Point & Shoots: Compensating For Our Small Sensors (Buy the S110/RX100/X20)

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Point & Shoots: Compensating For Our Small Sensors (Buy the S110/RX100/X20)

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

I know the common advice is buy an S95, but I really loathe Canon. I'd be all over the Nikon P300 if it shot raw, but I hesitate because it apparently won't. I shoot on a D3100 when luggage size isn't an issue, and I'd be using the P&S pretty much exclusively for business trips when I don't want to carry my SLR. Are there any other cameras I should consider?

This site makes it sound like the Nikon is roughly better in almost all respects except lack of raw anyway (edit: Oh, and the sensor. How big a deal is the sensor?):

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-lx5-vs-canon-s95-vs-nikon-p300-15928

And it brings up the LX5, but the price combined with the increase in size puts me off.

I guess it's basically down to how much I care about RAW, and since I'm basically sightseeing with this camera, I'm not sure it REALLY matters. The fact that it shoots faster, has a faster lens, and has better battery life, in addition to not being Canon, ... I dunno. I'm tempted to just go for it.

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Aug 2, 2011

# ¿ Aug 2, 2011 19:30

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 11:27

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

qirex posted:

Both the S90 and the S95 were announced in the middle of August, has there been any rumors about a new model?

Actually, you might be on to something ... according to DPreview, both the S90 and the S95 were announced on August 19th. I think I'll probably at least wait until the 19th before I buy a P&S - I may hate canon, but if they make something totally irresistible, I, well, won't resist it. Hah.

# ¿ Aug 2, 2011 23:37

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Haggins posted:

What's wrong with Canon anyway?

Disclaimer: I'm aware this is petty and likely just due to the employee I spoke to, not necessarily the company.

Back in February, I bought a refurb XSi from Canon. Within two days of receipt, the flash release stopped working. I phoned Canon up and let them know. They refused to replace it with a different camera, stating that they would repair it, but would not replace it. Since this would make the second time they tried to fix the camera, I did not feel comfortable with this. Canon refused to budge, and that's why I now own about $2500 of Nikon gear.

Basically, I think that was a bad customer service move, especially given I was buying my first DSLR.

Edit: I'm not so principled that I would buy an inferior camera because of the experience. Now I'm just wondering if the faster shooting of the Nikon mightn't be worth the loss of RAW. The Olympus XZ1 looks like a great option, but the price sucks.

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 00:24 on Aug 3, 2011

# ¿ Aug 3, 2011 00:21

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Lowness 72 posted:

So let me get this straight. The nikon s95 equivalent is:
1. Cheaper
2. Faster
3. Better battery life

If I dont care about raw then the nikon sounds like the better deal. Does the canon shoot better in low light or something?

Probably not. The sensor is bigger, and the camera is marginally smaller. Those combined with the ability to shoot RAW are what is making me still consider it. From the reviews I've seen, though, the Nikon is looking pretty good.

Edit: thought it wouldn't do MF, found out it's just a strange implementation.

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Aug 3, 2011

# ¿ Aug 3, 2011 00:47

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Haggins posted:

I'd probably be pissed too so I can't blame you. However, I will say that a few of us goons, including myself, have had great service in regards to our S90/95s. A couple months ago the LCD went out on my S90. It was one month out of warranty, but I figured I'd give it a shot and send it in to Canon. I mailed it USPS priority on a Saturday and had it fixed and back on my doorstep the following Friday. No questions asked and the only thing I paid for was the $4 to ship it to Canon.

dissss posted:

That sensor, the convenience of the controls and ability to shoot RAW are pretty much the whole reason the S90/5 gets recommended.

Without those features the Nikon is more like a high quality version of Canons lower end point and shoots (the Ixus 300HS for instance)

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_sd4000is&products=nikon_cpp300&products=canon_s95

If you're not planning on shooting RAW anyway or using manual controls then I can see the appeal of the Nikon

Just ordered the S95. Screw you guys

# ¿ Aug 3, 2011 17:52

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

tron- posted:

The best thing the S90/S95 has going for it are the controls! If there was a point and shoot that had better optics and a better senor but required me to dig through menus to change aperture or exposure compensation, I wouldn't touch it.

