "Image quality (JPEG)".

Dec 23, 2011permalink

lightsculpture

Hi Barney, is there any plan to replace the samples in the Studio Comparison tool with the best samples? I think that would do the sensor justice. Since the quality control issue has been highlighted extensively in the review, I think there is no need to further illustrate that in the Studio Comparison tool. Now, we would really see what the sensor is capable of in high iso... That would also give us some idea on what to expect for G13. Thanks.

Dec 23, 2011*permalink

The samples in the studio scene now are the best in one respect (they are the most even, in these very restrictive parameters - 1 meter away, ~75mm equivalent FL). But a glance at the sample images in both the body of the review and the gallery should reassure you :)

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Tahir Hashmi

Going by the DPReview scoring, it seems like S90 is the best among S90, S95 and S100, with vastly better optics, and an overall score of 75 against 72 for the others.

How does that work out?

Dec 23, 2011permalink

The S90 was reviewed a long time ago, when the market was entirely different, and using a different scoring system.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

5. When S90 came out number of owners complained about optical misalignment. IIRC there was no mention of that in DPR's review. IIRC same for S95. So if my memory serves me well how come attention is all of the sudden paid to S100?

Dec 23, 2011*permalink

As I look at results of cherry picked copy following questions are crossing my mind:

1. Was final, best, copy cherry picked with assistance from Canon or it was from same supply channel us mere mortals get our copies through?

2. Should reviewers post reviews based on best copy one can get or based on average copy one usually gets? I believe it should be later because results should represent typical result buyers will be getting. Otherwise review is misleading potential buyers into thinking they too will get so good results when they might not.

3. Are all other cameras DPR reviews cherry picked? If not why DPR is posting result from best copy of S100 against random copies of S95 etc? Playing field should be level and if it wasn't how we can know S95 wouldn't have topped S100?

4. Took 5 copies to get one that performs as it should?! WOW! What that tells us? That DPR "just" had bad luck with 4 or that majority of S100's will behave worse than product manufactured properly should?

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Respectfully, I really think you should read the review in full, and this article:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8370332082/first-impressions-using-the-canon-powershot-s100

both of which should answer some of your questions.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

I have read your review and article. I do not remember seeing anything that would directly answer my questions. Maybe I just missed them or couldn't remember seeing them. As one that is more familiar with this review could you please point to me where exactly those answers would be or briefly answer them directly? Thank you in advance!

Dec 23, 2011permalink

MGJA

From the preview: "At the time of writing, we are expecting another sample from Canon and we will rush it into the studio and out into the real world as quickly as possible."

So basically they had Canon send them a perfect sample. Now, before we all start wailing, I think most of the cameras they review are manufacturer samples sent out especially for reviewing purposes, often way before they're available through normal channels. Rather goes with the territory. Always assume that whatever online review you read is the best possible that piece of hardware will ever preform and that your own copy is likely worse. If anything, I'm amazed at Canon's amateurism in not securing good copies for a high-profile site like this from start.

All that said, I'm not sure I buy all this DPreview "doesn't matter in the real world" talk. We come here for technical details. If you think your tests are irrelevant, perhaps you should change them for test you consider reflect RW performance better.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

1 - dpreview gets it's copies from Canon directly. They've said that they come out of the "retail" stream or something like that. I mean if they got several bad copies, how much work could Canon be doing to provide them with good copies? Evidentally none.

2 - How would one go about getting the average copy? If you look at the review page -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonS100/page5.asp

They point out (with test shots) that copies that provided the clearest and sharpest studio results actually provided worse results in some real world shooting...

3 - I know they've also reshot Samsung nx200 shots. Frankly, you used the term "level playing field", and one has to ask - how do you get a level playing field? If you choose the best sample for all camera reviews, that is "level".

