Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon S100 vs budget MFT?

Go to last post
D

dcstrom

Active member
Messages
99
Reaction score
17
Location
US
Will be going on a looooong motorcycle trip this year, and want to take a good "pocketable" camera, along with my D7000 + assortment of lenses. I was thinking the Canon S100 was going to be "it", but reviews haven't all been fabulous, plus it's expensive, plus it really does have a tiny sensor.

I'm thinking something like the Olympus E-PM1 would be a better bet.
  • It's a little bigger but in some ways that might be better for my big hands.
  • Price is only $10 more than the Canon.
  • I can use it as a second body for my other Nikon lenses by using an adapter. Or keep it small and discreet with the kit lens.
The more I think about it, the more it seems like a no-brainer. Is it? Where's the downside? (I know I don't get autofocus/exposure using the adapter).

Thanks

Trevor
 
maybe you also think about the olx xz-1

--
XZ-1 4ever
No Kangaroos in Austria ;)
 
The size difference is pretty meaningful - the S100 is truly pocketable, while the E-PM1 with kit zoom is not.

A small pancake lens, like the 17mm f/2.8 or 14mm f/2.5, can make the E-PM1 pocketable (if you have largeish pockets, anyway).

If you're not determined to break the pocket barrier, I think the E-PM1 is a fine choice.
 
I owned an S95 and did a lot of "road trip" type work with it all around Texas, Arizona, and Utah. It's a very nice package with good looking out-of-camera JPEGs. I'm sure the S100 is even better.

If you're already bringing a D7000, I'd go with the S100. A Lens Mate adapter is very handy, and allows you to use filters with it.
 
dcstrom said:
The more I think about it, the more it seems like a no-brainer. Is it? Where's the downside? (I know I don't get autofocus/exposure using the adapter).
Click to expand...
The difference is that S100 is pocketable. E-PM1 with an equivalent zoom is significantly larger. Some people have pockets that can contain it, but it's not flat, and it will interfere with your freedom of movement. If you intend to keep it in your saddle bag then it's not an issue of course.

Vlad
 
No doubt that the EPM1 is a much more capable camera, but to get the most out of it, you'd need to add a prime or two. There are a few things I would consider. First, the kit lens is slower, at wide angle, than the lens on the S100, which will cost you some of the EPM1's high ISO advantage. Second, at base ISO the S100 performs pretty close to the EPM1 in regard to dynamic range and color depth if you believe the DXO testing. The S95 is not far behind either, and I've seen a lot of very nice landscape shots out of the S95 at base ISO. Third, the S100 lens will give you a bit more wide angle if you need it. And fourth, I've never found my PL3 (slightly larger than PM1) or my girlfriend's GF3/14mm to be "pocketable" while my S95 is indeed pocketable.

I think it really boils down to whether you'd get more use out of the smaller camera. If not, then I'd go EPM1 as it is a much more capable tool. But if you'll take more shots by having the smaller camera, I'd go with the S100 or even the cheaper S95. Unfortunately, while the S95 prices went down a bunch after the S100 announcement, they've gone back up to around $340 the last time I checked.
 
Doesn't it depend on what you're going to shoot?

For portraits and flowers with shallow DOF, the E-PM1 with the 45mm f/1.8 would undoubtedly be better than the S100.

For landscapes at f/8.0, the S100 might be better as a smaller package if your copy has acceptable border sharpness.

Then again, if you'll also have a D7000 + lenses with you anyway, it seems to me that "pocketable" would be the greatest criteria for a second camera (advantage S100). Carrying an E-PM1 with just the 14-42 kit lens doesn't seem like much of an advantage in your situation.
 
dcstrom said:
Will be going on a looooong motorcycle trip this year, and want to take a good "pocketable" camera, along with my D7000 + assortment of lenses. I was thinking the Canon S100 was going to be "it", but reviews haven't all been fabulous, plus it's expensive, plus it really does have a tiny sensor.
Click to expand...
The S100 is truly a small camera you can put in any pants pockets, and the "tiny" sensor isn't a big deal at all for daytime photos. (OK, there's a little noise visible at 100% view onscreen, but I don't find that objectionable, even on very large prints.)