It's a camera that fits in your pocket and is a dream to use if you are used to SLRs. The optics and image quality are a bonus. If you're a manufacturer bigot, go ahead and use something inferior. It's a tool, not a part of your identity.

Keep reading

# ¿ Aug 5, 2011 01:04

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Lowness 72 posted:

I have 0 photographic experience (well I did take a class in HS but I don't remember a thing). However, I would certainly like to learn.

We've decided to pull the trigger this week in time for a wedding this weekend. However, the wife is still not happy with a $365 price point for the S95.

Will I regret purchasing a nicer ELPH model instead? As much as I'd love to get the S95 - will I really notice the difference as a newbie?

As a newbie, maybe not. If you intend to grow beyond that, yes, absolutely.

I bought a bridge camera several years ago thinking that the zoom, sensor, etc were "good enough". When I realize what I can do now with my S95 (and, of course, DSLR), I feel really dumb for spending ~$400 on what was really just a glorified point & shoot.

The S95 is one of the few point & shoot cameras that can take truly good pictures - there really is a big difference. If your wife doesn't like the price point, look into used S90s - they should be a fair bit cheaper, and they're nearly as good.

# ¿ Aug 29, 2011 16:09

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

jsmith114 posted:

Well, a refurbished S90 is $279. It is not $200 but fits under your hard cap of $300. It is also not new and isn't at B&H.

They're also considerably cheaper used on ebay.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2011 14:17

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

dongsweep posted:

Sorry for the dumb question but I just bought a Nikon p500 today and I am playing around with it and am trying to figure out how to turn the massive red flash before a picture is taken off? I really don't even know what it is called, is it a red eye reducer? Maybe an auto focus thing? I took off red eye in the menu but other than that I don't know what to do. Thanks!

"AF Assist"

# ¿ Oct 9, 2011 00:55

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

dongsweep posted:

Thank you very much!

Absolutely. I usually keep it off on my D3100 because Nikon apparently sourced spare aircraft landing lights for it on that model.

# ¿ Oct 9, 2011 01:05

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

uXs posted:

Is being able to shoot in RAW worth that much?

In addition to what Zhentar said, yes, being able to shoot in RAW is worth that much. Forget to check your white balance? Fix it in post. Under or over expose? Fix it in post. Etc.

# ¿ Oct 28, 2011 02:56

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

What did you pay for it?

If you got an amazing deal, I'd just PS/LR it out of the pictures and not worry about it. If it wasn't amazing, though, I'd send it back and look for another.

# ¿ Nov 27, 2011 22:45

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

The Panasonic LX5 is $269 today. Not quite pocketable, but great camera, from what I've heard.

# ¿ Dec 2, 2011 21:02

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Pope Mobile posted:

I'm looking for a simple P&S that will be used by someone who never really takes the camera off auto and has a flash you can toggle.

My girlfriend loves her Casio Exilim EX-ZR100

# ¿ Dec 8, 2011 00:21

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

whatever7 posted:

IMO the Best used P&S cameras in different price ranges, use image quality as priority:

$100 Fuji F200 exr (well I brought mine refub for $100 but the ebay price seem to have gone up) or a F100fd

$150 Panasonic LX3

$230 Get the new LX5 or s95 deal, or a used Sigma DP1

Over $250 I would get a used Sony NEX-3 or Samsung NX100

Granted this is after prices have dropped (I bought the S95 awhile ago) but that still puts me in the "drat, I bought the wrong camera" category.

At the same time, I don't think the NEX-3 (not sure about the NX100, though I suspect it's similar) would work as well for me as the S95 - I use my D7000 whenever bulk isn't an issue, and when it is, I want something that will fit in my jeans pocket.

# ¿ Dec 31, 2011 01:41

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

What I got from those reviews wasn't that the photos were "lower quality", it was that it doesn't faithfully replicate colors, in favor of making them more vivid (brighter sky, stuff like that).

I've got the S95, absolutely love it, don't have any particular motivation to move to the S100, but I don't think it would be a step down. I'm not taking pictures to memorialize the world, I'm taking pictures because I like to, because I like memories, and because I like having sweet desktop backgrounds.

tl;dr: The S100 probably takes beautiful photos. Follow the OP's advice - get the most expensive Canon you can. If you decide that "you can" means the S95, go for it. You won't regret it.

