I picked up a new Canon S90 from b&m store this afternoon. Preliminary results are impressive for this little point and shoot. This is not dedicated to the gear heads who want mathematical interpretations - but instead geared towards folks who want to know if they should flop down $400+ bones for a P&S:
1) If you need compact size and image quality - this S90 is it.
2) If you want hi-iso and optical image stablization, this is it.
3) If you want rugged chassis and a good quality 3.0" lcd with better color and outdoor usage, this is it!
There's almost nothing bad except for price about this unit. Coming from using an SD870IS canon p&s, this S90 with manual controls and that nifty lens ring control (rotate to select manual control parameters) is very good - not gimmicky at all and is a "why didn't they do this before" sort of feature. The only other issue is that the lens barrel sticks out further and protrudes out when not in use.
I'm not gonna go into much detail but you can see that this camera has pretty good hi ISO quality. It's not really a "test" - but a quick and dirty sample in real life usage. Shot in kitchen with only kitchen lamp overhead. Macro shot with f-stop (f/2.0) for two of the three high iso pics.
(the first three out of box shots are actually from the iPhone3GS - damn, that's also good quality in outdoor lighting Oct 31, 2009 at 06:10 PM
(All hand held shots using Image Stablizer mode: on). These aren't too bad - no post processing except for downsampling 33.3% of original size. No noise-reduction, straight from camera jpgs.
(All hand held shots using Image Stablizer mode: on). These aren't too bad - no post processing except for downsampling 33.3% of original size. No noise-reduction, straight from camera jpgs.
I was lent an S90 for the weekend by Canon. We were very disappointed by its barrel distortion. The jpegs were ok, but the RAW files were gross. There would be way too much work involved to correct them. I was saddened, as it looked so promising on paper, but a few minutes or testing revealed itself. I still prefer the LX3 over the S90.
senna4ever wrote:
I was lent an S90 for the weekend by Canon. We were very disappointed by its barrel distortion. The jpegs were ok, but the RAW files were gross. There would be way too much work involved to correct them. I was saddened, as it looked so promising on paper, but a few minutes or testing revealed itself. I still prefer the LX3 over the S90.
The barrel distortion on the LX3 lens just as horrible as the S90's. The only difference is that Canon honestly presents the problem on their RAW files. On the other hand, the LX3 cheats by forcing (most) RAW processors to hide the problem. This is true for all the latest generation of Panasonic cameras, including the G-series.
I think most people would agree that RAW files should be kept, well... RAW, And I don't think anybody should be commending Panasonic for cheating, and trashing Canon for being honest.
Shooting JPEGs on the S90 corrects the problem automatically. On the other hand, if you shoot RAW you can have DPP correct the problem automatically. It adds about 3 mouse clicks to process your entire batch of RAW files. It's not at all "too much work".
senna4ever wrote:
I was lent an S90 for the weekend by Canon. We were very disappointed by its barrel distortion. The jpegs were ok, but the RAW files were gross. There would be way too much work involved to correct them. I was saddened, as it looked so promising on paper, but a few minutes or testing revealed itself. I still prefer the LX3 over the S90.
Both cameras have barrel distortion that is fixed automatically in the latest ACR, no?
Yep, this thread should be in the Alternate Gear & Lens forum just like other compact camera threads. That makes it easier to comparison compact cameras from various companies and information available to people that normally shoot Nikon or other brands.
If you aren't interested in the thread then just leave it alone
+1 +10.. I wish you guys would quit bitching about the wrong forum. It's Canon gear and the posts are articulate and informative. There were three posts on Canon gear posted on this forum in the last two days that directly related to items I happened to be looking at and the information gathered was helpful in making my choice to purchase said items. I would not have sorted through a mixed forum to search for the information.
If you don't like the post then don't read it but to waste your time bitching about it is absurd.
I'm sure the moderator will move the post if he finds it in the wrong place.
We have always discussed P&S cameras here and I always will, until there is a *dedicated* forum to do otherwise.
"Alternative Gear & Lenses" and "Pro Digital Corner" are not where the people I know hang out, plus I am talking exclusively about Canon gear so if you don't like posts about P&S cameras being here, then just don't read them.
It is also becoming much less clear what constitutes a dslr, my ageing Pro1 has a single lens, a viewfinder and works just like one, so why shouldn't that be included? What about future models with electronic viewfinders?
I think some of the posters here need to remove their thumbs from where the sun don't shine
Oct 31, 2009 at 06:10 PM
Oct 31, 2009 at 06:14 PM
Oct 31, 2009 at 06:18 PM
Oct 31, 2009 at 06:18 PM
Oct 31, 2009 at 06:18 PM
Oct 31, 2009 at 06:21 PM