Fenwick
Established
Just picked up a new S90.
Looked for one all afternoon today and came across one at my local Bestbuy (good price too) which really surprised me because all my local camera stores dont even have them in stock yet.
Anyway Im not big on point and shoot cameras but need something small to take with when I dont want to carry all the gear and the S90 has got lots of positive reviews so I figured it cant be to bad.
Now time will tell if me and the P&S will get along
Anyone else using one?
Any feedback?
Looked for one all afternoon today and came across one at my local Bestbuy (good price too) which really surprised me because all my local camera stores dont even have them in stock yet.
Anyway Im not big on point and shoot cameras but need something small to take with when I dont want to carry all the gear and the S90 has got lots of positive reviews so I figured it cant be to bad.
Now time will tell if me and the P&S will get along
Anyone else using one?
Any feedback?
Last edited:
BearCatCow
Established
It looks like a great mix of size and performance. Seems like a solid choice. Any pictures to share yet?
GoneSavage
not actually
It's a fantastic camera; the image quality is great, and the control ring around the lens is the best thing to happen to point and shoots in years. The only thing that bothers me about it is its distortion at the wide and of its zoom (though this is common an ALL canon compacts, so it isn't totally unexpected).
If this was a fixed focal length camera instead of a zoom, I'd be all over it. Call me picky... but...
dazedgonebye
Veteran
Fenwick
Established
No pics yet,
Very soon though
Very soon though
capitalK
Warrior Poet :P
This camera is on my short list, along with the LX3 for my next point & shoot.
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
Isn't that supposed to be 'fixed' when shooting RAW and using the Canon converter?
Are you using something other than DPP?
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/s90.shtml
We'll see. If Leica does well enough with the X1, Canon and Nikon will follow.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
A large sensor fixed lens presumably has image quality to make up for the lack of flexibility. Also, a built in zoom on a large sensor camera would be quite large and kill the compact nature of the camera.
The X1 may succeed, but if Canon or Nikon comes out with a mirrorless camera, it'll look more like the Panny than the Leica. IMO, or course.
newspaperguy
Well-known
FWIW - You don't HAVE to use the zoom.
My ancient G-5 is "locked" on w/a, and has a 35mm CV finder on top.
My ancient G-5 is "locked" on w/a, and has a 35mm CV finder on top.
photogdave
Shops local
...and you can use the control ring to set it to specific focal length equivalents. Unfortunately by the time you've set it to 50mm the fastest stop is f/3.2.
szekiat
Well-known
that's an elmar!
I can agree with that... but Nikon did have the 28ti and 35ti... so one can hope they still know how to make a classy compact.
exactly...
mackigator
Well-known
RE: distortion on the wide end of these small compacts.
I've shot with the LX1 and now the LX3, both of which have significant barrel distortion in the image as captured RAW. These cameras would not exist without the compromises made in lens design to keep costs and size down.
I usually shoot RAW + jpg and I'm fine correcting the barrel distortion in the RAW file after the fact. It takes only a few seconds and I only correct the one or two shots that I care about.
Automatic correction at the RAW file level - in your editing program of choice, using some kind of camera-model detecting feature - is a waste of time and money for the manufacturer, IMHO. The whole point of the RAW file is that I choose what pixels to throw away, not someone else.
So no big deal.
I've shot with the LX1 and now the LX3, both of which have significant barrel distortion in the image as captured RAW. These cameras would not exist without the compromises made in lens design to keep costs and size down.
I usually shoot RAW + jpg and I'm fine correcting the barrel distortion in the RAW file after the fact. It takes only a few seconds and I only correct the one or two shots that I care about.
Automatic correction at the RAW file level - in your editing program of choice, using some kind of camera-model detecting feature - is a waste of time and money for the manufacturer, IMHO. The whole point of the RAW file is that I choose what pixels to throw away, not someone else.
So no big deal.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
They could, I just don't think they will.
Re: 50mm = f3.2...that's ok, I like wider anyway.
Leica0Series
Well-known
I got one before a trip to Seoul and like it a lot. The clerk at Best Buy had to dig around in the shelves under the camera displays to find it, it wasn't on display at the time. I agree with GoneSavage that the control ring is great. I mostly shoot it in Aperture Priority or full Manual, and use it just like I use a "real" camera.
Most of the pictures here were made with it, including a couple of high-ish ISO ones (a couple are from the M4).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brettdavis/sets/72157622609317580/
Most of the pictures here were made with it, including a couple of high-ish ISO ones (a couple are from the M4).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brettdavis/sets/72157622609317580/
hiromu
Established
I use this camera as well. But for me, this is not 28-105mm camera. Instead, I almost always shoot at 28mm end so it is 28mm F2.0 fixed lens camera with bonus zooming capability when needed.
The only thing I don't like is that it can only shoot 4:3 aspect ratio. (or am I missing something??)
Hiromu
The only thing I don't like is that it can only shoot 4:3 aspect ratio. (or am I missing something??)
Hiromu
Fenwick
Established
Not bad for a P&S