S95 testing - clear, sharp, quality photos?

One other factor that has made a sharpness difference with my use of my S95: I have to concentrate very hard on holding the camera as still as possible, especially when pushing the shutter button. Most of the pics you posted do not have high shutter speeds. Do you have a tripod? If you do, take a few test shots using it (or at least with the S95 sitting on something very stable - not hand held). It's possible that you're not holding the camera as still as you think you are - when it's out at arms length so you can see the LCD screen. One advantage of an SLR is the additional bracing you get by holding the cam against your head. Personally, I agree that some of the shots you posted are fuzzy. If you find the same fuzzy results using a tripod, exchange the S95 if possible. Something is not right - maybe a lens issue. On the other hand, if the tripod results are sharper, work on your "holding still" technique. I'm not insulting you in any way. I've found that eliminating minute movement at the moment of exposure is critical for razor sharp landscape photos, and is not as easy as it sounds. That's why many pros who sell landscape prints for a living use tripods.

PaulRivers said:

gollywop said:

PaulRivers said:

I...don't entirely agree with that, I'm not terribly fond of all the colors my s95 produces. Though to be fair there are plenty of complaints with other models.

Click to expand...

Have you created a profile for your camera?

Click to expand...

What do you mean?

Click to expand...

http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/colorchecker-psssport.shtml

Also, do you use a gray card?
--
gollywop

-----------

guys, thank you for all you opinions, advices and help.

i am pretty surprised by advice to still the camera as possible when taking shot. i thought i dont have to care once having IS camera. (IS is one reson for a new camera) but now i see its not so simple. also, s95 doesnt have noise reduction adjusting option and only way to play with sharpness is one naive option in custom color settings. so noise/sharpness is accesible only via PP.

but more and more i am decided to stay with s95 as returning back to my old camera would be painful

the same place taken with tripod and -1/3 EV as adviced:

gollywop said:

i am pretty surprised by advice to still the camera as possible when taking shot. i thought i dont have to care once having IS camera. (IS is one reson for a new camera)

Click to expand...

In general, IS can only go so far in helping; it doesn't solve all hand-shake problems (my father-in-law, for example, could never make his finger work independently of his hand, and when he pushed the shutter button, the whole camera went down. All his pictures sucked ). However, I am not sure what all these comments are about here because your shots are not all that bad for sharpness or potential sharpness.

Most of the shots you posted were at fairly fast shutter speeds, which, combined with IS, should allow sharp shots without a tripod. The blue garage door, for example, has plenty of sharpness, as does the original of the shot you've redone, with virtually no benefit, with a tripod.

They all can benefit from some additional sharpening in PP, but your camera didn't let you down. The real problem with your shots is their prosaic subjects, lack of composition, and lack of processing for tonal/color strength.

gollywop said:

but now i see its not so simple. also, s95 doesnt have noise reduction adjusting option and only way to play with sharpness is one naive option in custom color settings. so noise/sharpness is accesible only via PP.

Click to expand...

Both are better done in PP. Your best bet would be to shoot Raw, which has no sharpening, NR, or other camera settings applied. Then do all your processing in PP. But some Raw converters have better facility than others.

gollywop said:

but more and more i am decided to stay with s95 as returning back to my old camera would be painful

Click to expand...

The s95 is an excellent camera, and once you get used to using it and processing its images, you are going to be more than happy.

gollywop said:

the same place taken with tripod and -1/3 EV as adviced:

Click to expand...

Again, I'm not sure why you were getting this advice. A tripod is indeed very useful, and for shots that are high on your wish list, it is advisable -- when possible. But for everyday shots (or while traveling), it is not necessary and can even get in the way.

When using a tripod, by the way, you should turn IS off. It can make things worse.

--
gollywop

-----------

The OP Confused me - Just to be clear, none of the measures says that the LX-5 or LX-3 take better photos than the S95/S90/G11/G12. The LX-3 was a good competitor to the G10, but Panasonic hasn't been able to keep up with the latest Sony CCD's that are in the current generation to top Canon compacts.

