seth_prince1 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p>so i've been wanting to get a pocket sized P&S, and have read in a few places that this is pretty much the best p&s available.<br> I was wondering if there was anything new coming out, or maybe already released that is an upgrade from the canon s95.<br> thanks for your help</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p>There's always something new coming out. The question should probably be: what does the S95 not do that you need? If there are specific points, can they be addressed with another manufacturers current camera? At the same price point? At a higher price point? If not, can you live with the current limitations? </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seth_prince1 Posted May 31, 2011 Author Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p>well, it is sort of at the upper range of what i was looking to spend. so the leica D-Lux is kind of off the list.<br> i like that its compact and can fit into my pocket (unlike the bulkier G11). and that it shoots raw. and also gets good marks for image quality. and has good low-light shooting ability. i like to shoot at night without flash</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p>Seems like the S95 would be a good choice. I'm sure others would add the Panasonic LX5 to the list of contenders (price is only $10 more at B&H). Thought it is slightly larger and heavier than the S95.<br> You can see a side-by-side review of them here:<br> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q42010highendcompactgroup/</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p>no such thing as be-all and end-all when it comes to cameras.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldbergbarry Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p>The only thing that the S95 does not give you is a long zoom. Some of the latest P&S have 10x zooms.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobcossar Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p>so Seth....look at Olympus and Fuji too.......your question has so many possible answers it hard to know just what to tell you.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seth_prince1 Posted May 31, 2011 Author Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p>from what i've seen so far, the s95 is the only pocket sized p&s that shoots raw. and that's one thing that really draws me to it</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobcossar Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 <p> Seth.....after looking at everything available, raw is the only deciding factor?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_tuthill Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 The F550EXR costs less and has a 15X zoom that is very good at the long end. But until Fuji gets off their a** and delivers a working sample to DCresource, I cannot recommend it to others. Nice design, though. I am fairly sure the S95 is sharper for wide-angle landscapes, because the Fujinon 24-360 lens seems optimized for telephoto and macro. With dynamic range optimization (DRO) the S95 is capable of holding highlights, though at some penalty in ISO noise, making EXR less obvious an advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seth_prince1 Posted June 1, 2011 Author Share Posted June 1, 2011 <p>F550EXR? call me a tinfoil-hat'er, but GPS in a camera? no thanks. i don't need to be tracked by "Big Sis" where ever i go. and especially don't need her secretly swiping copies of every picture i take.<br /> thanks for all your input. i took a read of the canon/nikon/panasonic review. looks like the canon is what i'm looking for.<br> <em>edit: </em>this is priceless. from an online retailer's description:</p> <blockquote> <ul > <li>16MP Back Side Illuminated CMOS Sensor</li> <li>Multiple Built-In GPS Functions</li> <li>3" 460K Resolution LCD</li> <li>15x Optical Zoom (24-360mm Equiv.) Lens</li> <li>Stunning 1080p HD Movies</li> <li>Motion Panorama Mode</li> <li>Tracking Auto Focus</li> <li>Face Detection/Red-Eye Removal</li> <li>EXR Auto Recognizes 27 Scenes</li> <li><strong>Quick & Simple Uploads to <em>Facebook</em></strong><em>, </em>[emphasis added by me]</li> </ul> </blockquote> <p>so they've built in a feature that conveniently strips you of all your rights to every photograph you take. BRILLIANT!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 <p>seth, good point about facebook and IP rights.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 <p>[[but GPS in a camera? no thanks. i don't need to be tracked by "Big Sis" where ever i go.]]</p> <p>I think you might want to read up on how GPS works. You seem to be very confused.</p> <p>[[so they've built in a feature that conveniently strips you of all your rights to every photograph you take. BRILLIANT!]]</p> <p>Let's set aside the hyperbole of your statement for a minute and just concentrate on a simple fact: this is a camera feature, not a requirement to using the camera. No one is being forced to upload anything.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seth_prince1 Posted June 1, 2011 Author Share Posted June 1, 2011 <blockquote> <p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=482130">Rob Bernhard</a><a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jun 01, 2011; 02:32 p.m.</p> <p>[[but GPS in a camera? no thanks. i don't need to be tracked by "Big Sis" where ever i go.]]<br /> I think you might want to read up on how GPS works. You seem to be very confused.