Returning my S95 - very disappointing

CloudyBay43 · Aug 25, 2010

It could turn out not quite :

1. Reportedly different lens - elements, groups etc
2. Now shoots HD .. how does this, if at all - affect stills ?

3. WHy should we believe Canon that the CCD is absolutely the same in S95 as the one in S90 and G11 ?

The only way, i believe - to proper compare is : get raws of the same scenes, time / light, settings, at a few ISOs (100, 400, 800) and a few apertures (f2.0, f2.8, f5.6) from G11, S90 and S95, processed with the same preset in Aperture 3 or LR3 and publish 100% size / 99% quality jpgs somewhere where we can download from. Then continue to shoot jpg and argue which camera is better

This is unlikely to happen or be provided by a serious site / reviewer, coz it might just cause unrepearable damage the (early) S95 sales big time

caissam said:
dave_bass5 said:

I do find the S90 to be much cleaner at all ISO settings but a is tend to use ISO400 and above most of the time i wanted something that was either cleaner, or could be cleaned up without too much detail loss.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but anything is wrong here.

The S95 is nearly the same camera as the s90, same lense, same DIGIC4, how should it be possible that the S90 is "much cleaner" ?!?
No way, I guess.

Also that the S95 would be much cleaner is impossible, because only the jpg-Engine could have changed a little bit. May be.

Did you compare S95-JPG to S90-RAW, or what?? Can´t work!

Some pics would be very very helpfull otherwise we can´t take your issue very serious, sorry.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ii

http://nightlight.zenfolio.com
http://photomoment.bg/user/show/3132

Daqing Li · Aug 25, 2010

I am very close to the Jaocob and has been thinking to go in for S95. Cannot remeber whether TZ7 can video with zooming? Please help.

canuck dave · Aug 25, 2010

I think everyone who gets poor photos with their cameras should 'take them back'.

I'm sure that's what artists do with 'faulty' brushes when they don't get the paintings they were after

dave_bass5 · Aug 25, 2010

Daqing Li said:
I am very close to the Jaocob and has been thinking to go in for S95. Cannot remeber whether TZ7 can video with zooming? Please help.

At the highly likely risk of getting miss quoted again by people who cant read i can tell you the TZ7 can zoom and has constant AF while videoing.

Please note guys, im talking about a TZ7 here, not a S95.
--
Dave.

Gallery @
http://davepearce.smugmug.com
S90 Shots @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/davebass5/sets/72157622647970370/
FZ38 Shots @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/davebass5/sets/72157623847343904/

Videos @ http://www.vimeo.com/user464364/videos

emblum · Aug 25, 2010

Don_D said:
Isn't the sensor on the S95 new, made to handle HD video?

If so, the IQ could have been compromised. This is unlikely, but I will be interested to see the IQ testing.

This is my concern as well.

Don_D said:
It doesn't matter to me, as I am completely happy with my S90, a little classic.

I held off on an S90 purchase in anticipation of the S95. But if the picture quality of the S95 has taken a step backward in the interest of adding HD video I'll save some money and buy an S90 instead.

I eagerly await some sort of professional reviews or controlled comparisons.

daveb99 · Aug 25, 2010

I really do get the impression that Canon have optimised the sensor for HD video (badly...!) at the expense of still image quality.

Yes, I know, direct comparisons of RAW images would be the acid test - but I never had an S90, and couldn't read the S95 RAW files for reasons stated in my original post. Unless the in-camera Jpegs processing is way off in the S95 (unlikely) then I'd say that the RAW files won't be a match for the G11 (or the S90 for that matter - from what I've read, the S90 and G11 IQ is almost identical at the same focal lengths/apertures)

For those of you who might think my tests were a little subjective, I'm not a beginner with photography, I have got a qualification and a 5D SLR with some nice lenses as well as my G11. Really not trying to blow my own trumpet at all, just trying to say that I know a little bit about image quality, i.e. I'm not a beginner who has some nice gear or whatever. My photos won't win any awards but I understand photography, if that makes sense.

Put simply - I'm used to looking at my G11 jpegs and the S95 jpegs were poor in comparison. Soft around the edges is the best description I can come up with - and this applies to the HD video quality as well). I could have had a lemon I suppose.

Simon97 · Aug 25, 2010

Same here. I wanted a cheap camera so I tried an A490 since it is rated so well. After trying and returning 3 of them, I gave up. In each case, the lens was misaligned causing heavy blur on one side of the image. Yes, I did test with a brick wall shot. Definite lens issue.

