Is the S-100 significantly better than the S-95?

[MikeFairbanks]

Originally Posted by spear

In good light even the Iphone 4 camera will do an excellent job and you really won't find much difference with a good P&S against even a top DSLR. .

There's a huge difference between my Elph 110HS and my Iphone4. The resolution is much better on the Elph and, most important in day-to-day situations, the Optical stabilization on the Elph really works (and works well).

[PaulRivers]

Originally Posted by MikeFairbanks

There's a huge difference between my Elph 110HS and my Iphone4. The resolution is much better on the Elph and, most important in day-to-day situations, the Optical stabilization on the Elph really works (and works well).

There is a difference, but there is not a *huge* difference. Imaging Resource actually took studio shots with the iPhone 4s -
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Compare it to the 100hs, and you can see the difference at 100%, but probably not at screen size.

[MikeFairbanks]

Studio tests aren't as realistic as going out to shoot. Image stabilization, zoom, mp, and more make a difference.

[hnikesch]

My wife's 4s is impressive for a phone but it's still a phone not a camera. Mike is correct no image stabilization or zoom, slow to focus, poor low light performance and a sensor and lens 1/2 the size of my P&S. The only thing it has going for it is my wife carries it. So a poor (in my opinion) image is batter than no image.

Hans

[spear]

To be honest, the Iphone 4s is incredibly impressive as a phone camera and it really closed the gap between phone cameras and P&S cameras. When I see the huge sensor advances Sony has made with the D800 sensor and when you factor in the fact that Sony also makes the Iphone camera sensor, then the Iphone 5 camera should make the gap even smaller. In good light I really am impressed by the quality of the Iphone 4s images!

[Tsmith]

Originally Posted by riverdog1

For landscape shots I handhold a circular polarizer filter in front of the lens....works great.

Oddly enough I haven't thought of doing that but certainly will in two weeks hiking in GNP ... thanks for the tip!

[yogestee]

I've had a S95 for quite awhile now. A work mate who is a very accomplished photographer with many years experience, asked me about my S95. She bought a S100 as the S95 was difficult to get. She also shoots with a 5D MkII.

She's just spent two weeks tripping around Myanmar. She showed me her pics of the trip up on a computer screen. I thought they were taken with her 5D, but she didn't even take the 5D to Myanmar. Wonderful photography.

[pbelarge]

I have been shooting the s95 for about a year. I am not in love with the IQ or the noise issues in lower (not even low) light. I have tweaked the settings, yet I am still not uber happy with it.
I stayed away from the s100 upgrade as I did not think it was enough of a difference, although I could be wrong.

I carry the s95 every day, I am now using it mostly to video what I am doing. It is decent for that, but as I get more involved with video, I am thinking more towards a video cam.

If I had a choice between the s95 or s100, and I did not own a previous model, I would definitely get the s100.
A very strong plus for the "s" model is its portability!

Good luck with your choice!

[yogestee]

Originally Posted by pbelarge

I have been shooting the s95 for about a year. I am not in love with the IQ or the noise issues in lower (not even low) light. I have tweaked the settings, yet I am still not uber happy with it.
I stayed away from the s100 upgrade as I did not think it was enough of a difference, although I could be wrong.

I carry the s95 every day, I am now using it mostly to video what I am doing. It is decent for that, but as I get more involved with video, I am thinking more towards a video cam.

If I had a choice between the s95 or s100, and I did not own a previous model, I would definitely get the s100.
A very strong plus for the "s" model is its portability!

Good luck with your choice!

Agreed,, the S95 does decent videos.

[MikeFairbanks]

Speaking of video, my daughter and I have having a blast using the super slow-motion feature on my Elph 110.

Yesterday I filmed her spitting water across the front yard, and replayed in slow motion it's hilarious.

Unfortunately, because of a bad angle, it looks like she's spitting all over the American flag hanging from my porch, so we're going to reshoot that scene.


If you want funny, go to Youtube and do a search for the Slo-Mo guys. Face slaps and more.

[MassWineGuy]

Where would you folks place the S90 in this lot? Significantly below the 95 and 100 in image quality, performance, etc.?

[CincyTriGuy]

Originally Posted by MassWineGuy

Where would you folks place the S90 in this lot? Significantly below the 95 and 100 in image quality, performance, etc.?

IQ is extremely close from the S90 through the S100 (I've owned all 3). High ISO performance of the S100 is notably better than the previous 2.

IMO the most significant difference between the 3 is ergonomics, the S100 is far easier to hold and use.

[MassWineGuy]

Thanks, Jason. Then I think I'll hang on to the S90 until I make a significant upgrade.

[PaulRivers]

Originally Posted by MassWineGuy

Where would you folks place the S90 in this lot? Significantly below the 95 and 100 in image quality, performance, etc.?

In image quality, they're not to dissimilar. The s100 does noteably better at very high iso's, but that's like iso3200 and iso6400. (I prefer to shoot raw and turn detail noise reduction off).

The s90 was an incredibly slippery camera, the s95 was better but usually required 2 hands, the s100 is the first of the series that I am actually comfortable shooting 1 handed, the ergonomics got a *lot* better.

I believe that between the s90 and the s95 shot-to-shot time about doubled, it didn't change much with the s100.

If you want a real jump in responsiveness and performance, I've read repeatedly that the Sony rx100's autofocus is blazingly fast, as well as it's 10fps full resolution burst and shot to shot times. It also has a sensor that's twice as big as the s100's. It's more expensive, and a little bit thicker though (hard to say if it's "jeans pocketable", it's smaller than the lx5 and g12).

In the fall they'll probably come out with an s105 or s110 or something. Though I don't know if it will be any significant improvement either.

I would bet that the fall after this fall, with the number of fast-focussing cameras that have come out in the last 2 months, that Canon will significantly improve the responsiveness and shot-to-shot times of the s-series. But that is a ways off.

[tmwag]

Originally Posted by MassWineGuy

Where would you folks place the S90 in this lot? Significantly below the 95 and 100 in image quality, performance, etc.?

The S95 is a improved S90. The most notable difference is video. Canon made a few ergonomic changes...a more grippy surface..also the rear control wheel was tightened up (on the S95) so it didn't spin so freely. Other than that I doubt anyone could notice a difference in IQ.

The S100 has a wider zoom a CMOS sensor vs the CCD on the S90 and S95 and of course HD video. The S90 was a game changer and copied camera. I would love to have a excellent copy of a S90. In the right hands can produce images just as good as a S100 imo