The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

No love from the S90?

Rawfa

Active member
I find it really weird that nobody seems to be buying/posting/using the G11 and the S90. What gives?
 

Streetshooter

Subscriber Member
I was looking at the G11 but when I tried it instore, decided it's not for me.
It's not as sleek as the G9, my favorite G camera.
It has that military, boxy feel to it.
I made a few frames on my card and passed it up after pp the images.

The S90...dunno?
 

Lars

Active member
I have a G11 on order, a friend is bringing it here from California after Christmas, less than half price compared to Sweden. I read a lot about the S90 but it seemed overpriced considering the compromising lens design and heavy barrel distortion.
 

kit laughlin

Subscriber Member
I have an S90 (with the Franiec grip) and have had all the others including the G11.

The S90 is a pocket camera; none of the others is (unless you are talking big coat pockets).

@ Lars: the supplied software, DPP, corrects the WA distortion with a single click; I posted an example somewhere else here. Really impressive, IMHO, and this hardware–software interaction is the way we are moving, I feel. Honestly, I have some excellent and expensive lenses, but if we are talking high-end P&S, I think the partial software solution is sensible, if it gives the results. I have a bunch of images from the Caymans (a nursery) to process; will post one or two later (next week).

I kept the G1 (like Vivek, I feel the designers really hit the mark with this first iteration of the µ4/3rds camera).
 

Lars

Active member
@ Lars: the supplied software, DPP, corrects the WA distortion with a single click; I posted an example somewhere else here. Really impressive, IMHO, and this hardware–software interaction is the way we are moving, I feel. Honestly, I have some excellent and expensive lenses, but if we are talking high-end P&S, I think the partial software solution is sensible, if it gives the results.
I'm strongly biased against the software dependency this leads to. Software based distortion correction locks you in to the manufacturer's software, much more so than a new raw format (like Nikon's P6000 NRF format, also a bad idea) does. In the end, only the few large software houses like Adobe can afford to rapidly bring out codecs for cameras that require software distortion correction. Smaller software makers won't be able to keep up. I do not think such a product should be promoted.

This is a way for the camera manufacturer to save tons of money on the hardware construction. I can only dream of the profit margins on the S90 - likely much, much higher than on the G11.
 

kit laughlin

Subscriber Member
I get your position totally Lars, but honestly feel the rules are different for these cheap cameras (what, $499 USD?). That makes it a toy in my book, and all I am interested in is the final IQ. As an aside, there is a certain intelligence in doing in software what real mechanical and optical precision otherwise would be needed that is attractive in its own right for these low-end devices.

And I agree about the software dependency aspect too, but if this approach becomes more common, then the problem is lessened. cheers kl
 

Terry

New member
I'm strongly biased against the software dependency this leads to. Software based distortion correction locks you in to the manufacturer's software, much more so than a new raw format (like Nikon's P6000 NRF format, also a bad idea) does. In the end, only the few large software houses like Adobe can afford to rapidly bring out codecs for cameras that require software distortion correction. Smaller software makers won't be able to keep up. I do not think such a product should be promoted.

This is a way for the camera manufacturer to save tons of money on the hardware construction. I can only dream of the profit margins on the S90 - likely much, much higher than on the G11.
Lars,
I thought the new opcodes were an effort to standardize the lens corrections to address your concerns. Maybe I'm over simplifying things but I thought that is what Panasonic/Olympus etc are using. In addition to Adobe, C1 and Silkypix seem to be able to handle the lens corrections. If you get forced to use camera manufacturer specific software (like DPP or NX) to correct the distortion, I agree with you. I won't change my workflow to deal with one camera, I just won't buy it.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
The g11 doesnt rely (as much?) on software correction of distorsion like the G11.
By the way Hasselblad, Mamiya and other do it to ;)

If we talk about price.... the S90 and G11 might be expensive compared to small-sensor digicams, but on the other side if you compare it to a dp1, dp2, the Ricohs or even 4/3 you get with the g11 a good image taking tool with a 28-140mm/2.8-4.5 lens for roughly 500€. I think the price is ok.

Personally I have decided for a g11 for several reasons (was choosing between S90,G11,D-Lux 4, GF1,GRD) and from the first results I am surprized how good the images look.
- very sharp,
- good exposure metering
- balanced flash images
- very good compromise between noise reduction and detail in higher ISO jpgs
- colors look balanced to me too, specially at higher ISO I clearly prefer it over images from the Sigma dp1/2

For me this is the first small sensor camera I have tried where I find such image quality (again-only first impressions).