However, the fundamental problem as they point out is that a camera that does the best with the studio shots actually does worse in several outdoors shots than the camera that does poorly in the studio shots

Dec 23, 2011permalink

4 - Again, read the review -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonS100/page5.asp

The fundamental problem from their testing is that there isn't really "good copies and bad copies". The "bad" copies that did poorly in their studio shots did well in normal shooting, the copies that did well in the studio shots did worse in normal shooting...how would one fairly test this? I mean I couldn't quickly find a link to how it's setup, but is it really fair to judge a camera based entirely on shots made at 3 feet away of a macro level scene with wine bottles and such at 70mm zoom? How often does one actually shoot like that in real life? The problem is fundamentally that different cameras may perform differently with different scenes.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

To MGJA: Regarding "So basically they had Canon send them a perfect sample. Now, before we all start wailing, I think most of the cameras they review are manufacturer samples sent out especially for reviewing purposes, often way before they're available through normal channels. Rather goes with the territory."

No, it doesn't go with the territory. If that is what is going on then reviews have question mark over them, there is zero value to consumer in review of sample that those consumers are not likely to get. Years ago there was an uproar in computer hardware communities over reviews done with "golden samples" / cherry picked samples because consumers felt deceived into making purchase decisions based on results that they would never get from their copies. I don't see why it should be any different here.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

To Paul Rivers:

Re "How would one go about getting the average copy?", very simple: Don't go looking for cherry picked copy. Instead get 3 random copies from 3 different random consumer outlets. Test all 3 and present result that is from neither best nor worst copy but from "average" copy, while providing link for consumers to look at other two if they want to.

Re "Frankly, you used the term "level playing field", and one has to ask - how do you get a level playing field? If you choose the best sample for all camera reviews, that is "level".", no, best from each is neither fair nor level to consumers. Random copy from S90, S95, LX5 etc (I still didn't hear answer from DPR did they cherry picked them too, until then I will assume they haven't) is not level and fair either.

Re "The fundamental problem from their testing is that there isn't really "good copies and bad copies".", as an engineer I find that nonsense.

Dec 24, 2011permalink

coastcontact

The overall review rating of 72% is a mystery to me. It appears that none of the bar chart ratings exceeded 72%. What am I missing? I realize that Canon is the big dog in the industry but honesty in ratings should count for something.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

jcmarfilph

Rating is useless. Sample comparisons and self-conclusion matters most.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Beauly

Funnily enough, a S100 appeared on my doorstep tonight. Ordered a month ago, on the box is the camera number. Anyone have any ideas about what batch is which? Or what these numbers mean?

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Richard Franiec

The reviewer(s) went out of the way to downplay the lens decentering issues. Going through five copies to pick one unit performing as it should is a little stretch. To say that soft corner/border does not matter in "real life" shooting is a deception in my book. Even if the difference is not easily distinguished, the worst thing is knowing about the potential problem and probability of the lemon which is statistically 80%.
I think the disservice of the review is twofold:
1.Telling the potential buyer that no matter how good or bad particular camera copy could be it does not make the difference in final IQ.
2. Helping manufacturer to get away with obvious deviation from expected quality standards for relatively expensive flagship model.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Hmm, you must have missed the bit where we wrote that the sample variation we saw was 'a Bad Thing'...

as for the difference it makes in normal shooting, you can see for yourself, we've published plenty of samples. The simple fact is that even the worst performing camera (in terms of uneven sharpness in our studio) gave good IQ in normal everyday shooting. That isn't always true, and sometimes in fact the opposite is true (a camera that looks great in our studio might disappoint 'out in the world').

Dec 23, 2011*permalink

I think the reviewer went way out of their way to take and post comparison pics showing why it was not a huge issue. If they had just waved their hands and said "oh, this isn't a problem" I would have been miffed to, but with a half page (or a full page? don't remember) of pics showing why this didn't make a difference in real world shooting, including different shots at different levels of zoom - I'm personally really happy they went to that length, and being that they did I find your comment pretty ridiculous...maybe you just didn't get to that part of the review yet? That would be understandable...

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Richard Franiec

Now, Paul,
Would you rather have the best cam out of the tested bunch or the worst one? Is that ridiculous question also?

Dec 23, 2011permalink

panini98

That's kind of like saying...

Benz A goes 0-100 in 6.04 seconds
Benz B goes 0-100 in 6.03 seconds
Benz C goes 0-100 in 6.01 seconds

Would you rather have the best out of the tested bunch or the worst one?

