s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

Started Sep 16, 2010 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
PaulRivers Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

All these number are timed over a period of 30 seconds (I used the stopwatch on my phone).

Pressing the shutter button over and over again as fast as possible (repeated this 3 times for each camera, but got the same numbers each time):
s90 - 9 shots
s95 - 12 shots

Put the camera in continuous + autofocus mode and held down the shutter button:
s90 - 13
s95 - 18-19

Continuous - no autofocus
s90 - 14 or 15
s95 - 26

stlsportscom Regular Member • Posts: 201
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

very nice comparison, Paul. Very nice. Well done!

 stlsportscom's gear list:stlsportscom's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Canon ELPH 300 HS Canon EOS 40D Canon EOS 350D Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM +6 more
srsteve Forum Member • Posts: 77
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

Thanks Paul,

I read and observed that the S95 was faster but it is always nice to have confirmation.

meanwhile
meanwhile Senior Member • Posts: 1,303
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

Thanks Paul!

Is that JPEG only, or RAW+JPEG?

 meanwhile's gear list:meanwhile's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 OSS +4 more
PaulRivers OP Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

meanwhile wrote:

Thanks Paul!

Is that JPEG only, or RAW+JPEG?

RAW+JPEG

meanwhile
meanwhile Senior Member • Posts: 1,303
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

Ah, OK, nice. Annoying question I know, but is shooting just JPEG quicker? That's just under 1fps, when Canon is saying 1.9 in the specs.

 meanwhile's gear list:meanwhile's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 OSS +4 more
PaulRivers OP Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

I had some free time this weekend and decided to test "Just JPG". I used "Reset All" in the camera menu a lot.

However...um, I decided to retest RAW+JPG as well. And while my original numbers were mostly within the margin of error, it looks like my continuous + autofocus numbers were way off. I feel kind of embarrassed...all I can say is that I made an honest effort at it, and despite doing the previous test before I seem to have somehow messed up that comparison. I don't know how that happened.

Here's for JPG only, the first run through I wanted to verify my numbers, and the second run through I did "Reset All" before shooting.

Press the shutter button as quickly as possible
s95 - 15 (RAW+JPG - 13)
s90 - 14 (RAW+JPG - 11)

Continuous + AF
s95 22 (RAW+JPG - 19)
s90 19 (RAW+JPG - 17)

Continuous - no AF
s95 - 55 (RAW+JPG - 27)
s90 - 28 (RAW+JPG - 20)

I'm not surprised some of the numbers have changed a little bit - different lighting conditions or doing the test slightly differently can do that. The Continuous + Autofocus number though...I really apologize, I have no idea how I ended up with a number that was that far off.

Overall, the s95 seems slightly faster than the s90, though the 11-to-13 number is not as impressive as the 9-12 number, but that's within the margin of error (one camera takes the pic just as I lift off the shutter button, the other camera almost takes the pic but I just lift off the shutter button before it does).

The one area that's really doubled is the "Continuous No Autofocus" times - in jpg they've actually doubled, in RAW the difference isn't quite as noticeable.

Both cameras had a fully charged battery in them (the battery the camera came with for both), and both used the same Transcend 16gb SDHC card I purchased off of Amazon (I switched the card between the 2 cameras for each test).

If someone else who owns both an s90 and s95 wants to verify my numbers, that would be great . Again, I apologize for any mixup. All I can say is that I'm just a guy trying this stuff out and posting the info for free.

meanwhile
meanwhile Senior Member • Posts: 1,303
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

Awesome Paul, huge thanks for that!k

 meanwhile's gear list:meanwhile's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 OSS +4 more
PaulRivers OP Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

meanwhile wrote:

Awesome Paul, huge thanks for that!k

You're welcome! thanks for posting back - good to now someone is reading my stuff.

maintenance New Member • Posts: 14
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

PaulRivers wrote:

If someone else who owns both an s90 and s95 wants to verify my numbers, that would be great .

From CHDK Development forum:
http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?&topic=5641.msg54851#msg54851

When examining the startup code for initialing the MCR registers, it appears that 128 MB is allocated to the raw image buffers, opposed to 64 MB for the S90, having the same number of MP. I suspect this is due to the in-camera HDR, needing to buffer three shots in RAM prior to the HDR.

The executable code section of the firmware is about 12% larger than the S90.

rayman 2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,228
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

Great Paul thanks for the comparison I too will try it out since I also got both cameras...
Peter

PaulRivers OP Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

rayman 2 wrote:

Great Paul thanks for the comparison I too will try it out since I also got both cameras...
Peter

That would be great.