You mention you are not a P&S shooter so I'd really be interested to know what you are comparing it to. What camera were you using before or are still using along with the S95 ?

In my own experience it's the first compact camera I've ever had that produces excellent results straight out of the camera in JPG. I've left the "my colors" setting as is. I find the colors on the saturated side of neutral but otherwise I've got nothing to complain about. I'd go as far as to say that in genera I need less post processing of the S95 shots than I do with my Nikon DSLR's.

I'll agree about one thing though: That Canon LCD sugar coats the images in some way to make them look better than they really are when viewed full size on a computer screen.

matador88 said:

guys,

I am testing my S95 now (as I have loose lcd and few days left to return it - what I am not sure i will) and I am wondering where are all that great photos I see in all reviews and samples and galleries from this little devil. no matter what i try i am getting tragical pictures comparing to almost everything i've seen on web as samples. are those sample pics taken by pros, using all experience, creative aproach? do they take them raw and develope in their high end software using all their knowledge? or are these pictures real world, some automatic, some using manual controls? no matter i try (and i have full manual control camera for many years so i am not p&s shooter only), i get very unconvinient ones. once i take them they are great on lcd (understanding it looks different on small high res quality display) but once i look on them on pc monitor i am really disapointed. unsharp, soft, brutal grainy on higher iso, unnatural colors..

is there any possibility something other than can play role other than hands behind the camera? or the expectations were too high and it cant do miracles (but many samples are saying it does)?

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/michelfleury

Compared to what I get with mine, I find your pictures lack detail and contrast. Colors are OK. Did you change the custom settings for sharpness ?

Also, at what time of day did you take most of these shots ? Some appear to have been taken at midday which will do nothing to enhance scenery shots as you probably know. Take a few scenery shots at dusk or dawn in aperture priority mode at f/2.8 to f/4 preferably on a tripod or stable surface so you can keep the ISO down low.

--
http://www.pbase.com/michelfleury

gollywop said:

PaulRivers said:

gollywop said:

PaulRivers said:

I...don't entirely agree with that, I'm not terribly fond of all the colors my s95 produces. Though to be fair there are plenty of complaints with other models.

Click to expand...

Have you created a profile for your camera?

Click to expand...

What do you mean?

Click to expand...

http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/colorchecker-psssport.shtml

Click to expand...

Hey, thanks for mentioning that, but...I can't imagine carrying that color checker thing around with me everywhere I go, which it sounds like you would need to do? I bought the s95 because it's so portable...

You wouldn't have any examples would you? The one example on that page, unfortunately, doesn't actually work (the one with the woman with the orange/red scarf).

I know they mentioned that you can create a profile based on 2 pictures, but would that be any better than the built-in profile specific to the camera? Have you used it - any before/after pictures you could share?

gollywop said:

Also, do you use a gray card?

Click to expand...

No, I gave it a lot of thought but I felt like it just wouldn't be portable enough. If I kept it in my wallet it would likely end up a different color than it's supposed to be. My front pockets are rather full already, being that one is dedicated to carrying my s95 around...

I appreciate the mention, and if you have any more info I'd be interested, though I cannot image carrying around that color thing with me for most of my shots...

non p&S shooter - i mean not typical p&s as i have compact camera but with full manual control. i have olympus sp-310 from when it was released (2005) so using manual is not a new thing to me.

the pictures are taken throughout the day from morning to evening - from full sunny daylight to alamost sunset.