Truth is the difference between the 3 is so small and indistinguishable, that the difference between 'best' and 'worst' is not relevant. No one is able to consistently differentiate between the sample cameras under REAL LIFE conditions; the differences are so small they are not relevant for most people.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Richard Franiec

Not sure if this is a good analogy, maybe it is depending on what MB is claiming for 0-60 for this particular model. There is no claimed tolerance range for S100 lens. DPR finding is the only reference to inconsistencies and huge kudos to them for reporting the facts.

To answer the question, I surely would settle for Benz C if I can test all three (5) of them and could afford or like one.

Now, imagine for sale ad for S100:
"Canon Powershot S100 with slightly decentered lens. No issues in real life shooting". Would you go for it? Would the disclosure be irrelevant for most potential buyers?

I think, the implication of DPR findings will have bigger long term effect than we could envision at the moment. It should serve as a warning that brand cannot be built on the name alone. Quality and consistency is something consumer appreciate and expect.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Charles King

I think you're all missing something rather important.

Lens fabrication is far more complex that has been portrayed in this thread. There isn't a simple continuum of soft<--->sharp. Instead, the design needs to accommodate a variety of compromises in order to produce a lens that falls within acceptable tolerances at all focal lengths and focussing distances.

The review clearly showed that the lens that was soft in the studio was better outside. Would you buy a camera that was advertised as "Canon S100, performs perfectly in the studio at 1m, but lens is a bit soft on the right when focused to infinity"?

I don't think this is anything new. All lenses are subject to these tradeoffs, and those who engage in the quest for a 'good copy' of a lens are often fooling themselves. Absolute perfection just isn't going to happen.

The only real question is whether Canon tried to go too far here and produce a tiny lens that was fast and had a wider zoom range. Maybe they aimed a bit too far.

Dec 26, 2011permalink

Jim

Congratulations on getting this review out soon after the product's introduction. Many people here will appreciate it...me included. :-)

Jim

Dec 23, 2011permalink

"A 4-channel readout system also substantially improves the continuous shooting rate, up to 2.3 fps compared to the S95's 0.9 fps."

That's not right. Take a look at dpreview's s95 review -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q42010highendcompactgroup/page5.asp

"Continuous shooting performance is impressive too, and in JPEG (high quality) mode to the S95 can shoot at 1.9fps (approx) for as long as it takes to fill a memory card."

The s100 shoots at 2.3fps (jpg), but that's only a slight improvement over the s95's 1.9fps (jpg).

Someone seems to have put in the s90 number, which was 0.9fps, but the s95 was 1.9fps.

Dec 23, 2011*permalink

Fixed now, thanks for pointing that out.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

...or the jpg and raw specs are getting mixed up.

"Continuous shooting performance is impressive too, and in JPEG (high quality) mode to the S95 can shoot at 1.9fps (approx) for as long as it takes to fill a memory card. Frame rate drops in raw mode to approximately 0.9fps, but with a fast card installed, burst depth remains unlimited."

s95:
- raw - 0.9fps
- jpg - 1.9fps

s100
- raw - 0.8 fps
- jpg - 2.3 fps

I know it's not right because I've owned both, but I also got the s100 numbers from the dpreview review on this page -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonS100/page4.asp

...did raw shot-to-shot time actually go down?

EDIT: Barney posted right between when I started writing my comment and when I hit "Post", apologies for appearing to write the same thing after getting a response.

Dec 23, 2011*permalink

A decrease in average fps of 0.1fps is barely significant. And remember that the S95 was reviewed a year ago, with a different memory card.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

"A decrease in *average* fps of 0.1fps is barely significant."

Just...fyi, totally agree, more of a reaction to the "it's so much faster" sentiment, perhaps a bit unfair on my part.

Dec 23, 2011*permalink

Love the chart under "Continuous shooting modes". :-) Faster in jpg, still dog slow in raw. Also wanted to say I think the s95 vs s100 aperture chart is fantastic!

Dec 23, 2011permalink

jcmarfilph

"Note: As part of the process of working through this review we have replaced our previously-published S100 studio samples with new files. The updated shots can be accessed via the studio scene comparison widget, both in its standalone form (accessed via the 'reviews' dropdown at the top of every page) and from within the 'compared to...' pages of any review."

Hopefully you will also find an X10 with sharper lens and replace the samples in the studio too. And oh please utilize the NR setting next time and include the low/off and high results. Just like what you did with the LX5.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

"Likewise the deletion of the S95's customizable 'S' button - again, something that depending on how you had your S95 set up, might require you to slightly change your way of working."

In my opinion, that isn't quite true, because the "RING FUNC." button on the back is in the same place and is assignable to all the same things as the old shortcut button was. It's more that they got rid of the dedicated "change the front ring function" button and renamed the shortcut button but otherwise it still does the same thing.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

"As far as its operational ergonomics are concerned, the only thing we wish the S100 had, which it does not, is a dedicated ISO button."

Wish the review had mentioned that you can iso to the shortcut button - err, the "Ring Func." button.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

ANAYV

It did, Paul.

"...you're left with two choices for ISO - either assign it to the RING FUNC button, on the rear of the camera, or just dive quickly into the FUNC menu. Easy enough."...

and
"...The 'Ring Func' button is customizable, and can take on any of the functions offered by the S90 / S95's 'S' shortcut button. We suspect many users will set it to control ISO, and leave it there."...

Have a Merry Christmas/Happy Holiday Paul !!

Dec 23, 2011permalink

"Even though the added grips seem small they do a a lot to keep the camera firm in your hands. Although it's certainly no replacement for a wrist strap."

Just my opinion - I put the wrist strap on my s95 after trying to avoid doing so. On my s100 - haven't, and I've had it over a month. :-) The s100 is actually better enough that I don't feel the need to have a wrist strap! :-)

Dec 23, 2011permalink

DYNAMiTE

when would you give a camera over than 85%
and Is there any good news about Canon's G13?

Dec 23, 2011permalink

This -
The excellent multi-functional 'Lens Control Ring' that can be used to change a wide range of settings is still in place, and is accompanied by a rear control dial that no longer provides direct access to exposure compensation (as per the S95) but changes shutter speed in manual exposure mode, and exposure compensation in concert with the dedicated exposure compensation button on the camera's rear.

I really do not even understand what that last sentence means.

I would say something like "On the s90, one common complaint was that it was fairly easy to hit the exposure compensation dial and change exposure compensation unintentionally. The s95 improved greatly upon this, with the s100 it's now impossible because the rear dial doesn't change exposure compensation until you press "up" first. The downside is that it's not clear at all that pressing up does the trick, so some people may not realize you can change the exposure compensation with the rear dial at all.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

P.S. It appears that (hey, totally understandably, I didn't realize it either until someone else mentioned it) the dpreview simply didn't realize you could press "up" to turn on exposure compensation on the rear dial -

"The rear control dial is effectively locked (in that it can be rotated but by itself does nothing) in all exposure modes except manual, where it controls shutter speed. This is a change from the S95, on which the rear dial provided direct control over exposure compensation in program, aperture priority and shutter priority modes. The change will be welcomed by some users (the rear dial on the S95 was easy to rotate accidentally, thus activating exposure compensation) but it is a shame that there is no option to set the rear dial to its 'old' behaviour. The risk of inadvertent operation aside, we're sure that some S100 users upgrading from an S95 will miss the quick access to exposure compensation that their camera's rear dial used to be provide."

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Just to be clear -
1. You can use the rear dial to change exposure compensation. But you have to press "up" first to get it to work.

Dec 23, 2011permalink

fyi - (I'm just trying to be helpful, seriously), here's another mention -

"If you tend to like to keep exposure compensation assigned to the Control Ring (remembering that you don't have the option to use the rear control dial for direct access to this function anymore), it is a little annoying to have to dive into a menu (however efficiently presented) to change ISO sensitivity."

Dec 23, 2011permalink

Another mention -
"One of the most obvious is the deletion of direct exposure compensation control from the rear dial. If you were bothered by inadvertent activation of this function in the S95, you'll welcome the change (and we suspect that Canon has made the change for this reason), but if you've become used to it, you might not."

Dec 23, 2011permalink