Canon needs better QC.

caissam · Aug 25, 2010

Yes, you re right, canon adds HD so it can´t be exactly the same.
But does this mean that they changed its photofaciltities, too?
Its no CMOS!

daveb99 said:
I bought an S95 today (UK) and its going back tomorrow. The Jpegs are not as good as my G11 (at all ISOs) and the HD video quality was disappointing. The Jpegs actually remind me of my TZ7 which is definitely not a good thing.

Sorry, my posting was adressed to this dave, to the thread opener.
He had the S95 and I would ask him to show us some comparsions.

Tammy T · Aug 25, 2010

daveb99 said:
Yes, I know, direct comparisons of RAW images would be the acid test - but I never had an S90, and couldn't read the S95 RAW files for reasons stated in my original post. Unless the in-camera Jpegs processing is way off in the S95 (unlikely) then I'd say that the RAW files won't be a match for the G11 (or the S90 for that matter - from what I've read, the S90 and G11 IQ is almost identical at the same focal lengths/apertures)

For those of you who might think my tests were a little subjective, I'm not a beginner with photography, I have got a qualification and a 5D SLR with some nice lenses as well as my G11. Really not trying to blow my own trumpet at all, just trying to say that I know a little bit about image quality, i.e. I'm not a beginner who has some nice gear or whatever. My photos won't win any awards but I understand photography, if that makes sense.

Put simply - I'm used to looking at my G11 jpegs and the S95 jpegs were poor in comparison. Soft around the edges is the best description I can come up with - and this applies to the HD video quality as well). I could have had a lemon I suppose.

Dave, Thank you for confirming my experience that G11 has the best IQ among Canon advanced compacts, including S90 and G10, at least in RAW. My story ... I am a DSLR shooter and was looking for a compact to carry on a trip in the fall. I bought a G11 and found the handling a bit difficult due to little space for my thumb to rest, so I returned it. I bought a used S90 and found the IQ was not as good as that of the G11. I can't explain but the G11 RAW images after processing in DPP look so clear, sharp, detailed and have an almost 3D feel. I did the same amount of processing for the S90 images but they did not get any better. So I sold the S90. I bought a used G10 at a good price. Again, the G11 IQ looks better than the G10 IQ.

Probably it's not that your S95 is bad; it's just that the G11 is the best.

I now have a Samsung EX1 (a keeper) and will probably buy a G11 again and accept its ergonomic limitation. Maybe I got a perfect copy of the G11 and I'd kick myself for returning it.

Anfy · Aug 25, 2010

Tammy T said:
Dave, Thank you for confirming my experience that G11 has the best IQ among Canon advanced compacts, including S90 and G10, at least in RAW.
...Again, the G11 IQ looks better than the G10 IQ.

Although I never owned the G11 (I have a G10 and a S90) I thought general consensus was that at lowest ISO (80-200) G10 IQ should be noticeably better than that of G11 - I gave another look at IR comparometer, and again agreed on that.

Ciao!

--
Viva la evolución!

Don_D · Aug 25, 2010

n/t..

--
Don
http://www.pbase.com/dond

Tammy T · Aug 25, 2010

Anfy said:
Tammy T said:

Dave, Thank you for confirming my experience that G11 has the best IQ among Canon advanced compacts, including S90 and G10, at least in RAW.
...Again, the G11 IQ looks better than the G10 IQ.

Click to expand...

Although I never owned the G11 (I have a G10 and a S90) I thought general consensus was that at lowest ISO (80-200) G10 IQ should be noticeably better than that of G11 - I gave another look at IR comparometer, and again agreed on that.

That's what I thought after reading reviews and charts online. That's why I bought a G10. But after using both my (subjective) evaluation is that G11 IQ is a bit better than G10 IQ. Maybe it is less detailed when cropping, but the global IQ (constrast, colors, clarity) of the G11 is a bit better. Again, just my subjective observation. Or I got a perfect copy of the G11. Grrr ... I returned it.

Canon DSLR · Aug 25, 2010

Well, that's very disappointing if your observations prove correct. I'd like to see what you think after spending a lot more time with it, but I understand if you have to return it soon. I'll wait for some professional reviews to really put the S95 through its paces before I make up my mind, but I'll keep your comments in mind. Other early reviews seem to be very positive. Here's hoping you just got a lemon.

daveb99 said:
I really do get the impression that Canon have optimised the sensor for HD video (badly...!) at the expense of still image quality.

