Canon S100 or, alternative?

<p>I'm just about to buy an S100, but are there other alternatives? G12 better? 2MP won't make or break the deal for me.<br>

For me, 1080p is a plus, but 720 would be fine. Love the RAW, manual control, and sensitivity.<br>

I am a semi-pro/pro user that wants a compact for @ home.</p>

The LX5 has a better lens, but unless you always shoot RAW, I would avoid the Panasonic JPEG engine. The Olympus XZ1 also has a better lens but below-average video.

<p>Yeah, lens is an issue. I checked Flickr for S100 images and there aren't very many that look sharp. Completely nixes the point of having more pixels.</p>

<p>The external mechanical controls and the articulated LED screen of the g12 strongly tipped the balance for me in favor of the G12. The G12 is physically larger than the s100, but at least it's not as large as the currently popular interchangeable lens mirrorless models (with a similar lens mounted). </p>

<p>I also did some quick IQ comparison tests in the store between the s100 and g12, and for quick hand held shots, wide open, in typical store lighting, the IQ seemed to be consistently better from the g12, both throughout the frame, as well as in the corners. This probably was due to a combination of the the larger lens (for corner perf), NR, and the new angle+translation image stabilization of the g12. I'm sure the larger sensor of interchangeable lens mirrorless models would have had lower sensor noise, but the absolute lowest light performance wasn't my main priority in this purchase. I use my d700 and fast primes for such situations. I was looking for generally balanced performance.</p>

<p>I'm up to a few thousand shutter actuations with the G12 and I've been exceptionally happy with it. Getting an articulated LCD back, mechanical controls, great image stabilization and macro performance have been exactly as useful / pleasing as I thought they would be.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>Better? Not at that size, although personally, I think Canon ruined a good thing. Well, ruined is perhaps a little too strong. I could have bought the S100, but I paid less and got an S95, because I don't want a 24mm equivalent wide angle.</p>

<p>Honestly though, I don't think you can go wrong with it. I've tried others, but while I do use raw files for some things, I like what Canon does with its JPEGs in this class of camera. </p>

<p>True, RAW would not be as important for this type of camera, but I like to run everything through Lightroom.</p>

<p>This tool is so powerful! http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare<br>

G12 beats a lot of stuff in its class. S100 looks horrible on this thing.</p>

<p>Olympus XZ-1. Not only is the lens sharper, it's more consistently sharp across the frame. To my eyes it's also superior to the Leica lens on the Panasonic LX-5.</p>

<p>The dpreview comparison is great, but the decision should not be made only on the basis of IQ when mounted to a tripod. </p>

<p>Actual in-use handling plays a huge role in the majority of my shots. For example, I mentioned the mechanical dials, but I forgot to mention that articulated LCDs often allow one to hold the camera in much more stable positions, eg, against your belly or some other support that you couldn't use (and see what you are shooting) with standard, non-moveable LCDs, or even direct optical viewfinders. For casual shooting, I find this is a surprisingly important and somewhat unexpected factor.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>The G12 is basically an S100 with longer lens, flash mount, and less pocketability. Other competitors in this segment are the Panasonic LX-5, Olympus XZ-1, and Fuji X-10. I think the S95 is the most pocketable for someone that usually just goes out in pants or jeans and a shirt, so it would get my vote. My brother has one, and it's really fun to use and I am impressed with the image quality. But as you see from all the responses so far, every individual model will have just as many people against it as for it along with their own recommendation, so you need to just check out the field, do some research and watching forums online, use them yourself in a camera store if possible, and go from there. I can tell you that of each of the cameras I have listed, you will find thousands of knowledgeable photographers that enjoy and love their purchase, so you won't really go wrong with any of them.</p>

<p>I don't know what Mr. Twedten's budget is, but the Panasonic LX5 is currently the least expensive of the "high quality compacts." A few weeks ago, Amazon was selling them for $330. Right now it's back up to $360, but that's still less than the S95 and S100, and significantly less than the XZ-1.</p>

<p>I currently use the S100 after having sold my G12. I loved the G12 but I do see some improvement in the high-ISO images as a result of the newer Digic 5 processor. I also find the image quality to be exceptional. I know there were some early quality control issues with lenses on the S100, but maybe mine is from a later batch that was produced after the bugs were worked out. I also owned the S90 and S95 and enjoy using the S100 more, again because of the minor tweaks afforded by the newer processor. One of the features that I really like is the high speed burst that allows me to shoot 9.6fps at full resolution as compared to the much lower resolution and lower frame rate the G11/12 allow. Not that that's a feature one would use all the time but I have used it and it's nice to have. The high ISO is really pretty impressive on the S100 (as it also is on the HS-model PowerShots with the Digic 5) and yields nice 8x10s at ISO 800 and 1600. I never really bonded with the S90 or S95 because I never felt that the lens on those cameras was as capable as the G11/12, but I'm quite impressed with the lens on my S100. I love the fact that it's pocketable <em>and</em> yields such nice pictures. I miss the articulated screen of my G12, but the fact that the S100 rides comfortably in my pocket and goes absolutely everywhere with me more than makes up for it. I personally love the 24mm end of the lens as I shoot lots of landscapes. The in-camera processing corrects distortion pretty well and also corrects CA as long as you're shooting Jpegs. I love this camera and have been using it more than any of my other cameras, film or digital, including my 7D. BestBuy has them for $385 and they're going for $350 and up on Ebay right now. It's definitely one to consider, and certainly gets my vote.</p>

