Canon S120 image quality is very disappointing

[lmkk]

For most part, my DSLR stays at home gathering dust, I use that Canon T3i with two lens comb for trips or special events due to its size. For causal parties and events, I rely on old trusted Canon S400 or A620. I recently got a new Canon S120, I had hoped it can replace my old yet still working, sharp picture taking S400 & A620. But look at the pictures taken with S120, they all look like have a hazy on them, the pictures taken with S400 and A620 are mush sharper, cleaner and crisper. Now I have a buyer’s remorse, wish I have kept A620.

Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120 pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 years old S400 and A620. I thought that new 1/1.7” CMOS sensor should have advantage over the 10+ year old 1/1.8” CCD sensors, it does not.

The most important part of any camera is the ability to take sharp, clean pictures, all others are just add-ons. Now I am thinking to let go S120 and get back A620.

 

[NWT]

It was not my experience with s120. For general use, it is a excellent camera for the size, with limited use in low light conditions, but that's the case with all small sensor cameras.

 

[Tom Z]

I don't think they are as bad as you describe.

I did find that DxO really makes the photos pop out of their shell.

 

[MikeJ9116]

I had an S110 for a while and found it to take decent photos. Nothing to fawn over though. I understand your fondness for the photo quality of some older cameras. One older camera that I still have that continues to impress me is the Sony P200. It is a stellar performer that I still use to this day for many tasks. The photos that come out of it need little work and it just gets the job done reliably and with ease.

 

[PhotoRaw]

>Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120
>pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 yearsA620.

Thanks for telling me this. I was going to get the Canon S120 and now I will not.
I am looking for something small for low light, and for less than $400, and the S120 was on the list.

Any others for less than $400? For low light and raw?

Yes, the old cameras were great I remember the A650is and the A590is.

 

[Combatmedic870]

For most part, my DSLR stays at home gathering dust, I use that Canon T3i with two lens comb for trips or special events due to its size. For causal parties and events, I rely on old trusted Canon S400 or A620. I recently got a new Canon S120, I had hoped it can replace my old yet still working, sharp picture taking S400 & A620. But look at the pictures taken with S120, they all look like have a hazy on them, the pictures taken with S400 and A620 are mush sharper, cleaner and crisper. Now I have a buyer’s remorse, wish I have kept A620.

Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120 pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 years old S400 and A620. I thought that new 1/1.7” CMOS sensor should have advantage over the 10+ year old 1/1.8” CCD sensors, it does not.

The most important part of any camera is the ability to take sharp, clean pictures, all others are just add-ons. Now I am thinking to let go S120 and get back A620.

CCD sensors are actually very very good at base ISO. CMOS sensors are far far far far better at low light and are capable of 1080p. One thing I love about my XZ-1. It's CCD is great at base ISO. It's why I didn't buy the XZ-2, it's high ISO may be a stop better but I doubt it would be cleaner at base.

Also lower your expectations. It's a point and shoot camera. If your not going to be printing larger then an 8x10/12 then you'll never see any noise. I don't know if you ever do print your photos. For Web use you'll never see any noise. Are you printing 13x19's or larger? If not then it's really a mute point.
--
Ryan,

 

[ludwik123]

For most part, my DSLR stays at home gathering dust, I use that Canon T3i with two lens comb for trips or special events due to its size. For causal parties and events, I rely on old trusted Canon S400 or A620. I recently got a new Canon S120, I had hoped it can replace my old yet still working, sharp picture taking S400 & A620. But look at the pictures taken with S120, they all look like have a hazy on them, the pictures taken with S400 and A620 are mush sharper, cleaner and crisper. Now I have a buyer’s remorse, wish I have kept A620.

Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120 pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 years old S400 and A620. I thought that new 1/1.7” CMOS sensor should have advantage over the 10+ year old 1/1.8” CCD sensors, it does not.

The most important part of any camera is the ability to take sharp, clean pictures, all others are just add-ons. Now I am thinking to let go S120 and get back A620.

Today's compacts are actually much better than those of 10 years ago.

The problem is the legacy of the megapixel war. The IQ of the sensors is better at all iso values but the megapixel count has increased faster than the improvements. The results when you pixel peep at images is that the old ones look sharp and the new ones a bit fuzzy round the edges.

If you resize both sets of images to some compromise megapixel value such as 10MP. You should find that the S120 images look sharper and the A620 images start to look fuzzy.

 

[boogisha]

For most part, my DSLR stays at home gathering dust, I use that Canon T3i with two lens comb for trips or special events due to its size. For causal parties and events, I rely on old trusted Canon S400 or A620. I recently got a new Canon S120, I had hoped it can replace my old yet still working, sharp picture taking S400 & A620. But look at the pictures taken with S120, they all look like have a hazy on them, the pictures taken with S400 and A620 are mush sharper, cleaner and crisper. Now I have a buyer’s remorse, wish I have kept A620.

Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120 pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 years old S400 and A620. I thought that new 1/1.7” CMOS sensor should have advantage over the 10+ year old 1/1.8” CCD sensors, it does not.

The most important part of any camera is the ability to take sharp, clean pictures, all others are just add-ons. Now I am thinking to let go S120 and get back A620.