</p> </blockquote> <p>i understand your point. GPS is only a reciever. but if the camera is able to upload to facebook by itself, then it can also upload the info recorded by the GPS reciever in the camera</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 <p>Seth,</p> <p>If you look for EXIF data in Facebook images, you will see that it is all stripped out, which would include GPS coordinates. If FB indexes it in the background (before stripping it out) without telling you, that's another issue, I have no idea. Given their track record on user rights, it wouldn't surprise me, but that's a secondary issue.<br> Nothing is stopping you from stripping out EXIF data before sharing images anyway, it's a trivial task. <br> Regardless, the fact still remains: the camera cannot upload to FB automatically and certainly not while you're out photographing. There is no two-way communication functionality. The camera allows you to tag your photos with GPS coordinates for your use later, that is all. And it only does this if your actually turn on the GPS functionality. I'd turn it off simply to save battery power, not out of any misplaced privacy or IP rights concerns.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philip_tam Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 <p>Seth, no P&S is really that great in low-light without flash. Even with the slightly larger sensor (compared to other compacts), a S95 will be rather noisy past ISO400.</p> <p>It's a nice little cam, but it is what it is: a decked out P&S. I have an LX5, and I try very very hard not to use it past ISO200.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_markanich Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 <p>What I would really, really like is an S95 "tough".</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 <p>[[a S95 will be rather noisy past ISO400.]]</p> <p>There is very little value in discussing noise characteristics without also discussing intended output. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_tuthill Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 John, you mean you want a "tough" S95 with poor picture quality like the Tough 8000? That one is so bad that Olympus pays you to own it. I was looking at behind-the-scenes dancer pictures taken with a friend's S90 and my F200EXR. In general the Fuji pictures were better because there was less redeye. In the no-flash pictures, high ISO noise was about the same. Both are classic P&S cameras, if there is such a thing, but the Fuji is far better in bright sunlight. Seth, I advise you to buy an S95 now before Sony stops making high-end CCD sensors. The new biCMOS sensors are very disappointing in comparison. For instance, see the recent Nikon P300 test at DPreview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 <p>As far as pocket cameras go, I'm real pleased with the <a href="../equipment/store/product?pgid=870556857">Canon 300 HS</a>. But I will admit that a "pocket" camera for me is just that. I don't look for a lot out of it in terms of pro-photography type features. I just want reasonably quick AF, small size, movie recording, etc. Basic P&S functions. I don't need RAW or full manual control, etc. For me, these are cameras that capture a moment that I wouldn't have captured otherwise (or would have had to capture on my phone camera).</p> <p><a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/store/product?pgid=870556857">http://www.photo.net/equipment/store/product?pgid=870556857</a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lachaine Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 <p>A year ago, I sold my Canon S90 go so I could get a DSLR because I couldn't afford both, but not a day goes by when I don't wish I still had it in my pocket. I'm sure its successor the S95 is not the be all end all, but it's a great little pocket camera, and very suitable for street and other kinds of photography where the mythical "image quality" is not the prime consideration (which means almost everything). There is nothing, but nothing like having an f/2 camera in your pocket, as long as you don't mind that it's only at the wide end of the zoom. I would buy one in an instant if I could afford it, and I wouldn't even give a second thought to other comparable but even more expensive models.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 <p>A little ouf of date, but this article might be worth a read:</p> <p>http://www.photo.net/equipment/prosumer-digital/lx3-g10-gx200-review</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_markanich Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 <p>Yep, Bill, I really meant a "tough" S95. Waterproof, drop & crush proof, freeze proof with RAW output. I ski, swim, stand in the snow and rain and am clumsy. But I would like a pocketable, hammer-proof pic machine that outputs a RAW file. Not too much to ask. They can keep the video, face, smile, pet recognition. M or +/- compensation would be nice too.<br> Along these lines, if I worked for Canon, I would be pushing for a digital F1. NO layered or buried menus. Just the dials I set that won't get changed when I sneeze (a digital T90 would be over the top for me). AF, AE and P are good enough at this point in history so I'd keep them but too many interrelated choices are confusing and get in the way of what we came to do in the first place. Expose the film......errr, I mean sensor. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkka Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 <p>It should have a bigger sensor. Like 10x bigger. And be waterproof and durable. Then it would be close to being perfect. But is is a very good small sensor digicam.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_markanich Posted June 3, 2011 Share Posted June 3, 2011 <p>Oh yes. No argument here. A full frame in a "tough" S95 sized package would have me glad to see ya.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now