more and more i am realising that pictures are good, just little different from what i was expecting and i fully understand why. what i see on forums over the net many people were shocked the same way - fantastic review, great sample pictures, unbelievable results on lcd while trying in shops and then reality on monitor. the problem is i thought that technology went more far that is possible in last 6 years. and it was in connection with price as was expecting more from compact in entry dslr price level (the local shop has olympus e-420 14-42 kit for100€ less than S95!!) comparing to price of "normal" compact. my problem is that i wish fourthirds or entry level dslr pictures in pocketable machine. thought its possible now but its not. cameras like fourthirds seems just right for me but i'd give up using them as carrying is problem for me. i have to have it in pocket - i mean side pocket of my cargo pants, not "jeans" pocket but its not possible either.

so learning, training and post processing is a way for me. i like s95 in many ways, its of course huge step from my old camera and i will stay with it. the last problem is loose lcd. i will try to exchange it for another piece today but i dont believe its gonna be ok as what i understand, whole batches, series are the same. good or bad. and i will be facing situation when they will have 2-3 pieces all with the same problem. and having all cameras in the country from one importer i probably dont have chance to have ok piece. just to decide if to stay with loose lcd or without s95...

Michel F said:

Compared to what I get with mine, I find your pictures lack detail and contrast. Colors are OK. Did you change the custom settings for sharpness ?

Click to expand...

no i didnt change anything. and sharpness is adjustable only in C mode right?

matador88 said:

loose lcd. i will try to exchange it for another piece today but i dont believe its gonna be ok as what i understand, whole batches, series are the same. good or bad. and i will be facing situation when they will have 2-3 pieces all with the same problem. and having all cameras in the country from one importer i probably dont have chance to have ok piece. just to decide if to stay with loose lcd or without s95...

Click to expand...

tried and failed. situation is exactly as i was afraid of. all pieces available have this issue. official (and only one official) importer and service center has the same. but no one complained, no one noticed, i was the first customer asking about loose lcd. thier opinion is that this issue is minor and has no influence on anything.

The best advice I ever got was to remember that you are taking pictures of the light. It's alll about the quality of the light. Harsh light typically obliterates detail and flat light lacks contrast and these issues are evident in all of your first set of sample shots save the one of the store that looks like it was taken more towards sunset.

Your second attempt of the building looks better and seems sharp enough as well.

--
Eric
http://www.pbase.com/haglunde

PaulRivers said:

gollywop said:

PaulRivers said:

gollywop said:

PaulRivers said:

I...don't entirely agree with that, I'm not terribly fond of all the colors my s95 produces. Though to be fair there are plenty of complaints with other models.

Click to expand...

Have you created a profile for your camera?

Click to expand...

What do you mean?

Click to expand...

http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/colorchecker-psssport.shtml

Click to expand...

Hey, thanks for mentioning that, but...I can't imagine carrying that color checker thing around with me everywhere I go, which it sounds like you would need to do? I bought the s95 because it's so portable...

Click to expand...

You don't have to carry the 24-color card around with you (though some do -- I don't); but you do need it to create the profiles. Rather, you can get a small (credit-card sized) WhiBal gray card to take along with you. It has a very nice lanyard that makes portability a snap.

If you do get a 24-color card, consider the Passport rather than the GretagMacbeth. It is smaller and flat (a necessity) whereas the GM tends to curl and is hard to make flat. The X-rite profile-creating software also comes with the Passport card.

PaulRivers said:

You wouldn't have any examples would you? The one example on that page, unfortunately, doesn't actually work (the one with the woman with the orange/red scarf).

I know they mentioned that you can create a profile based on 2 pictures, but would that be any better than the built-in profile specific to the camera?

Click to expand...

I can't see how the two-picture method would be of much service. They mention that because the creation of a proper target may seem daunting to some. I've found that a single profile made from a target taken in good sunlight does very well for a wide variety of situations -- certainly almost all the conditions in which I shoot. If I had incandescent lights, and did a lot of shooting under them, I'd probably make another profile for that.

If you're interested in creating a target and profile, I've described the process in some detail in an earlier post at http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1039&message=35818268

PaulRivers said:

PaulRivers said:

Also, do you use a gray card?

Click to expand...