However, the "S" series have rather bad lenses, or perhaps bad quality control. When I took the same photo with my E-PM1 and then the S90, I immediately saw a very large improvement in image quality. However, when I did the same experiment with the Canon G9, I couldn't tell the difference, and in fact, the Canon G9 was SHARPER. See here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=40443548

However, the G9 will not fit in your pants pocket, and Canon doesn't sell it anymore.

However, you might consider whether you really need the D7000 at all. What do you intend to do with it that you can't do with a smaller m43 system?
 
I had a GF1, GH1 and S95 at one point. But I found that although I loved the pocketability of the S95 (it is a HUGE difference even when you put a pancake on an m43 camera). I couldn't live without the bokeh afforded but the larger sensor. So i sold it.
 
+1

Oly xz-1 matches/beats E-PM1 with kit lens. I know as I own both.
 
elliotsam said:
I had a GF1, GH1 and S95 at one point. But I found that although I loved the pocketability of the S95 (it is a HUGE difference even when you put a pancake on an m43 camera). I couldn't live without the bokeh afforded but the larger sensor. So i sold it.
Click to expand...
The S95 isn't meant to take photos with shallow DOF. Of course, neither is m43 with kit lens.
 
Kevdog said:
+1

Oly xz-1 matches/beats E-PM1 with kit lens. I know as I own both.
Click to expand...
Prices:
XZ-1: $500
S100: $410

What else is small? With CSCs, its either putting a prime on, or getting a very compact zoom lens. There are rare. Perhaps the Nikon has them, as does Panasonic with their higher quality zoom lens, the G X Vario PZ 14-42.

The Nikon J is not really smaller than m43, and with two lenses costs. $750. Over budget I guess.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Digital Micro Four Thirds Camera W/14mm Lens F/2.5 Price:$569.95 That is really competitive if you are happy with 28mm wide shots only.

1 J1 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 10-30mm VR Zoom Lens (White)
Price:$597

Panasonic

Lumix DMC-GF3 Digital Camera Kit (Black) Includes Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm Lens
Price:$698.00

LUMIX DMC-GX1 Digital Camera & G X VARIO PZ 14-42mm Lens Kit (Black)
Price:$950.00

The GF2 with the 14mm is worth the extra money, you'll get a lot in 'cause its wide. And night time shots may work with that fastish lens.

How important is the zoom option (the new $400 GX Vario PZ zoom OIS 14-42 lens is tiny) - is it worth the extra $300 over the S100? It would if you use the tele a fair bit IMO. Wide, the S100's lens's F/1.8 removes the larger sensor advantage of the 14-42, because at 14 the Panasonic lens is only F/3.5.

Which brings us back to size ... none of these other choice cameras, approach the size of the Canon S100 in one's pocket. And with F/1.8 wide open, the Canon can achieve a lot. The CSC cameras only make sense, if you use more than on lens IMO. Or instead, a prime. But that inhibits many of your potential shots.

So I'd got the Canon S100, because its so much smaller, and its only $410, a good camera as well, sell it at the end of your trip and buy a CSC then.
 
Wow, the XZ-1 has gone up. It was $425 when I bought it! You can still get it for $400 on Ebay new.

The XZ-1 is not as pocket-able as the S95/S100, no that is true. BUT the XZ-1 lens stays at f2.5 fully zoomed in. That makes a big difference and does allow you to get either low light shots zoomed in or decent bokeh. The lens on the XZ-1 is fantastic and sharper than any of the m4/3 kit lenses except the 14-42X or the 14-45 Pany (which is no longer a kit lens really).

Also, the XZ-1 is much quicker to focus and snap the picture. I know the S95 is slow to operate. I'm not sure on the S100.

The GF2 with 14mm is not as good as the XZ-1. It gets noisy above ISO 800 and the XZ-1 can almost match its ISO performance, but with a lens that's still 1 stop faster. I'm selling my GF2 and 14mm because of this.