<p>Here's another dpreview.com comparison (published mid-Dec 2011) that may also be of interest to the OP - 6 cameras more-or-less in the same class as the G12:<br>

Canon PowerShot G12<br /> Fujifilm X10<br /> Nikon Coolpix P7100<br /> Olympus XZ-1<br /> Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5<br /> Samsung TL500</p>

<p>Intro here: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4333175133/buyers-guide-enthusiast-raw-shooting-compact-cameras<br>

Conclusions here: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4333175133/buyers-guide-enthusiast-raw-shooting-compact-cameras/6</p>

<p>Note that this comparison doesn't include any of the interchangeable lens mirror-less cameras, or any of the thin, s100-like cameras, but g12-s100 comparisons have also been done ... I just didn't bookmark them and am too lazy to find the articles again.</p>

<p>HTH,</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>Nate—I haven't had obvious sharpness issues with my s100. See, for example:<br>

/> /> />

There does seem to be a smallish amount of barrel distortion up close, per the G & T photo.<br>

I picked the s100 over alternatives for the same reasons everyone else does: because it actually fits in my pocket and, at least to me, offers optimal size / performance trade-offs. YMMV.<br>

Unless you want to be able to auto-focus during video, BTW, I don't think the s100 is a significant improvement over the s95. </p>

<p>AC: <em>"... I know there were some early quality control issues with lenses on the S100, but maybe mine is from a later batch that was produced after the bugs were worked out. ..."</em></p>

<p>Tom E: <em>"... I haven't had obvious sharpness issues with my s100 ..."</em></p>

<p>About 6 weeks ago, I spent a long time in a very patient camera store comparing a s100 to a g12, and the s100 images were definitely and consistently softer. Since this was hardly a controlled comparison and was done on a tiny sample, I don't know if this was the lens issue that had been reported in pre-production and early production runs, or it was just the result of differences in image stabilization, NR processing, etc, but whatever the reason, just a month and a half ago, it was one of the important factors in me going with a g12 in spite of its size. YMMV, but definitely try b4 u buy, if at all possible.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>Among the expensive P&S cameras, there are some differences in features but if you're looking at image quality you're splitting hairs. If you want a noticeable improvement in that department you need to move up to interchangeable lens cameras with larger sensors.</p>

<p>An Olympus E-PL1 kit is actually $100 cheaper than an S100. Unless pocketability is a high priority, I'd take the Olympus any day and for any task, and the extra $100 would buy, say, a Minolta to M4/3 adapter, a 45mm f/2.0 (for portrait) and a 28mm f/2.8 (a "normal" prime on M4/3), so you'd also have a lot more lens for your money.</p>

If it's between the s100 and the g12, keep in mind the faster aperture at the wide end. That extra stop is significant if

you're into available light stuff. As for the sharpness thing, really, it's a non-issue. Do you want to test and review it, or

do you want to take pictures with it?

 

I love them myself, but be aware that the S models are really tiny. Some people like a bit more size.

<p>For me having a pocketable camera has become a convenience that I really love, especially a camera that takes high quality pictures. Sort of a digital Stylus Epic. For whatever reason that has come to mean more after acquiring the S100 than it did when I had the S90/95 cameras. I am definitely in the market for a mirrorless body (the NEX-5N) but for now I really enjoy the S100.</p>

<p>@Tom Mann—judge with your own eyes, but if you're still looking you may want to try a different s100 / g12 or g1x pair.<br>

@Andy Collins—"For me having a pocketable camera has become a convenience that I really love. . ." Me too. To me, camera size is really a binary: it fits in my jeans or shorts pockets or it doesn't. </p>

<p>Thanks for the comments, Tom (E), but I bought a g12 about 6 weeks ago and have been delighted with it. </p>

<p>It was a close call, especially with its f/2 lens, but even if the IQ of both looked identical in the tests that I did, the articulated LCD and the extra manual controls really sold me on the g12. Perhaps I should have tried another s100, but when I saw (with my own eyes, just like dpreview's published test shots on the preproduction model) that one corner of the image was substantially more blurry than the others, that sealed my decision. As I said earlier, I wasn't looking for either ultra low light noise performance or the smallest size. They are obviously both very good cameras.</p>

<p>Cheers,</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>Andy L, I agree that arguing image differences among these cameras is splitting hairs. I don't agree that the E-PL1 is automatically a better choice. First, it's noticeably bigger than any of these cameras, as you mention, as there will always be the lens sticking out. Second, many places such as concerts don't allow interchangeable-lens cameras. It used to be just SLRs, but since the days of these Olympus and Sony NEX cameras, they've amended the rule to this. Third, the E-PL1 and kit lens have very pretty slow operation. Fourth, the lens has a slow aperture and limited range compared to these cameras. With the S100 for example wide open at 28mm equivalent, you're at f/2. With the E-PL1, you're at f/3.5. Fifth, the E-pl1 has crappy controls, no AF assist lamp which makes it hard to focus indoors, etc. which is the reason that this camera can still be found new even though it's two generations old. The E-PM1 solves most of the operational problems, and Panasonic GF3 or GF5 with the 14-42mm X collapsible lens solves the size issue as well (but still slow aperture and limited range), but you're now talking $650 minimum. For someone that just wants a single camera and lens, one of these other cameras is a better choice than an m4/3 camera.</p>