No, I gave it a lot of thought but I felt like it just wouldn't be portable enough. If I kept it in my wallet it would likely end up a different color than it's supposed to be.

Click to expand...

As noted, the WhiBal card is small and readily hung about the neck (and tucked into the shirt front if your pocket is full).

See http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/whibal.shtml for a review. Get the small one; the large (studio) version is unnecessary. B&H or Amazon have them available for about $30.

I will say, however, that the auto WB on the s90 (and, I assume, the s95 as well) is pretty good under good outdoor, sunlit conditions. But there are times, including when shooting in the shade and in mixed lighting, that it is not very effective.

--
gollywop

-----------

Hey, I appreciate all your advice. For the moment, as I mentioned, the problem is mainly that it's just to inconvenient to carry this stuff with me. Almost all my photos are taken in social situations where I can't really have a bag, and carrying something around my neck would be impossible (dancing, specifically).

Though to be fair, since I go to the same venues repeatedly maybe I could just do it once...on the other hand they change which lights are on sometimes...erg, lol.

No chance you would know of any comparison pics of this stuff with an s95 would you?

Thanks again for the info.

PaulRivers said:

Hey, I appreciate all your advice. For the moment, as I mentioned, the problem is mainly that it's just to inconvenient to carry this stuff with me.

Click to expand...

It's not really "stuff." You would add a simple, small credit-card sized card on a lanyard to your things. That's all.

PaulRivers said:

No chance you would know of any comparison pics of this stuff with an s95 would you?

Click to expand...

Here are three examples of the effect of using a gray card. The first is with an Olympus E-510, the second two are with an s90. These are followed by a comparison of the use of the Adobe Standard profile with the custom profile made for the s90.

For the gray-card comparisons, the shot to the left is with Auto WB, the shot to the right is WB corrected according to the gray card. For the profile comparison, the shot to the left is with Adobe Standard profile; the shot to the right is with the custom profile.

This first gives a great idea of how auto WB treats a solid expanse of a nice blue sky:



Here is the s90 auto WB vs. gray-card corrected WB



And here is an s90 in mixed lighting. The shot was taken using fill flash and the mix of that and filtered sunlight caused the green of the plant and the color of Thaddeus to be off, subtly but noticeably. A gray card shot taken with the same lighting provided the needed correction -- the colors are spot on.



And here is the comparison of the Adobe Standard profile (left) with the s90 custom profile (right), both using the gray-card corrected WB.



--
gollywop

-----------

I know you have prior experience but I suggest taking a photography class at a local group. I did and it was fun. Most will have DSLR but not all and really most of the critique which is the high point applies to p&s also. I've taken a couple of local courses and really enjoyed them and it's cheap. The S95 is a good camera but it's not magic.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ralphandjenny/
Nikon D Seven Thousand Canon S ninety five

Hey, thanks for posting pictures.

gollywop said:

PaulRivers said:

Hey, I appreciate all your advice. For the moment, as I mentioned, the problem is mainly that it's just to inconvenient to carry this stuff with me.

Click to expand...

It's not really "stuff." You would add a simple, small credit-card sized card on a lanyard to your things. That's all.

Click to expand...

I was referring to both things, but even with just the gray card...I can't wear it around my neck, not only might it look weird but more importantly when social dancing I can't have something flipping around.

And my pocket is unfortunately already crammed up with my camera in one pocket, and my phone, keys, car fob, pencil, and work keycard in the other because my camera takes up the entire other pocket...there's not really room, and I imagine that even though it's a solid color all the way through the gray card would get absolutely destroyed after several months in my pocket...

gollywop said:

gollywop said:

No chance you would know of any comparison pics of this stuff with an s95 would you?

Click to expand...

Here are three examples of the effect of using a gray card. The first is with an Olympus E-510, the second two are with an s90. These are followed by a comparison of the use of the Adobe Standard profile with the custom profile made for the s90.