I find myself using wide angle quite often.
Also the large DOF of a small sensor is more often an advantage than an disadvantage for the kind of images I plan to use the g11 for.
The only thing I miss is 720p video.
This camera has some really nice things which complement a DSLR.
The large DOF is one, another one is the posibility to shoot 1/1000 flash sync. Together with the built in ND-filter this means I can fill-flash in bright light (snow/beach).
With the swicel display and the DOF together with a low minimum focusing distance this camera also allows interesting Macro photography.

I believe with the 4/3 hype small sensors are overseen nowadays.
As nice as 4/3 is (my wife uses a gh1 and I like it for its flexibility) large sensors in small cameras still mean to be bound to either a fixed focal length if you want to keep it relativly small.
If I had it as the one and only camera I might have prefered a 4/3, but as an add on camera I prefer the g11.
I will now sell my Sigma dp.
 

Lars

Active member
I get your position totally Lars, but honestly feel the rules are different for these cheap cameras (what, $499 USD?). That makes it a toy in my book, and all I am interested in is the final IQ. As an aside, there is a certain intelligence in doing in software what real mechanical and optical precision otherwise would be needed that is attractive in its own right for these low-end devices.
Each to one's own of course. At $500 these cameras are among the most expensive compacts today, so I wouldn't call them cheap toys. And yes, final IQ is the bottom line. I'm just still in the habit of preferring to pay more for a better lens. Slightly irrational perhaps.

Another thing that made me prefer the G11 over the S90 is the aperture on the tele end. S90 loses a factor of 6x from wide to tele whereas G11 loses 2.6x. I prefer a wider aperture on the tele end, for shallow DOF and for shorter shutter times. The S90 is brighter at the wide end, but that's less important.

Whether that matters in real life photography I cannot say, as I have not yet used either camera.
 

smokysun

New member
finally had a chance to handle both at best buy. what struck me was the cheap construction. the g11 nowhere near as well-built as the g5 or dp1. of the two the g11 obviously offers the most. but it's very plastic. i don't know if you can set buttons like the ricoh or dp1. the dials certainly could not be seen under dark conditions. the viewfinder small and not full framed. still, as a journalistic backup, i'd get it for the speed. the s90 didn't seem worthy of consideration, not at 400 dollars.

wayne
www.pbase.com/wwp
 

Paratom

Well-known member
finally had a chance to handle both at best buy. what struck me was the cheap construction. the g11 nowhere near as well-built as the g5 or dp1. of the two the g11 obviously offers the most. but it's very plastic. i don't know if you can set buttons like the ricoh or dp1. the dials certainly could not be seen under dark conditions. the viewfinder small and not full framed. still, as a journalistic backup, i'd get it for the speed. the s90 didn't seem worthy of consideration, not at 400 dollars.

wayne
www.pbase.com/wwp
The dp1 is metall but thats about it regarding better feel IMO.
I dont think the g11 feels overall cheeper than the dp1. The dials are a great user unterface.
The viewfinder is small and tunnellike-I dont know if I use it, maybe in very bright light or for stabillizing the camera when shooting long exp times.
Maybe sturdy plastic is even more resistant than thin metal (we are not talking about "heavy" metal/brass ala Leica M).
 

Lars

Active member
Two more weeks until I get my G11. Thinking about optical viewfinder, and what losing OVF on mainstream cameras means for people who require reading glasses for focusing at close distances. I just got my first reading glasses (I'm 47). My previous compact camera has no OVF, and it is becoming a problem (but my near vision was fine when I got that camera a few years ago). Another reason to shy away from the S90, I'm afraid.

We'll see how usable the G11 finder is. The G9 finder I did not care for much.
 
Last edited:

Paratom

Well-known member
Two more weeks until I get my G11. Thinking about optical viewfinder, and what losing OVF on mainstream cameras means for people who require reading glasses for focusing at close distances. I just got my first reading glasses (I'm 47). My previous compact camera has no OVF, and it is becoming a problem (but my near vision was fine when I got that camera a few years ago). Another reason to shy away from the S90, I'm afraid.

We'll see how usable the G11 finder is. The G9 finder I did not care for much.
The viewfinder of the g11 is a tiny tunnel, but I find it better than nothing. I would check it out before buying the camera and see if it works for you.
So far I am happy to decide for the g11.
The G11 is clearly more a jacket pocket camera while the S90 fits in a shirt-pocket. However I really really like the user interface of the g11.
 

m3photo

New member
Re: buying/posting/using the S90

I find it really weird that nobody seems to be buying/posting/using the G11 and the S90.
OK, I've decided on an s90. Had the s50 (nice flip open, reminded me of my Olympus Mju), then G6 (lovely lens), then G9 (good all-rounder) BUT ...
s90; What a sensor! It's a perfect little always-with-you camera that has a charming double personality: a good quality RAW shooter that delivers files you can get lots from and an Auto everything jpeg party shooter that even takes ambient light into consideration when taking indoor flash snaps. Talking of personality, one funny trait is the fact that said RAW files seem to come out with more sharpening than the jpegs, go figure.