The one place the XZ-1 is not as good is in video. You have to set it to a center focus point or manual focus to prevent the focus hunting. The center focus trick works for us. But now the E-PM1 has taken over video duties so it's no longer an issue for us.

For better photos and camera operation, I'd chose the XZ-1. If video is more important or fully pocket-able size, I'd probably choose the S100.

Ultimate quality in a small package, then I'd get:
E-PM1
14-42X lens
[email protected] (I prefer the [email protected], but it's a lot bigger).

This setup matches/beats the XZ-1 and is still quite small. It's much more expensive. It'd be easier to get the GF3 + X lens combo ($570 on amazon warehouse deals under used). But I like the E-PM1 better. But if you got the GF3 bundle and 20mm you could be there for around $1000 and it would still fit in a tiny camera bag.
Melbourne Park said:
Kevdog said:
+1

Oly xz-1 matches/beats E-PM1 with kit lens. I know as I own both.
Click to expand...
Prices:
XZ-1: $500
S100: $410

What else is small? With CSCs, its either putting a prime on, or getting a very compact zoom lens. There are rare. Perhaps the Nikon has them, as does Panasonic with their higher quality zoom lens, the G X Vario PZ 14-42.

The Nikon J is not really smaller than m43, and with two lenses costs. $750. Over budget I guess.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Digital Micro Four Thirds Camera W/14mm Lens F/2.5 Price:$569.95 That is really competitive if you are happy with 28mm wide shots only.

1 J1 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 10-30mm VR Zoom Lens (White)
Price:$597

Panasonic

Lumix DMC-GF3 Digital Camera Kit (Black) Includes Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm Lens
Price:$698.00

LUMIX DMC-GX1 Digital Camera & G X VARIO PZ 14-42mm Lens Kit (Black)
Price:$950.00

The GF2 with the 14mm is worth the extra money, you'll get a lot in 'cause its wide. And night time shots may work with that fastish lens.

How important is the zoom option (the new $400 GX Vario PZ zoom OIS 14-42 lens is tiny) - is it worth the extra $300 over the S100? It would if you use the tele a fair bit IMO. Wide, the S100's lens's F/1.8 removes the larger sensor advantage of the 14-42, because at 14 the Panasonic lens is only F/3.5.

Which brings us back to size ... none of these other choice cameras, approach the size of the Canon S100 in one's pocket. And with F/1.8 wide open, the Canon can achieve a lot. The CSC cameras only make sense, if you use more than on lens IMO. Or instead, a prime. But that inhibits many of your potential shots.

So I'd got the Canon S100, because its so much smaller, and its only $410, a good camera as well, sell it at the end of your trip and buy a CSC then.
Click to expand...
 
dcstrom said:
Will be going on a looooong motorcycle trip this year, and want to take a good "pocketable" camera, along with my D7000 + assortment of lenses. I was thinking the Canon S100 was going to be "it", but reviews haven't all been fabulous, plus it's expensive, plus it really does have a tiny sensor.
Click to expand...
I go out for short trips most weeks but my only motor is the one that involves my legs moving up and down. This has some advantages over the motorcycling fraternity as it keeps both you and the planet in better shape. When cycling, even on short trips, I find it best to keep my camera on a neckstrap and inside my waterproof and highly visible jacket. I have tried my small m43 camera (GF1) but find it is still just a little too large. The EP-M1 will be smaller but still nowhere near as small as one of the quality compacts such as the Canon S-100, Olympus ZX1 and Panasonic LX5. I would advise you to visit a good photo store and try out these three in your hands before going down the m43 route.

Personally I still use a Panasonic LX3 when cycling as the more recent cameras listed above are only marginally more improved and the LX3 is built like a brick privy and should last me for years.
 