For the gray-card comparisons, the shot to the left is with Auto WB, the shot to the right is WB corrected according to the gray card. For the profile comparison, the shot to the left is with Adobe Standard profile; the shot to the right is with the custom profile.

Click to expand...

Thanks for posting the pictures - that's very interesting. It kinda seems like in several of them the colors get better, but also a little oversaturated...though a bit less saturation might fix that. I mean, the Olympus picture is definitely to yellow. The gray card version has more natural colors except that it's way saturated and vivid. The cat picture does look just plain better. For the tree/barn picture, I wasn't there...I assume there was no actual yellow in the leaves? The leaves on the tree do look...very, very, very green. Again though, the colors overall look like just reducing the saturation by 1 might bring it back to "neutral" colors.

I am slightly confused about which card you mean - luminous landscape picture has 4 cards in it, black, white, and 2 greys that look like they're attached, but the one I found on amazon looks like it's only 1 card?

http://www.amazon.com/GENUINE-WhiBal-Certified-Neutral-Balance/dp/B004G3NW5M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1305236994&sr=8-1

(Side note - I just noticed they have a keychain card...maybe that would do it and be small enough to be carryable...)

I'll most likely order one to give it a shot.

I assume from the other thread you linked to on the best way to use the expanded color chart that you've used one - you wouldn't happen to have any sample pictures from that would you?

P.S. Thanks again for posting all this info!

PaulRivers said:

gollywop said:

PaulRivers said:

Hey, I appreciate all your advice. For the moment, as I mentioned, the problem is mainly that it's just to inconvenient to carry this stuff with me.

Click to expand...

It's not really "stuff." You would add a simple, small credit-card sized card on a lanyard to your things. That's all.

Click to expand...

I was referring to both things, but even with just the gray card...I can't wear it around my neck, not only might it look weird but more importantly when social dancing I can't have something flipping around.

Click to expand...

I can see from the nature of these excuses that you are dead set, a priori, against using a gray card.

PaulRivers said:

Thanks for posting the pictures - that's very interesting. It kinda seems like in several of them the colors get better, but also a little oversaturated...though a bit less saturation might fix that. I mean, the Olympus picture is definitely to yellow. The gray card version has more natural colors except that it's way saturated and vivid. The cat picture does look just plain better.

Click to expand...

PaulRivers said:

For the tree/barn picture, I wasn't there...I assume there was no actual yellow in the leaves? The leaves on the tree do look...very, very, very green. Again though, the colors overall look like just reducing the saturation by 1 might bring it back to "neutral" colors.

Click to expand...

I find no such over saturation, but then I'm not viewing things on your monitor.

PaulRivers said:

I am slightly confused about which card you mean

Click to expand...

As I said in my earlier post, I like the WhiBal gray card.

http://www.amazon.com/GENUINE-WhiBal-Certified-Neutral-Balance/dp/tags-on-product/B000ARHJPW

or

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/716944-REG/WhiBal_WB7_PK_White_Balance_G7_Pocket.html

PaulRivers said:

I assume from the other thread you linked to on the best way to use the expanded color chart that you've used one - you wouldn't happen to have any sample pictures from that would you?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean: pictures of the card? pictures using the card. I have many images of the card, which were taken during the target shooting process. I do not use that card in my shots; I use the WhiBal gray card for this purpose.

Here are a couple more examples:

This is a comparison (using an s90) of the auto WB (left) vs. gray-card determined WB (right). You'll have to take my word for it that the gray-card WB is the right color for these rhodies. The auto WB is too blue.



Here is a comparison of the Adobe Standard profile (left) vs. the s90 custom profile (right). The Adobe Standard does fairly well with the rhodie color, but it's still not as good as the custom, and the green of the leaves is definitely off (too yellow) with the Adobe Standard.



--
gollywop

-----------

PaulRivers said:

P.S. Thanks again for posting all this info!

Click to expand...

You're welcome.

--
gollywop

-----------