<p>Tom E, I feel exactly the same way. There is a discrete cutoff at "fits in my pocket" size. I have a Panasonic G2 which is a micro 4/3 camera, and people on those m4/3 forums are often talking about how great their newer version camera is because it's marginally smaller. If it's already going to have to go around my shoulder instead of in my pocket, a few centimeters here or there won't affect anything! Especially when you start adding multiple lenses into the mix.</p>

<p>This is tough... I wish i could use them all for a week and then decide. I was leaning toward the G12 last night, now unsure again. I'm not getting a micro 4/3 camera because of what Ariel outlined above. I have SLRs a plenty available to me. I have an older Canon SD1000 that we used for several years because of its pocketability, but now I'm tired of the terrible low light performance or it, and I'd really like something with more manual control, since there are many options available now. The SD1000 also takes pretty low quality videos, so I'd like at least 720p.</p>

<p>I don't want to spend more than $500 incl shipping and an SD card.</p>

<p>Pro S100<br>

- small, will get taken with out of the house<br>

- good reviews<br>

- 1080p, 12MP (but I doubt the S100 is really worth this res)</p>

<p>Con S100<br>

- my friend sent it back the same day he got it, would not focus<br>

- the dpreview comparison makes the S100 look HORRIBLE</p>

<p>Other options<br>

- Nikon P7100, I don't see much reason to get this over the G12<br>

- Panasonic LX5, nice, good reviews, G12 looks better to me<br>

- Olympus XZ-1, expensive, similar to G12<br>

- Fuji X10, super cool, a friend loves his, studio shot isn't great though</p>

<p>So, maybe this should be between the G12 and X10, but of course the X10 is $600, and I just want to take pictures of my kids.</p>

<p>Don't trust the DPReview comparison tool. Every time I see someone use that bit of "evidence" to tout the superiority of one camera over another, I go in and make a quick comparison that shows its absurdity. For today's show, we have the Canon G12 against the Nikon D3s, Canon EOS-1d Mk IV, and Fuji X100. Three tools renowned for their image quality and used the world over by professionals:<br>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=canon_g12&masterSample=img_1071&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=canon_g12&slot0Sample=img_1071&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=nikon_d3s&slot1Sample=bsb_9938&slot2Camera=canon_eos1dmkiv&slot2Sample=canon1d4_iso50&slot3Camera=fujifilm_x100&slot3Sample=dscf2574&x=0.10023584905660378&y=0.1424581005586592</p>

<p>Well gee, I guess you should just get the G12!</p>

<p>I know, the tool is not an end all. All of those cameras look good to me, and they're not worth comparing, really. There are too many factors. I'm not looking at "sharpness". One camera could just be out of focus a little. I'm looking at smoothness of colors, chunkiness, black quality, fine detail rendering, lots of stuff.<br>

<br />The S100 looks horrible on the tool because it looks like there is a film over the whole image. The whites glow. Even though the image is larger, the G12 image looks better, smoother, sharper overall, better colors.</p>

<p>If the decision is between a g12 and a s100, you may also want to take a look at some other forums/websites that specifically discuss and compare the two, eg,</p>

<p>http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1172167<br /> http://www.flickr.com/groups/1088996@N21/discuss/72157628020456055/<br /> http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-S100-vs-Canon_PowerShot_G12</p>

<p>At least you'll get a wider assortment of opinions than the small number of people participating in this discussion.</p>

<p>Even if you assume the IQ differences are a wash, you certainly should think hard about exactly how you tend to use cameras, for example, are you a constant knob twister; is the weight and size of the g12 a deal breaker or a positive attribute; will the ability to get into unusual shooting positions (thanks to the articulating LCD of the g12) be useful to you or just another thing to break; is the closer focusing of the g12 important to you or do you hate bugs and flower pix ;-), etc. etc.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<p>PS - Although my in-store side-by-side comparison was far from a well-controlled experiment, like the dpreview comparison, I also thought the contrast and shadow detail was noticeably better in the g12, not just the sharpness. FWIW, I had not known about the dpreview comparison tool until someone pointed it out in this thread.</p>

<p>PPS - My recommendation: You need to go to a store and kick some tires. There's only so much one can get out of an abstract discussion on the net with people you don't even know. </p>

<p>These resolution pages on dpreview are very telltale, IMO:<br>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonG12/8<br>

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons100/9</p>

<p>Definitely leaning G12. I'd like the 1080p, but the video quality on the S100 isn't really worth the extra space (1080p video is such a hog). Wish I could afford the G1X or X10, but for my use, I don't think it's necessary.</p>