BigBarney said:
I go out for short trips most weeks but my only motor is the one that involves my legs moving up and down. This has some advantages over the motorcycling fraternity as it keeps both you and the planet in better shape. When cycling, even on short trips, I find it best to keep my camera on a neckstrap and inside my waterproof and highly visible jacket. I have tried my small m43 camera (GF1) but find it is still just a little too large. The EP-M1 will be smaller but still nowhere near as small as one of the quality compacts such as the Canon S-100, Olympus ZX1 and Panasonic LX5. I would advise you to visit a good photo store and try out these three in your hands before going down the m43 route.
Click to expand...
I've never found a great way to carry a M4/3 camera around while cycling. I think perhaps a messenger style bag would work OK, but I don't have such a thing yet. Slipping a small cam like the S95/100 into my jersey pocket would probably be the easiest and most convenient approach.

I once made the mistake of placing a compact digicam in my saddlebag in a soft case. The tools in there jostled around and beat the thing up pretty badly!
 
BigBarney said:
I go out for short trips most weeks but my only motor is the one that involves my legs moving up and down. This has some advantages over the motorcycling fraternity as it keeps both you and the planet in better shape.
Click to expand...
What's up with the preaching? "keeps the planet in better shape" funny

To the OP you should also get an HD helmet cam for video...I've seen some awesome work with those.
 
sigala1 said:
elliotsam said:
I had a GF1, GH1 and S95 at one point. But I found that although I loved the pocketability of the S95 (it is a HUGE difference even when you put a pancake on an m43 camera). I couldn't live without the bokeh afforded but the larger sensor. So i sold it.
Click to expand...
The S95 isn't meant to take photos with shallow DOF. Of course, neither is m43 with kit lens.
Click to expand...
But even a GF1 with the kit lens can produce much shallower DOF than the S95. And with the 20mm lens it's not even worth comparing.
 
elliotsam said:
sigala1 said:
elliotsam said:
I had a GF1, GH1 and S95 at one point. But I found that although I loved the pocketability of the S95 (it is a HUGE difference even when you put a pancake on an m43 camera). I couldn't live without the bokeh afforded but the larger sensor. So i sold it.
Click to expand...
The S95 isn't meant to take photos with shallow DOF. Of course, neither is m43 with kit lens.
Click to expand...
But even a GF1 with the kit lens can produce much shallower DOF than the S95. And with the 20mm lens it's not even worth comparing.
Click to expand...
In most cases, the DOF you get with m43 and kit lens is just shallow enough to be annoying my making parts of the image less sharp, without in any way creating an artistic shallow DOF affect.

DOF is something you want a lot of or none at all. There's no middle ground.

The 25mm at f/1.4 is pretty nice.
 
TomCreek said:
What's up with the preaching? "keeps the planet in better shape" funny
Click to expand...
Well I do appreciate those trying to keep the planet in better shape, but I'm in a hurry to see it all before it's gone - hence the motorcycle. Hey, at least it's not a Hummer!
TomCreek said:
To the OP you should also get an HD helmet cam for video...I've seen some awesome work with those.
Click to expand...
Yeah I have two actually - Contour HD and Roam. Allows me to mount in different locations on the bike. Quality is not fantastic, but good for what it is. Still getting to grips with them. I imagine if I want to get some higher quality vid, I'll figure out a way to mount the S100 (whose size would be better for this than an M43).

Thanks all for the help and good advice. I guess I'm still undecided - although there is a good case for sticking with the original plan of the S100, but I'll take a close look at the XZ1.

I was disappointed there was nothing comparable in Canon/Nikon's recent announcements of new P&S models.

I have a few months before I leave - I guess I'll hold off making a decision.

Trevor
 
dcstrom said:
Thanks all for the help and good advice. I guess I'm still undecided - although there is a good case for sticking with the original plan of the S100, but I'll take a close look at the XZ1.
Click to expand...
The S100 is apparently very close to the XZ1 and is actually superior for video. The lens is not as fast, but its sensor is one generation newer, which nearly closes the gap in low light. The XZ1 is also bigger than the S100 by a good bit. If/when there is an XZ1 successor or an LX5 successor they will likewise leapfrog ahead of the S100, but until then there seems little to recommend that class of camera over the S100.

If you want something smaller than the E-PM1 + pancake I think the S100 is simply the best bet currently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top