Scales USA Veteran Member • Posts: 3,121
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

PaulRivers wrote:

All these number are timed over a period of 30 seconds (I used the stopwatch on my phone).

Pressing the shutter button over and over again as fast as possible (repeated this 3 times for each camera, but got the same numbers each time):
s90 - 9 shots
s95 - 12 shots

Put the camera in continuous + autofocus mode and held down the shutter button:
s90 - 13
s95 - 18-19

Continuous - no autofocus
s90 - 14 or 15

The numbers are good only for the exact lighting, distance to subject, same contrast, etc, and as such cannot be repeated unless you have a studio setup with fixed lighting, etc. They do serve to show the relative difference in that situation, so can we expect the S95 to be slightly faster all around? I'd say that comparing them under different conditions might help decide.

 Scales USA's gear list:Scales USA's gear list
Canon G1 X II
PaulRivers OP Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

Scales USA wrote:

PaulRivers wrote:

All these number are timed over a period of 30 seconds (I used the stopwatch on my phone).

Pressing the shutter button over and over again as fast as possible (repeated this 3 times for each camera, but got the same numbers each time):
s90 - 9 shots
s95 - 12 shots

Put the camera in continuous + autofocus mode and held down the shutter button:
s90 - 13
s95 - 18-19

Continuous - no autofocus
s90 - 14 or 15

The numbers are good only for the exact lighting, distance to subject, same contrast, etc, and as such cannot be repeated unless you have a studio setup with fixed lighting, etc. They do serve to show the relative difference in that situation, so can we expect the S95 to be slightly faster all around? I'd say that comparing them under different conditions might help decide.

Yes.

lol

emutier Regular Member • Posts: 114
my s90 vs s95 timings (jpg)

the s95 is MUCH faster (shot in M, continuous).

s90 jpg at f2 1/100 iso80 = 55 frames/min
s95 jpg at f2 1/100 iso80 = 115 frames/min

s90 lowlight at f4 1/125 iso320 = 121 fpm
s95 lowlight at f4 1/125 iso320 = 217 fpm

I meassured by tipping the burst-"beat" in my kaossilator (an instrument), it should be +-5% accurate

that means nothing more than the s95 shoting almost as fast as the s90 in lowlight mode - and at ca. 3,6fps in lowlight. nice!

but the speed for both cameras depends on the amount of light. in bright light the s95 is REALLY fast, especially in lowlight-mode on iso320 of course. but if you have to go slower than 1/40 the speed decreases (on 1/10 it's 98fpm at s95, 1/4 = 79fpm). NR takes the same time as the picture itself, right? guess thats why.

PaulRivers OP Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: my s90 vs s95 timings (jpg)

emutier wrote:

the s95 is MUCH faster (shot in M, continuous).

s90 jpg at f2 1/100 iso80 = 55 frames/min
s95 jpg at f2 1/100 iso80 = 115 frames/min

s90 lowlight at f4 1/125 iso320 = 121 fpm
s95 lowlight at f4 1/125 iso320 = 217 fpm

I meassured by tipping the burst-"beat" in my kaossilator (an instrument), it should be +-5% accurate

that means nothing more than the s95 shoting almost as fast as the s90 in lowlight mode - and at ca. 3,6fps in lowlight. nice!

but the speed for both cameras depends on the amount of light. in bright light the s95 is REALLY fast, especially in lowlight-mode on iso320 of course. but if you have to go slower than 1/40 the speed decreases (on 1/10 it's 98fpm at s95, 1/4 = 79fpm). NR takes the same time as the picture itself, right? guess thats why.

Hi, thanks for posting your results.

The s95 is twice as fast as the s90 - though only in "Continuous (no af)" mode, and only when shooting jpg (not RAW).

Would love to your your results when shooting RAW, or in other modes.

PaulRivers OP Veteran Member • Posts: 7,420
Re: s90 vs s95 timings over 30 seconds

Just thought I would add a link in this thread - I also did timings of the s95 alone with different settings to try to figure out if there's any way to substantially reduce autofocus/autoexposure time (there isn't, even if you set everything manually unfortunately) -

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1010&message=36368479

emutier Regular Member • Posts: 114
strange timings with RAW

Would love to your your results when shooting RAW, or in other modes.

I don't shoot RAW, but I tried - and found out that it is not really measurable...

RAW shooting with same settings is 59fpm with the S95 - taking pictures of my ceiling (with a lamp). after ca. 15 frames the speed decreases little.

taking pictures of my screen, the buffer runs out(?) after 2-3 frames (!) and after that the speed is just 40fpm with same settings and everything. tried again with jpg only - no problem.

different with S90: 49fpm on the ceiling, 45fpm on the screen... strange

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads