|
I just lost my Panasonic Lumix FX-100 and so am looking for a new camera. The FX-100 had a great battery life and I had no problems with it so I'm interested in knowing what the equivalent Panasonic to the Canon s95 is. Also, why the s95 is superior to it. I have no problem buying the s95, but I'd like to understand why.
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2010 01:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
It's 560,000 won (about $500) here in Korea although that includes a spare unofficial battery, 8GB card and a case. I'll probably still buy it but it's a little expensive.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2010 05:31
|
|
|
Is there any reason to not disable digital zoom? Does using it have any advantage at all? I have an s95 and it was one of the first things I did.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 15:29
|
|
|
When I bought my Canon s95 here in Korea the battery charger came with an AC cable. I know you can get them with built in plugs but does anyone have any experience charging their NB-6L with USB?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2011 09:00
|
|
|
spf3million posted:The s90/s95 easily fits into the front pocket of a pair of jeans (assuming you are wearing mens jeans). I never use a case with it, haven't seen the need. Can't argue with the price point though. The s95 fits in skinny jean pockets too!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2011 09:37
|
|
|
spog posted:Do you mean connect the camera to USB and charge the battery? I am pretty sure you cannot do that. I mean the second one. I'm going to be travelling for a while and not always have reliable access to mains electricity. I'm going to take 3 batteries, but if I had a way of charging the battery with USB then I could charge using something like http://www.amazon.com/Tekkeon-TekCharge-Mobile-Battery-Charger/dp/B0014KLX9C/ref=pd_cp_e_1 which uses AA batteries.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2011 15:05
|
|
|
I think you're probably right. I'll pick up some extra batteries and run them in a cycle so I know which ones to charge. If I stop somewhere for 30+ minutes I'll set them charging. I decided to do a bit of a test to see how good my unofficial battery was. Not very scientific but it's making me think that when I buy more batteries they'll be Canon ones.. or at least a different fake one. In my first test I charged both my batteries and then using chdk to show battery life tested how long it took to go from 90% to 60%. I turned power savings so it didn't turn off for 3 minutes and pressed the AF button every 2 minutes to keep it awake. I didn't actually take any photos. The unofficial battery lasted 40:20, the official one lasted 1:06:25. In my second test I recharged the battery. Changed chdk to show me the voltage and then set a script to take a picture every 2 seconds. I started at 3.9v and left it running until the battery ran out. The unofficial one took 558 pictures, the official one 1016.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2011 14:20
|
|
|
I had an issue and accidentally lost some pictures taken in cr2 format RAW on my s95. I managed to recover them but some of them are corrupt and won't open in Lightroom. Is there some software I can use? Googling around seems to throw up software to undelete pictures rather than showing what is left of corrupt ones and 'restoring' them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2012 17:45
|
|
|
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? Two things... 1. Is that even the case on Manual mode? 2. How about using CHDK to be able to let you set all those things, even ones outside of the limits Canon pre-defines.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2012 00:43
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:S100 is down to $325 at Adorama. Very tempting. $365 when I just added it. What's the release cycle like? I just lost my s95 and am looking to get a replacement. I've got 4-5 weeks that I can wait, and would of course prefer to not buy an s100 if they're about to replace it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2012 01:14
|
|
|
Spime Wrangler posted:The S100/110 can only do long exposures at ISO 80. Using CHDK gets around that, but yes that is ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2013 03:14
|
|
|
Costello Jello posted:The s110 is cheaper because only the smaller shops still have stock of the s100 so they have poorer prices, as its a discontinued model now. So buy the s110 if it is cheaper, it is the same camera with a few added features like GPS. The s100 had GPS, the main thing that the s110 added was a touchscreen.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
Is an RX100 iii likely to come out any time soon? I'm going to be picking up an RX100, or ii, but I'm not sure if the ii is worth the money. I'd never use the wifi sharing - I don't have a smartphone and I can't see the kind of wifi I get being good at sharing 20 megapixel pics too quickly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Its not like you can find other p&s with a fixed lens. s120 doesn't have CHDK on it yet .. or so Google seems to say.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:I'm in the exact same boat, never considered a pop-up viewfinder. Assuming the lens is still sharp enough on the wide end at f/2, literally every criticism of the RX100 (except price) has now been addressed. I may not be an early adopter, but I definitely want one. Worthwhile bracketing? Timelapse photos? Just two things I wish my RX100 had
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2014 06:55
|
|
|
Didn't they also improve the sensor and add things like WiFi ? Also option to be able to take better night movies cos you can take 24fps instead of just 50. If money isn't a question, the Mk3 is better than the Mk1. If it is, and it's a newbie, I think the s120 is probably a better choice. I've used the s95, s100, and now Mk1 and while the Mk1 is my favourite, my mum finds it easier to use the s110 that she has than my Mk1.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 13:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
RFX posted:My fiancee wants a point and shoot for our honeymoon. She tried playing with my dad's DSLR for a bit but felt she was never going to fully commit to it, plus doesn't want to have to carry so much while we're traveling this summer. I think the RX100 is the best buy for us, since we'd like to stay under $500. Seeing all the recommendations in this thread has just pushed me towards it more, but I was unclear if people are talking about only the Mk3 of the RX100 or if they're referring to the older ones as well. The only thing that stopped me from buying it already is that it feels weird to buy a product that is technically 3 years old. Is there any reason I shouldn't buy the Mark I or will it still be solid? I've not tried the MKIII but the MKI and MKII are both very similar. I've now got the MKII but find the moveable screen and the wireless functionality to be a complete waste of time for me. The MKI is still a fantastic camera.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2015 21:03
|
|