Yes, I know, direct comparisons of RAW images would be the acid test - but I never had an S90, and couldn't read the S95 RAW files for reasons stated in my original post. Unless the in-camera Jpegs processing is way off in the S95 (unlikely) then I'd say that the RAW files won't be a match for the G11 (or the S90 for that matter - from what I've read, the S90 and G11 IQ is almost identical at the same focal lengths/apertures)

For those of you who might think my tests were a little subjective, I'm not a beginner with photography, I have got a qualification and a 5D SLR with some nice lenses as well as my G11. Really not trying to blow my own trumpet at all, just trying to say that I know a little bit about image quality, i.e. I'm not a beginner who has some nice gear or whatever. My photos won't win any awards but I understand photography, if that makes sense.

Put simply - I'm used to looking at my G11 jpegs and the S95 jpegs were poor in comparison. Soft around the edges is the best description I can come up with - and this applies to the HD video quality as well). I could have had a lemon I suppose.

caissam · Aug 25, 2010

Canon DSLR said:
Well, that's very disappointing if your observations prove correct.

Me be you should check some pics from people who knew how to get the best out of the S95!

Some amazimg pics u ll finde at

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oscar210/

pittguy53178 · Aug 25, 2010

I am saying it looks worse than cameras from last year and definitely does not look HD. FZ35 video looks better, and videos from the LX5 look even better than that.
Canon should have not released HD video if the quality was going to be so poor.

_Bowhunter · Aug 25, 2010

pittguy53178 said:
I am saying it looks worse than cameras from last year and definitely does not look HD. FZ35 video looks better, and videos from the LX5 look even better than that.
Canon should have not released HD video if the quality was going to be so poor.

You realize that logic makes no sense.

Lucien · Aug 25, 2010

Without seeing S90 direct comparison with S95 I think we can't conclude anything yet. The G11 is slightly better than S90 currently but not everyone may see it unless you look 1:1 pixel. It is possible that the PP has changed and causing more artifacts. I'd imagine the new better low-light is bit more noise filtering.

I still don't get why Canon removed super fine JPG given memory is cheap and looking at 1:1 pixel you probably see always some artifacts.

Regarding video I checked a few on youtube and looks in line what I'd expect for P&S camera HD video. E.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMryun3cxDE&fmt=22 looks to me same as other 720p video pocket camera's.

24fps is ok as long as you don't pan (or do it super slowly). 30fps still would have been nicer but this won't replace a camcorder anyway.

pittguy53178 · Aug 25, 2010

But it looks like upscaled VGA-not HD and is choppy compared to the video from Panasonics. I really wanted to get this camera. I am disappointed in the video. Video is not overly important to me now, but I want to have the option of getting decent video if I am going to pay $400 for a camera. I may as well pay an extra $100 for an LX5 if I am already going to spend that much and have more long term options.

Moef · Aug 25, 2010

About the spot thing. I had the exact same problem with me Sony HX5V. A shadow circle or spot suddenly appeared on all my video and photos, and also visible on the camera LCD. I'm not 100% sure, but aren't the Canon and Sony using the same sensor, or is it the 4500? There was nothing on the lens, so I got an exchange. But I've delivered both Sony cams back. I decided to do so, as the sound was sooo bad on the HX5V, and the photos wasn't that great, only middle good.

gail said:
Cailean Gallimore said:

Canon - hummpff... I've had enough of Canon releasing cameras with problems that could and should have been dealt with in the design stage, and then releasing a successor that has had only SOME of the problems resolved. Come on Canon - do better.

Click to expand...

You ain't kidding.

I just packed up the sd4000 to be returned tomorrow. Very obvious spot on the lens that appears in photos with light backgrounds...and on the LCD.

Canon can do much better; question is, why don't they?

--
gail ~ http://www.pbase.com/gailb

My Canon s90 BLOG: http://www.digicamhelp.com/camera-logs/canon-s90/canon-s90-first-impressions/

--
-------
Moef

Lucien · Aug 25, 2010

pittguy53178 said:
But it looks like upscaled VGA-not HD and is choppy compared to the video from Panasonics. I really wanted to get this camera. I am disappointed in the video. Video is not overly important to me now, but I want to have the option of getting decent video if I am going to pay $400 for a camera. I may as well pay an extra $100 for an LX5 if I am already going to spend that much and have more long term options.

Definitely looks HD to me. Just run that same video in 480p and you see less detail.

But yes 24fps is choppy if there's faster movement (movies look fine in 24fps but not so much your home video's). I'm also disappointed they just couldn't get 6fps more. Maybe they could have dropped AVCHD compression since that's typically expensive. The SD4500 can even do 1080p but not sure about PQ yet.

Returning my S95 - very disappointing

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Active member

Member

Simon97

Guest

Leading Member

Active member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Active member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts