Canon S5 IS needs badly better IQ (*)

Mr. Amp Up Wrote:

Perspective - I own and use one.

Yes, this is what S5 users have been saying and we agree that the S3 is a great camera. So the S5 is a great camera, too, with some different features.

I have recommended to two different inquirers on this very website in the last two weeks that they keep their S3 and that if I hadn't been in my return period on my S5, there is no way I would sell my S3 at a "used" price and buy the S5. I've always acknowledged that the MAIN difference between them is a larger/higher res LCD and Hotshoe.

I've tried to be very fair and balanced, and, unlike you, have a strong basis for doing so - I owned, used, and think both the S3 and S5 are very good cameras. You have not owned or used the S5, yet you bash it incessantly.

MJ

Mr. Nyxx,

I never said you shouldn't discuss it. You may discuss it all you want and as long as you continue to parrot the same issues that are fully available on the Canon website or one of the 7 professional reviews, you really won't add much to the discussion because you add nothing UNIQUE. Owners/Users, on the other hand, have one unique advantage that makes our input particularly beneficial for those who do not have and S5. That advantage is that we actually own one and can provide them something you can't - an owner's perspective.

MikeTJ said:

I've tried to be very fair and balanced, and, unlike you, have a
strong basis for doing so - I owned, used, and think both the S3 and
S5 are very good cameras. You have not owned or used the S5, yet you
bash it incessantly.

Click to expand...

I don't bash it, but when I only see posts talking about all the pros but none of the cons, I have to balance things out. You don't need to own the S5 to know the pros and cons, heck, in my last post I directed you to a thread I started 2 months ago proving just that. I have also suggested the S5 to some users, mostly those that have dSLRs and already own an external flash, or those who can't find the S3 in stores anymore. The S5 is, at this moment, the best superzoom to be released in 2007; but because it had a bunch of downgrades, I don't know if it's the best superzoom overall. You'd need to pick which features are more important to you, but there definitely won't be a clear winner either way.

--
'Amp up and amplify! Defy! I'm a brother with a furious mind!'

-Virvatulet

MikeTJ said:

Mr. Nyxx,

I never said you shouldn't discuss it. You may discuss it all you
want and as long as you continue to parrot the same issues that are
fully available on the Canon website or one of the 7 professional
reviews, you really won't add much to the discussion because you add
nothing UNIQUE. Owners/Users, on the other hand, have one unique
advantage that makes our input particularly beneficial for those who
do not have and S5. That advantage is that we actually own one and
can provide them something you can't - an owner's perspective.

Click to expand...

LOL The "Mr." part isn't necessary.

MikeTJ said:

In real world shooting conditions, there is no discernable difference
between the S3 and S5, and what makes the S5 a better camera for some
is its extended features of a larger/higher res LCD, hotshoe. Gee -
it took us a long time to get here, but I'm glad we arrived. MJ

Click to expand...

So I can't talk about the slower burst mode because that info is found online, but you can talk about the bigger LCD even that too is found online? Am I missing something here? As for your "owner's perspective" I think you place too much importance on that. I tried it at the store, and it's pretty much identical to the S2/S3. Same feel to it, same menus, etc. The only important differences are the features and image quality, and that has been posted online for anyone to comment on.

--
'Amp up and amplify! Defy! I'm a brother with a furious mind!'

An "eeeeeevul" Canon S5?

(I'm here assuming your topic post was a play on Austin Powers)

OK, Nyxx.

If you'll go back and read my posts vis a vis the LCD, you'll note that I didn't repeat that it had a larger and better LCD only - I tried to convey that it is one thing to read teh specs, but when I actually saw the huge improvement of the LCD it actually changed my mind, but whereas when I just read the spec. sheets, that didn't convince me. Only when I became an actual user did "2.5 207,000 pixels translate into - "hell yes, if the IQ is comparable, I'll take the S5."

That is a perspective from an owner and that is what I thought was important. Just look 'em up. You'll see that I added perspective - not just recited specs. This is important! Specs are only the beginning! Until you actually use the 1.5 burst mode with auto focus and compare the outcome to the S3's 2.3 or whatever it is, does the inquirer get a real picture of if it is a real downgrade or not. Saying that the S5 is bigger than the S3 doesn't help.