# ¿ Jan 3, 2012 02:42

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

One of my family members is looking to buy a decent camera and I'm thinking I'm going to hook him up on my Canon S95. The question, then, is what should I upgrade to? The S100 isn't compelling to me. I like the Fuji X10 and the Nikon J1 but don't know if it's the way I should go ... suggestions?

Great picture quality and size/pocketability are what's most important to me. I have an SLR for when size isn't an issue, so I guess that's the priority.

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Jan 8, 2012

# ¿ Jan 8, 2012 23:10

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

whatever7 posted:

If you don't want a S100, there isn't much that can interest you.

Fuji X10, Canon G1X, Sigma DP1x.

It's not so much that I don't want an S100, it just really isn't compelling to me over the S95. I love my S95, I'm just using this as an excuse to upgrade to something else I might want.

Looking like the X10 is the way to go. What's an S95 worth? $250? Edit: Just read back up the page ... lol. So less than $280. I figure if I sell it to him for $200, that makes the X10 pretty palatable, price-wise.

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Jan 9, 2012

# ¿ Jan 9, 2012 02:40

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Pockyless posted:

Be aware that the x10 has a really annoying quirk of making little white balls on highlights.

Thanks for pointing it out. Checked it out, not that worried about it. Sounds like it's a software issue and only happens at low iso in low light situations ... things I'm not likely to combine.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2012 06:16

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

soy posted:

I'd like to see the same pic taken on a 40d and an s100 side by side.. I tried it with the 40d and the s90, and obviously its pretty noticeable at low light.

Obviously you're going to have a larger range of conditions you can shoot in with the slr, but as long as you're within those, it's hard for most to tell the difference. I get compliments on my s95 photos at least as often as on my D7000 - if not more, because I shoot with it more.

# ¿ Jan 22, 2012 04:20

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Mathturbator posted:

Could you be more specific regarding what you don't like? Are they blurred, out of focus? Colors are dull? Shadows too dark?
Learning to use the camera properly is always the best investment, as it will pay off even when/if you upgrade.

Agreed. It's no x100, but the specs aren't bad. Understanding Exposure might be a good place to start.

# ¿ Jan 30, 2012 07:52

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

whoops

# ¿ Mar 2, 2012 17:09

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Harry Potter on Ice posted:

Well this is a huge bummer, I'm by no means a good photographer but having the s100 be limited to iso80 for any time above 1 second loving sucks. Why did they do this? Everything else is great... Time to return it.. I love messing around camping and this was a big letdown. Any recommendations for something in the similar price range that can do this?

S95

# ¿ Jun 27, 2012 07:16

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

spog posted:

I am curious why you need this functionality?

I'd find it pretty restricting to only be able to use the weakest available ISO setting while shooting long exposures. Shooting on a dark night?

# ¿ Jun 28, 2012 19:42

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

There aren't a huge number of differences. Same sensor, same glass, S95 has better IS, control layout was changed up for the S95 (broadly hailed as good changes), stereo audio, better video.

Unless she's all "I WANT AN S95", she'll be fine with an S90.

# ¿ Sep 21, 2012 23:54

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

From what I've read, the XZ-1 seems to have a larger but not necessarily better sensor, though I think a lot of the noise issues perhaps come from the NR done on JPEGs in camera. Since I only shoot RAW, I suspect this won't be an issue.

I picked up an XZ-1 and currently have an S95, so I should have some better feedback about the comparison next weekend. If the XZ-1 can do high ISO shooting relatively well, I expect I'll be selling my S95 soon.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2012 19:02

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

HeyEng posted:

I used the XZ-1 for about 6 months. ISO 1600 raw was usable with some lightroom noise reduction. Anything outside of that was a real crapshoot.

Honestly, the shots I took the other night at ISO1000 in relatively low light were pure noisy garbage. I'm going to return this and cannot at all recommend it over an S95/100.

# ¿ Nov 6, 2012 20:04

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

DJExile posted:

My name is DJExile and I am a brand whore

In my defense it wirelessly controls my DSLR flashes and it's a loving f/1.8-2.5.

Is that the XZ-1? Because if so, it's garbage, despite the theoretically great glass.

Edit:
Before the weekend:

Krakkles posted:

From what I've read, the XZ-1 seems to have a larger but not necessarily better sensor, though I think a lot of the noise issues perhaps come from the NR done on JPEGs in camera. Since I only shoot RAW, I suspect this won't be an issue.

I picked up an XZ-1 and currently have an S95, so I should have some better feedback about the comparison next weekend. If the XZ-1 can do high ISO shooting relatively well, I expect I'll be selling my S95 soon.

After the weekend:

Krakkles posted:

Honestly, the shots I took the other night at ISO1000 in relatively low light were pure noisy garbage. I'm going to return this and cannot at all recommend it over an S95/100.

It may have great glass, but the sensor in the S90/95/100 is enough better that it isn't worth it.

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Apr 24, 2013

# ¿ Apr 24, 2013 22:50

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

DJExile posted:

S95's a drat good camera, no denying that, but the XZ-1 fits my hand a bit better, has a much better aperture on the long end (f/2.5 is only theoretically better than f/4.9?), has a better battery, dedicated video button, and will run my flashes through the hotshoe and wirelessly.

Plus I like the goofy art filters and have enjoyed how Oly shots JPEGs because I'm lazy ~~sometimes~~ a lot of times.

S95 is definitely more pocketable, and they have good IS, but I wanted a little more control over DOF and I don't do much low-light shooting anyway.

i said the glass is "theoretically great", not theoretically better / faster / anything comparative. Sweet straw man, though.

Hey, if it makes you happy, cool. That sensor is garbage, though.

# ¿ Apr 25, 2013 05:09

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

VomitOnLino posted:

The sensor is not garbage, if you compare it to other cameras from it's class/time. Like the S95.

And to prove I'm not talking out of my rear end, look at the link here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusXZ1/9

Be sure to check out the RAW comparison (next page), where the XZ-1 beats the (doctored) S95 RAW so much in terms of clarity, color and detail that it just isn't funny.
Heck it even stands on it's own against the newer S100, S110 iterations.

I know this because I researched it, as I wanted one of these some time ago, but couldn't justify the cost/size factor as I was already owner of a Canon S90.
Yes it has it quirks, but so do all compact P&S cameras.

And of course it will lose out to the APS-C compact crowd, but different horses for courses and all that.
If you are really serious about sensor size and noise / dynamic range, a compact isn't the way to go anyway - either at least full frame digital or film.

Edit: Removed personal attack. Sorry, shouldn't do this.

Disclaimer: My personal style of photography definitely biases my opinion here.

I've found that most cameras, at ISO100, can produce images that look just fine. And yes, the XZ-1 may well be better at ISO100 in good lighting.

However, by ISO 400 (based on my own experience AND that dpreview article), it produces considerably more noise than the S95, and it's a complete shitshow by ISO1000, whereas the S95 is still producing very usable images.

So, by my standard (ability to capture images in less than perfect lighting conditions), the sensor is garbage.

wa27 posted:

I've been enjoying my XZ-1, but I got it when Amazon was selling them for $200 last year and I'm not sure I could have got anything better for that price.

That was when I picked one up as well, but I already had an S95 at the time, and there was simply no comparison.

# ¿ Apr 25, 2013 16:40

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

It's worth pointing out - if you intend to take pictures of your child, you want fast AF performance and good low light performance.

Trust. Me.

# ¿ Apr 17, 2017 22:26

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Have they really not updated the Canon S in 3.5 years?

I want to upgrade my S95 meaningfully, but the RX100 V is a bit rich for my blood. Maybe.

I think really I'm hoping there's some reasonable alternative to the V that I can buy instead of what I know I'll probably do, which is buy the V.

Also, I think I'm not really considering the IV because the V has faster AF and I don't think I could leave that on the table. Feel free to tell me I'm crazy, but bear in mind my other camera is a D500, so fast AF really is a high priority to me.

Any other cameras I should consider?

# ¿ May 12, 2017 07:21

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 11:27

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

What's a good option for an amateur children's sports photographer? I've got a family member who wants to get good shots of her kid's football games.

Her budget is "under a grand", so I take that to mean less is better, no more than $1000. She's ok with used, so I'm thinking a used last model canon or Nikon SLR with a zoom lens, but that could be too complex, so I want to explore some other options.

# ¿ Aug 11, 2017 19:23

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > Point & Shoots: Compensating For Our Small Sensors (Buy the S110/RX100/X20)