Anyway, the man said posting, so I thought coming from the m4/3rds crowd I'd show you a couple of side-by-sides with a G1. All shots 16bit Raws just tapping the Auto button in Camera RAW then downsampled to jpegs for posting. I found that the s90's responded well to the Shadow-Highlight command in Photoshop at 100% Highlight/50% Tonal Width and the bottom slider I always leave on at the maximum 2500 anyway; no halos this way. No sharpening - as stated before, the s90's don't need them and I thought it fairer not to touch the G1's.

First the 28mm equivalent pair. Both at f/3.5 as that's the maximum aperture on the G1's kit zoom and although the s90 boasts f/2 at 28mm equivalent it's only for emergencies, f/2:8 is fine but for a bit more dynamic range I'd say f/4's the sweet spot (naturally at this sensor size, depth of field is the same anywhere you set the aperture on shots like this).

G1:



s90:



This second pair is at 90mm equivalent on the G1 (max zoom) and 105mm equivalent on the s90 (max zoom) both widest aperture here, i.e. f/5.6 on the G1 and f/4.9 on the s90.

G1:



s90:




Have fun (resisting temptation, that is!) :D
 

Lars

Active member
Re: buying/posting/using the S90

Thanks for posting :)

I'm not quite sure what you want to communicate with these samples though - lighting is ideal so any camera on the market (and some phones) would have produced similar results (at this moderate resolution).

Not meaning to be rude here... but I do think the question needs to be asked what can anyone read out of the posted samples?

The only thing I see worth noting is that the S90 blows highlights in a less flattering way than the G1 (highlight reflection in the boat).

OK, I've decided on an s90. Had the s50 (nice flip open, reminded me of my Olympus Mju), then G6 (lovely lens), then G9 (good all-rounder) BUT ...
s90; What a sensor! It's a perfect little always-with-you camera that has a charming double personality: a good quality RAW shooter that delivers files you can get lots from and an Auto everything jpeg party shooter that even takes ambient light into consideration when taking indoor flash snaps. Talking of personality, one funny trait is the fact that said RAW files seem to come out with more sharpening than the jpegs, go figure.

Anyway, the man said posting, so I thought coming from the m4/3rds crowd I'd show you a couple of side-by-sides with a G1. All shots 16bit Raws just tapping the Auto button in Camera RAW then downsampled to jpegs for posting. I found that the s90's responded well to the Shadow-Highlight command in Photoshop at 100% Highlight/50% Tonal Width and the bottom slider I always leave on at the maximum 2500 anyway; no halos this way. No sharpening - as stated before, the s90's don't need them and I thought it fairer not to touch the G1's.

First the 28mm equivalent pair. Both at f/3.5 as that's the maximum aperture on the G1's kit zoom and although the s90 boasts f/2 at 28mm equivalent it's only for emergencies, f/2:8 is fine but for a bit more dynamic range I'd say f/4's the sweet spot (naturally at this sensor size, depth of field is the same anywhere you set the aperture on shots like this).

G1:



s90:



This second pair is at 90mm equivalent on the G1 (max zoom) and 105mm equivalent on the s90 (max zoom) both widest aperture here, i.e. f/5.6 on the G1 and f/4.9 on the s90.

G1:



s90:




Have fun (resisting temptation, that is!) :D
 

m3photo

New member
Re: Samples

I'm not quite sure what you want to communicate with these samples though - lighting is ideal so any camera on the market (and some phones) would have produced similar results (at this moderate resolution).

Not meaning to be rude here... but I do think the question needs to be asked what can anyone read out of the posted samples?

The only thing I see worth noting is that the S90 blows highlights in a less flattering way than the G1 (highlight reflection in the boat).
You're quite right really.
I'm not quite sure about any camera producing similar results - I've had a few jpeg only models in the past and they couldn't have managed what this new one does. Re "moderate resolution", naturally all 72 dpi screen examples posted on the web are not indicative of what's really possible but I merely wished to whet some appetites as to the s90's capabilities as a very small camera that won't let you down as much as many offerings on the market. I could post the usual ISO comparisons taken in dark corners but they're readily available elsewhere.

Oh well, just one, (with corresponding blown highlight I know) 1600 ISO 1/800 at f/8:



and detail:



I trust this will at least promote some even better posted examples than mine as per the OP's original wish.

As a comparison, my G1 blows highlights in a less flattering way than my D700 - sensor size is sensor size after all :)
 
Top