Saying that the S5 is a bit bigger than the S3, but still fits nicely in the same case and by the time you put in a few extra batteries, etc., you don't notice the difference in size or weight is a perspective a non-user doesn't have.

Saying the S3 is a touch less noisy in the lab anyone can deduce and did deduce before the 8 MP was put on the chip.

To say that I've had both S3 and S5 and IQ is the same and in viewing on the LCD or printing images I can see no real differnce is a perspective you can't give.

So thank you for listing the specs - that was helpful, but, frankly, to reiterate that the 8 MP camer has more noise than a 6 MP camera of same sensor size is known, noted, but largel irrelevant.

MJ

I'm honestly not trying to insult your intellegence . . . it's just that I like to use extremes to illustrate my point and I just thought of one.

Which is faster a Ferrari or a Moped? Most would answer, of course, the Ferrari.

But the student with a moped on campus will bet his life savings that if I set up a race between any two points on campas between he on his moped and a driver in the Ferrari, he would beat the Ferrari 19 out of 20 times.

In the lab the Ferrari will measure faster torque and RMPs where its rubber hits the road.

On the campus the moped will get to the student center much faster than the Ferrari because the conditions on campas prevent the Ferrari from operating at its ideal potential.

Likewise, real world conditions basically equalize the IQs of the S3 and S5 and the improved LCD and hotshoe give a slight edge in overall performance to the S5 - not in the lab, but at the birthday party.

This is a users perspective.

MJ

MikeTJ said:

OK, Nyxx.

If you'll go back and read my posts vis a vis the LCD, you'll note
that I didn't repeat that it had a larger and better LCD only - I
tried to convey that it is one thing to read teh specs, but when I
actually saw the huge improvement of the LCD it actually changed my
mind, but whereas when I just read the spec. sheets, that didn't
convince me. Only when I became an actual user did "2.5 207,000
pixels translate into - "hell yes, if the IQ is comparable, I'll take
the S5."

Click to expand...

Tested it in the store, it is a nice LCD, but for someone who uses the EVF 99% of the time, 200$ more was a waste of money, especially since I usually go on long camping trips where the longer battery life of the S3 comes in handy (like it did this past week).

MikeTJ said:

That is a perspective from an owner and that is what I thought was
important. Just look 'em up. You'll see that I added perspective -
not just recited specs. This is important! Specs are only the
beginning! Until you actually use the 1.5 burst mode with auto focus
and compare the outcome to the S3's 2.3 or whatever it is, does the
inquirer get a real picture of if it is a real downgrade or not.
Saying that the S5 is bigger than the S3 doesn't help.

Click to expand...

It's actually 0.9 FPS with Auto Focus, and I did the math in another post... You could just as easily refocus between each shot on the S3 at the same speed if not faster, so the only advantage of the 0.9 FPS AF is that you don't need to lift your finger from the shutter. I also did the math on why the 2.3 FPS was no longer an option. Taking filesizes into consideration, the S5 should be able to take pics at 1.8 or 1.9 FPS, and that's assuming it was still using the DiG!C II, not the "faster" DiG!C III... These are not only considerable downgrades, they also seem to be stupid and careless downgrades on Canon's part. No reason for such a slow burst mode with today's technology.

MikeTJ said:

Saying that the S5 is a bit bigger than the S3, but still fits nicely
in the same case and by the time you put in a few extra batteries,
etc., you don't notice the difference in size or weight is a
perspective a non-user doesn't have.

Click to expand...

Actually, that's exactly what I said. One of the differences was size/weight, but it was marginal and pretty meaningless.

MikeTJ said:

Saying the S3 is a touch less noisy in the lab anyone can deduce and
did deduce before the 8 MP was put on the chip.

Click to expand...

Actually, even though I knew the theory about more noise, I wasn't sold on it until I saw some pics. It might not be a big factor, but it's still a downgrade. A camera is meant to take pictures first, and everything else second. I'd pick less noise and 1 gig movies over more noise and 4 gig movies any day.

MikeTJ said:

To say that I've had both S3 and S5 and IQ is the same and in viewing
on the LCD or printing images I can see no real differnce is a
perspective you can't give.

Click to expand...

I don't need to take pictures to see pictures. Ever heard of EXIF? Many people posted lots of pics of the S3 and S5, and DPReview even compared the two. I saw more noise and noise reduction. I never said it was crazy obvious, but it's there nonetheless. If you don't see it, that's fine, enjoy it; but don't say it isn't there.

MikeTJ said:

So thank you for listing the specs - that was helpful, but, frankly,
to reiterate that the 8 MP camer has more noise than a 6 MP camera of
same sensor size is known, noted, but largel irrelevant.

Click to expand...

Not according to DPReview who gave the image quality a lower rating than the S3, which in turn lead to the final rating of Recomended instead of Highly Recommended like the S3.

--
'Amp up and amplify! Defy! I'm a brother with a furious mind!'

MikeTJ said:

Likewise, real world conditions basically equalize the IQs of the S3
and S5 and the improved LCD and hotshoe give a slight edge in overall
performance to the S5 - not in the lab, but at the birthday party.

Click to expand...

I don't use the LCD to compose shots so I don't see that helping. I don't even use the LCD to review shots. I only use it if I have friends around and want to show them some pics. As for the hot shoe, 90% of users don't have an external flash or plan on buying one. If you have one, good for you, stick with the S5; if you don't, don't spend an extra 200$ on something that you will never use. The S series is mostly an outdoor camera. You don't need a 12X zoom indoors. If you want to take indoor shots, there are much smaller cameras that will do a better job, but anyway... As for better performance... What about taking multiple consecutive shots at a sporting event? Could the faster burst mode of the S3 help? Yeah, I thought so...

--
'Amp up and amplify! Defy! I'm a brother with a furious mind!'

Nyxx said,

"Not according to DPReview who gave the image quality a lower rating than the S3, which in turn lead to the final rating of Recomended instead of Highly Recommended like the S3."

Here's what Dpreview actually said:

"So then, Canon took an already great camera and gave it a better screen, better viewfinder and a flash hot shoe, and made it a bit prettier to boot. They then put inside it a sensor that is noisier than its predecessor, meaning that - for the most part - the resolution increase simply isn't reflected in the output, thanks to the need for stronger noise reduction. It's certainly a better camera in most respects, but the improvements are about 'features' not 'picture quality', and we'd hoped for a little more from Canon this time around."

Exactly - the S5 is "certainly a better camera in most respects" and its improvements are about "features" not picture quality.

S5 didn't get worse in IQ, but added some nicer features.

Dpreview did not note that the noisier processor downgraded the camera - rather it noted that the more aggressive noise reduction rendered the increased 8 MP resolution not helpful over the 6 MP.

Again, S5/S3 IQ - toss up, but both very good. S5 better features.

Clint Sanders said:

They need to start upping the fill-factor, not pixel count.

I would rather have a high-fill-factor 6mp sensor than a
low-fill-factor high 10mp sensor, and I would prefer a (relatively)
high-fill-factor 10mp sensor over both.

BTW, my 400D has better high ISO performance (ever so slightly) than
my 300D.

Click to expand...

By fill-factor I assume you mean amount of detail in relation to the number of pixels (with Sigma being a class leader), right? I completely agree. If you break down resolution into two categories, image resolution and pixel resolution, then pixel resolution would be off the charts in comparison to the image resolution, largely because of the ill effects pixel-stuffing has on the resulting image.

The only thing keeping the megapixel race from completely destroying the image quality is the innovative noise reduction techniques they are coming up with. Eventually, that well is going to dry up, if it hasn't already: you can only do so many software tricks before you can no longer improve the result.

This all reminds me of the rip-off 10-megapixel (back when that was a big number) cameras that they've sold for years in the back pages of tech magazines. If you read the fine print the camera actually take a low-res shot and interpolates it up to 10 megapixels. LOL! But really, is that much worse than what is going on now?