Today's compacts are actually much better than those of 10 years ago.

The problem is the legacy of the megapixel war. The IQ of the sensors is better at all iso values but the megapixel count has increased faster than the improvements. The results when you pixel peep at images is that the old ones look sharp and the new ones a bit fuzzy round the edges.

If you resize both sets of images to some compromise megapixel value such as 10MP. You should find that the S120 images look sharper and the A620 images start to look fuzzy.

^^ This.

It`s kind of a way I felt when I took IXUS 220 HS in 2012 (12.1 MP, 1/2.3" CMOS sensor), after owning PowerShot A75 since 2004 (3.2 MP, 1/2.7" CCD sensor) - older camera images just looked better (cleaner, sharper)... when viewed at 100%, and that is part of the issue.

Nowadays cameras (compacts, at least) are hardly made to be viewed at 100%, pixel peeping, but if you print them the same size as you did your old camera images - then new ones should be much better (or at least the same, if lighting is good).

I mean, sure, A75 images look just great - at 2048x1536. Resize your new camera images to same resolution, and they`ll look the same, or better.

The other part of the "issue" why older camera`s seem to have produced better images is because you could only use them in good (or not that bad) lighting, as ISO was pretty limited. I exactly knew when I need to use the flash, and when I shouldn`t even try to take a picture.

Cameras today allow very high ISO values, and while the top ones aren`t really useful for other than having "any" memory being better than none, ISO 800 - 3200 (6400) can still be quite useful, and down-sampled a bit (for example, resized to resolution of that older camera) they look pretty good - where old camera wouldn`t be able to make half a decent picture.

Again, it depends on JPEG algorithm and noise-reduction being applied (you have some in-camera control over it if you shoot JPEG, or total control in post processing if you shoot RAW), where people were complaining on S120 JPEG noise in comparison to S90/S95 (CCD sensor).

I think it comes down to two things - your expectations, and learning to get the most out of the camera. Not each one of them can be used the same, nor one should expect same performance in same circumstances, with the same/similar settings. Cameras today allow for a greater versatility - but that means more chances for user error, as well, producing worse images. With a bit of getting used to the tool you use, it should be much better.

I mainly shoot G7 X now, but I did use S120 for more than a year, and I find it to be a truly great camera - some of my images are posted here, showing my progress with the camera as well (last set of images here , here and here).

 

[Jostian]

>Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120
>pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 yearsA620.

Thanks for telling me this. I was going to get the Canon S120 and now I will not.
I am looking for something small for low light, and for less than $400, and the S120 was on the list.

Any others for less than $400? For low light and raw?

Yes, the old cameras were great I remember the A650is and the A590is.

Fuji X20 or X30, great build, and IQ, Olympus XZ2 is also an option, or maybe an older RX100 from Sony.

 

[PhotoRaw]

Jostian,

I like the Fuji X20 looks better than the X30, but can't find it new one at a good price. The X30 costs $600 and it has a small sensor The RX100 looks like a better choice since it has a bigger sensor and I can find it for about $448. The S120 wins in size, it is smaller, I still haven't ruled it out, but I'm concerned about the noise, IQ, and the small sensor. I hope Canon comes up with something like the Fuji look, small like the S120, and with the RX100 Sony sensor

 

[Jostian]

Jostian,

I like the Fuji X20 looks better than the X30, but can't find it new one at a good price. The X30 costs $600 and it has a small sensor The RX100 looks like a better choice since it has a bigger sensor and I can find it for about $448. The S120 wins in size, it is smaller, I still haven't ruled it out, but I'm concerned about the noise, IQ, and the small sensor. I hope Canon comes up with something like the Fuji look, small like the S120, and with the RX100 Sony sensor

Just remember the X20/30 sensor is a bit bigger than the one in the G16/S120, but the RX100 for $448 odd sounds like a good option imho.

 

[damian5000]

>Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120
>pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 yearsA620.

Thanks for telling me this. I was going to get the Canon S120 and now I will not.
I am looking for something small for low light, and for less than $400, and the S120 was on the list.

Any others for less than $400? For low light and raw?

Yes, the old cameras were great I remember the A650is and the A590is.

Look for real reviews with real pic simples. Especially search here for user boogisha s120 pics. The OP's experience is in the minority.

 

[nafik]

For most part, my DSLR stays at home gathering dust, I use that Canon T3i with two lens comb for trips or special events due to its size. For causal parties and events, I rely on old trusted Canon S400 or A620. I recently got a new Canon S120, I had hoped it can replace my old yet still working, sharp picture taking S400 & A620. But look at the pictures taken with S120, they all look like have a hazy on them, the pictures taken with S400 and A620 are mush sharper, cleaner and crisper. Now I have a buyer’s remorse, wish I have kept A620.

Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120 pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 years old S400 and A620. I thought that new 1/1.7” CMOS sensor should have advantage over the 10+ year old 1/1.8” CCD sensors, it does not.

The most important part of any camera is the ability to take sharp, clean pictures, all others are just add-ons. Now I am thinking to let go S120 and get back A620.

You said:"The most important part of any camera is the ability to take sharp, clean pictures..."

I would suggest to replace the word "camera" with "photographer" (and it is much more than just "sharp, clean pictures").

Unless you got the real lemon, IMHO Canon S90-S120 are superb little cameras (I owned S90 and now S100). They have some limitations just like any other camera but it is us, the shooters, who should know these limitations and be able to work around them.

Recently I bought canon G7x which is more capable camera especially for underwater photography that i use it for. On land I still prefer S100 (smaller, lighter, longer battery life). 120 is basically the same camera.

As for results it really does not matter what camera I use (including 2 SLRs I own). Most of our photography these days is looked at on smartphones and, if we are really lucky, on crappy computer terminals. So viewers do not see what I see on my Mac Retina display anyway.

As for printing, how often do we print 12x18"? I have one print hanging on the wall shot on film in 1999, one print shot on 4 mp Canon A80 and five prints shot on S100. Nobody can tell the difference unless they bring magnifying glass.

 

[BarnET]

>Even at the ISO 100, you can see noise in S120
>pictures, whereas it is total noise free with 10 yearsA620.

Thanks for telling me this. I was going to get the Canon S120 and now I will not.
I am looking for something small for low light, and for less than $400, and the S120 was on the list.

Any others for less than $400? For low light and raw?

Better in a significant way?

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX100-Sensor-Digital-Camera/dp/B00889ST2G/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1442498006&sr=8-1&keywords=Rx100

Amazon.com : Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GM1KS Mirrorless Digital Camera with 12-32mm Silver Lens Kit : Compact System Digital Cameras : Electronics

Amazon.com : Panasonic LUMIX DMC-GM1KS Mirrorless Digital Camera with 12-32mm Silver Lens Kit : Compact System Digital Cameras : Electronics

www.amazon.com

G7x is also on the table for a bit more. If you don't mind the slow performance especially in Raw.

then cheaper yet slightly better then the Canon

Amazon.com : Fujifilm XQ1 12MP Digital Camera with 3.0-Inch LCD (Silver) : Point And Shoot Digital Cameras : Electronics

Amazon.com : Fujifilm XQ1 12MP Digital Camera with 3.0-Inch LCD (Silver) : Point And Shoot Digital Cameras : Electronics

www.amazon.com

Other options would be

Panasonic LX-7

Olympus XZ-2

Panasonic MX-1

They all have similar sensor perfomance but brighter lenses at the long-end

 

[rpm40]

Take test shots of the same subject, at the same settings, and compare them at the same size. 100% viewing isnt fair because the newer camera will be taking a photo 3 or 4 times larger.

Also, the new model has a faster lens but may not be as sharp wide open, so you may want to stop down to a similar aperture to compare lens sharpness.

The old cams can still produce very nice results, but comparing apples to apples the new stuff should come out on top.

 

[ludwik123]

Take test shots of the same subject, at the same settings, and compare them at the same size. 100% viewing isnt fair because the newer camera will be taking a photo 3 or 4 times larger.

Also, the new model has a faster lens but may not be as sharp wide open, so you may want to stop down to a similar aperture to compare lens sharpness.

The old cams can still produce very nice results, but comparing apples to apples the new stuff should come out on top.

I have done it and the new cameras win!

I still have a 4MP olympus c765 from 2004 and I compared it to the 16MP p&s olympus SZ16 from 2013.

At the compromise size of 8MP. The new camera was a clear winner in IQ.

And it had a 24X optical zoom vs 10X

better wide angle, was smaller, cheaper, had IS and better in low light.

 

[kdt82002]

I had a few of the Canon SD and A series cameras from 10 years ago. They were great outdoors where there was plenty of light. Indoors in low lighting, you absolutely needed the flash or the picture would come out dark and blurry. The S120 can take great natural looking pictures in low lighting without the flash - that is the big difference. I suggest you take a few pics indoors by turning off the flash on your old Canon cameras and on the S120 and compare picture quality. You will appreciate the S120 a lot more.

 

[PhotoRaw]

The RX100 with a 1 inch sensor and that F 1.8 lens for $448 sounds like a great deal.

And 10 FPS.

But then I took a look at the Fuji X30, and the images seem sharper.

 

[Jostian]

The RX100 with a 1 inch sensor and that F 1.8 lens for $448 sounds like a great deal.

And 10 FPS.

But then I took a look at the Fuji X30, and the images seem sharper.

I had a range of G seies (G12, G15) and when I was looking at the G16 I thought I'd try the X30, and it is something special, the lens is superb and the EVF is peerless (way better than the RX100 IV even). the X30 is the most complete package in the high end Camera game imho. I have the G1X MkII now but miss the uncompromising package the the X30 offered. The G1X mkII has superb IQ, build quality and the touch screen is a blast but the lack of an inbuilt view finder, its size and less than stellar macro are all things that the X30 excelled at.

 

[PhotoRaw]

Jostian, originally I was looking for something for about $400. But now $450 is fine, and that's the price of the RX100 at the moment. The Fuji X30 price is way out of range now but things can change. The Canon S120 still offers the best price and size. Perhaps I should wait for a Thanksgiving sale.