S90 vs SD4000IS

I am looking for a small compact to complete my 5D2. I want a small size for pocketability as I mainly want it for travelling and to bring with me more oftenly than my DSLR. I was looking in the used department and I am relucting at the S90 or SD4000IS, both f/2 max aperture. S90 has a bigger sensor but SD4000IS has a 720p video mode...

I was wondering which has the best IQ in daylight, any difference ? Any other specs i should consider ? thx

You might find some answers here;

http://www.digicamhelp​.com …s/camera-logs/sd4000-s90/

Dennis

nice, thanks Dennis

Another you might look at would be the SD4500 IS.
1080p on video. Aperature isn't quite as fast as the 4000. 10x optical, 10MP.
Just ordered one two hours ago just because I needed something quick instead of having to always grab the big boy.
$150 at Beach Camera.
I'll find out if I screwed up, in a week.

I'd go with the S95. Canon refined the control wheel and included HD video. Other than that it's pretty much the same as the S90

s90 has the advantage of the larger sensor. this allows for better low light photos. s90 also offers RAW. In terms of normal daylight photos in jpg, both cameras probably do not look too different in terms of IQ, thats the case with most point and shoots. however, if you in low light situations and take advantage of RAW, the photos are worlds apart. At the end, which one is better, if you want the best IQ and the ability to tweak, go for the S90. If you just want to take quick snaps and videos, then go for the sd4000. I never found video too important. but thats me.

Do the S90 has the possibility to do timelapse with an internal intervalometer ?

joelmarineau wrote in post #14380215
Do the S90 has the possibility to do timelapse with an internal intervalometer ?

Nope

Actually, personally, I wouldn't suggest either. I never quite understand how people who own super expensive dslr's want to cut corners on cost when buying a compact (which costs significantly, significantly less to being with), but...

The s90 was Canon's first model of this kind of camera. The body is slick kind of like a bar of soap. A number of people complained that they would hit the wheel on the back of the camera by accident and changing the exposure compensation, ruining all their shots after that until they figured it out. It's also a rather slow camera (not that the later models are exactly speedy, but the s95 was particularly slow). When I moved to the s95 the picture quality only improved a little, but it was just a nicer camera to use.

The s95 didn't have any major flaws, and you can buy a refurbished one from the official Canon store for $280:
http://shop.usa.canon.​com …uct_10051_10051​_276388_-1

The sd4000 was also Canon's first model in it's category. It had a bit of a reputation for having a soft lens and kind of soft pics. Otherwise it was ok.

However, it's replacement - the 500hs - only costs $180 *new* on amazon. It's main drawback is that it's kind of slippery as well, and it's touchscreen controls have gotten not-so-great reviews. But it takes sharper pics than the sd4000.

I own the Canon s100. While there has not been a huge difference in picture quality between it and my previous s95, I really do like it's very improved ergonomics, and it's slightly better low light performance (and the s100 is much better at iso3200 and iso6400 than the s95, but I rarely go that high).

To me, it would be between the s95 and the s100. There's nothing horribly wrong with the s95 that the s100 fixes, but for me it's worth the cost difference for the improved ergonomics and slightly better low light performance of the s100.

P.S. The s95 supports CHDK, while the s100 does not (not yet, at least). CHDK (I believe) lets you do intervalometer stuff, and well as a whole bunch of other customizations.