I think it would be a reasonably safe bet that most who buy a superzoom with a tiltout/twistout hi-res LCD screen would use it at least sometimes, if not frequently, for composition. Also the EVF in the S5 is brighter and clearer in the S5. Again, I know this because i used both.

MikeTJ said:

Nyxx said,

"Not according to DPReview who gave the image quality a lower rating
than the S3, which in turn lead to the final rating of Recomended
instead of Highly Recommended like the S3."

Here's what Dpreview actually said:

"So then, Canon took an already great camera and gave it a better
screen, better viewfinder and a flash hot shoe, and made it a bit
prettier to boot. They then put inside it a sensor that is noisier
than its predecessor, meaning that - for the most part - the
resolution increase simply isn't reflected in the output, thanks to
the need for stronger noise reduction. It's certainly a better camera
in most respects, but the improvements are about 'features' not
'picture quality', and we'd hoped for a little more from Canon this
time around."

Exactly - the S5 is "certainly a better camera in most respects" and
its improvements are about "features" not picture quality.

S5 didn't get worse in IQ, but added some nicer features.

Dpreview did not note that the noisier processor downgraded the
camera - rather it noted that the more aggressive noise reduction
rendered the increased 8 MP resolution not helpful over the 6 MP.

Again, S5/S3 IQ - toss up, but both very good. S5 better features.

Click to expand...

They said the image quality didn't improve, that doesn't mean it didn't get worse. As for better features, like I said earlier, that's for the consumer to decide. For someone who thinks I'm being biased, you have some nerve to state for the record that the S5 has better features... Wow... Who made you the "Decider"?The features are useless if no one uses them. If you buy a car that has the potential to have a DVD player and multiple screens, does that make it better than a car without a DVD player and multiple screens? No, not until you actually install the DVD player and multiple screens. So the hot shoe isn't an improvement unless you have an external flash, which 90% of consumers won't use. Like I said earlier... The S3 was better than the S2 because it added features, it didn't remove them. When you add AND remove features from a camera (like the S5 just did), you can't really say that it's better or worse than an older model. It all depends on what features you need more. I don't need the hot shoe or bigger LCD. I need better battery life for my long camping trips, a faster burst mode for sporting events, and the ability to use the CHDK hack to take RAW shots for HDR images.

--
'Amp up and amplify! Defy! I'm a brother with a furious mind!'

Hot Diggity Dog

Finally got us a dogfight. Thought I was going to be disappointed but after 3 days, it has paid off!
--
Bill

MikeTJ said:

I think it would be a reasonably safe bet that most who buy a
superzoom with a tiltout/twistout hi-res LCD screen would use it at
least sometimes, if not frequently, for composition. Also the EVF in
the S5 is brighter and clearer in the S5. Again, I know this because
i used both.

Click to expand...

It was stated in the reviews, and I also used both, remember? I didn't really notice any difference between the two EVFs, but then again, mine is brand new. As for the LCD, yeah, I'm sure I'll use it sometimes when it's necessary, but I don't see that being more important than the RAW hack or 2.3 FPS burst mode, especially not for 200$ more. There was no reason for Canon to remove or downgrade some of the features, why can't you understand that? If Canon had done what they did between the S2 and S3 and only added to the S3 with the only difference being a little added noise and a slightly shorter battery life, then it would be a different story and we could more easily say the S5 was better. That can't be done right now because they added and removed important features, and depending on what's more important to you, one camera could be better than the next, but it can't be the best overall.

--
'Amp up and amplify! Defy! I'm a brother with a furious mind!'

MikeTJ said:

Which is faster a Ferrari or a Moped? Most would answer, of course,
the Ferrari.

Click to expand...

MikeTJ said:

Likewise, real world conditions basically equalize the IQs of the S3
and S5 and the improved LCD and hotshoe give a slight edge in overall
performance to the S5 - not in the lab, but at the birthday party.

Click to expand...

These are both Toyotas.

MikeTJ said:

This is a users perspective.

Click to expand...

Yes but actually what percentage of S5 users own a external flash. I would say that most users wouldn't benefit from it and that is called statistics.

OFF TOPIC HERE:

I just don't buy the thing that people who own the camera have more "value" to say about the camera than those who don't. I mean just look at the alter ego "pereg" a Canon fanboy who has "reviewed" Fuji models and gave them poor IQ ratings. Then he went to "review" those excellent Canon cameras and gave them best ratings. He says he owned a F30 or something and didn't like the IQ but even an idiot can read and look at the pictures to see that it has very good IQ. The fact that 8MP in a small sensor is a bad thing and it doesn't change at all if you shoot outside or you actually own the camera. And can I comment on the camera if I go and test it in the store or what's the limit of how many pictures or days do I have to own a camera to actually comment on it. This is just rambling but the point is that many times user opinios also total BS and fanboy talk. Even if I don't own the actual camera I can easily say that SD800 blurry pictures(corners) can be seen in normal prints in some models. If it doesn't bother that particular user that's okay but it doesn't make it non existent.

Also I don't understand these "don't rain over his parade" comments. If someone posts "what an excellent camera, it took these amazing pictures, look" and all you see is poor pictures that could've been taken with any camera. Then come the fanboys shouting amazing and how did you capture those blown highlights accidentally so well. This is how those people who can't sing at American Idol competitions are born. This is why some people have very little knowledge about the world around them. You can disagree with me but there's a sample forum and if someone things those pictures are good then they will tell you that. There are many great pictures in these forums, not gonna deny that.

Yet another thing I don't understand is "if you don't have anything nice to say about this camera then shut up end let others enjoy". This is the same thing I talked earlier "either you're with us or you're against us". It's not my problem if some people are dumb enough to follow marketing people and stop others from getting cameras with good quality(way business works). But it's not those peoples problem when some people actually want to change the thinking of consumers and maybe one day get cameras with little more principles and little less marketing. I can take pictures with any camera but I want to take pictures with a great tool that shouldn't be too much to ask. So me "whining" about it is much more usefull than you buying and supporting this megapixel race, IMO of course. This is how things change, when someone opens their mouth if you haven't noticed.

To these things I think I have the right to say what I think. Some of these persons are the ones that said removing RAW from these cameras is a good thing. How dumb you have to be to shoot RAW if you can shoot JPEG and you don't want to process RAW pictures. It's a choise and I don't see it damaging if you can get more out of the camera or not, your choise. You really have to be a huge Canon fanboy to say that he wouldn't buy a G7 if it had RAW and it has been said here.

I doubt I'm going to add anything more into this discussion if people didn't get me then it's not my problem.

--

If a man empties his purse into his head, no one can take it away from him. An investment of knowledge always pays the best interest.

--
'Amp up and amplify! Defy! I'm a brother with a furious mind!'

I am not interested in getting into a tit-for-tat on features. What I am interested in doing is giving an objective evaluation of the S5 in comparison to its predecessor, the S3.

From what I can see from your posts, you are generally contending that the S3 is a better camera because you think it has less noise and therefore Canon has taken a step backward with the S5.

I am contending that Canon basically continued in the S2/S2/S3 tradition of producing a fine superzoom by not messin' with the basic formula of a very good lens, nice ergonomics, good overall IQ and updated a few of the features that most welcome. I will even concede that the upgrade to 8 MP was contrary to the technical preference, but I am quite sure that the step up was necessary from the market constraint.

In the end, you and I differ in specifics with regard to feature inclusion or exclusion, but a simple question is do you agree with the Dpreview conclusion that:?

"So then, Canon took an already great camera and gave it a better screen, better viewfinder and a flash hot shoe, and made it a bit prettier to boot. They then put inside it a sensor that is noisier than its predecessor, meaning that - for the most part - the resolution increase simply isn't reflected in the output, thanks to the need for stronger noise reduction. It's certainly a better camera in most respects, but the improvements are about 'features' not 'picture quality', and we'd hoped for a little more from Canon this time around."

And BTW, contrary to what was stated on this forum, Simon did not struggle with the "Recommended." Again, here's what he said:

"The output (with fringing and noise issues) simply isn't good enough to earn the S5 IS an unqualified 'Highly Recommended' rating, but it's an easy 'Recommended'."

-Virvatulet