Canon S5 IS vs S3 IS -- affect of pixel count?

GaryBakker

Here is a side-by-side of the Canon S5 IS vs the S3 IS.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_s3is%2Ccanon_s5is&show=all

Other than a slightly larger LCD, the only significant difference between the cameras is 6 megapixels vs 8 megapixels.

How does this affect the picture quality? The sensor size is identical, so I assume they're simply cramming more photosites onto the sensor? That would make each photosite smaller. What affect does this have? Does this potentially increase the noise? Decrease the quality?

In other words, is bigger always better?

PS -- I know I'll get advice to avoid these cameras completely and get a dSLR instead. I already have a Canon Digital Rebel (first generation). This camera would be for a specific purpose. Further disclosure: I've already purchased the S3, but now the S5 is available and I'm still within the window of opportunity to return the S3.

epetti

The .5" bigger LCD is a pretty significant increase in size, and there are some other minor improvements in focusing, the hot shoe for flash, and higher ISO.

I've read several reviews comparing changes in resolution. The general consensus that I've seen is that it's a mixed blessing, and some of it depends on the quality of the sensor and image processing in the camera (which is important since there is no RAW mode). More resolution does mean more detail captured. However, it also means more noise captured or introduced. So depending on how immune the sensor is to noise or how well the software handles it, you could lose the detail you gained through the noise reduction software. Or you could get a bit more detail. I'm sure when it comes out and dpreview reviews it they'll compare it to the S3. May have to wait until then to find out....

I'm also very likely going to buy that camera so I am also interested in the results. If I went with the S3 after the S5 came out likely the price would have dropped significantly.

Ernie

Green Fleurdelis wrote:

Here is a side-by-side of the Canon S5 IS vs the S3 IS.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_s3is%2Ccanon_s5is&show=all

Other than a slightly larger LCD, the only significant difference between the cameras is 6 megapixels vs 8 megapixels.

How does this affect the picture quality? The sensor size is identical, so I assume they're simply cramming more photosites onto the sensor? That would make each photosite smaller. What affect does this have? Does this potentially increase the noise? Decrease the quality?

In other words, is bigger always better?

PS -- I know I'll get advice to avoid these cameras completely and get a dSLR instead. I already have a Canon Digital Rebel (first generation). This camera would be for a specific purpose. Further disclosure: I've already purchased the S3, but now the S5 is available and I'm still within the window of opportunity to return the S3.

GaryBakker

epetti wrote:

More resolution does mean more detail captured. However, it also means more noise captured or introduced. So depending on how immune the sensor is to noise or how well the software handles it, you could lose the detail you gained through the noise reduction software.

That's what I thought. It is an interesting issue to me. I can't seem to find anything conclusive on the web. That's why I asked about it here.

It's hard to justify spending an additional $150 if the benefits are a wash. What to do. What to do.

You make a good point about the 0.5" LCD size increase. It's a bigger improvement than I give Canon credit for. I guess because some other LCDs in this class are at 3".

claudermilk

Since the changes in sensor are a wash, don't base your purchase decision on that. Look at all the other specs for what fits your needs better. It's generally agreed going from 6MP to 8MP is a small difference particularly with common use (web, email, 4x6 prints).

BTW, we know here that DSLRs are not for everyone. If you need a P&S, then that's what you need.

LeeSC

Unless you have to have a hotshoe, go with the S3. Cramming 8 MP onto a sensor which has problems with low light noise at 6 MP just doesn't make sense. All they are doing is increasing the noise. The LCD size increase is nice, but the S3's LCD is large enough for most people now.

I own an S3 and can tell you it is a very capable little camera, as long as you know it's limitations. It offers mediocre low light performance at best. ISO800 is pretty much unusable. The on board flash is insufficient and can produce some nasty flash results.

On the flip size, in good lighting it takes some pretty remarkable pictures. I have taken and seen some photos that make high end dSLRer's jaw drop. The ability to go from 12x zoom to macro mode by pressing a button is also pretty remarkable. RAW mode is available is you use the software hack put out by end users.

I recently bought a dSLR for low light and action shooting. After using a dSLR for awhile, I am beginning to realize just what a great little camera the S3 is. Epsecially for a camera that you can carry in your cargo pocket.

Lee

nymusicman

I know this talk started quite a few months ago but for anybody still looking at it, the price of the two cameras are no longer that significant. So I have a question. If you lowered the resolution of the picture on the S5 would you get the same picture quality as the S3 or is the chip in the S5 completely ruined because they are trying to cram 8 MP on there? This question comes with the understanding that if you change the resolution of the picture you are adjusting the amount of MP being used.

So to reiterate the question if you set the S5 camera to a resolution equal to 6 MP would the pictures come out the same as if you took the with the S3 or would they still come out ultimately worse.

ziggy53

nymusicman wrote:

I know this talk started quite a few months ago but for anybody still looking at it, the price of the two cameras are no longer that significant. So I have a question. If you lowered the resolution of the picture on the S5 would you get the same picture quality as the S3 or is the chip in the S5 completely ruined because they are trying to cram 8 MP on there? This question comes with the understanding that if you change the resolution of the picture you are adjusting the amount of MP being used.

So to reiterate the question if you set the S5 camera to a resolution equal to 6 MP would the pictures come out the same as if you took the with the S3 or would they still come out ultimately worse.

I'm afraid your question is moot because the Canon S5IS doesn't have a 6MP setting, only a 2592 x 1944 or 5MP setting.

Regardless, both cameras are pretty terrible by ISO 800 so if that is your need, there are much better choices.

Of these two cameras, the Canon S5IS has a hot shoe and that alone would be my determinant, given similar cost. An external flash, used properly, can make a tremendous improvement in image quality.

Also at low ISO, the S5IS has more usable resolution and detail than the S3IS, and at ISO 400 that extra resolution could allow subsequent software noise reduction, concentrating on color random noise, and make arguably superior images, especially shooting RAW.

For snapshot sized photos, they would both look about the same printed from the same ISO capture.

Tee Why

You can look at identical studio shots with the two and see what you think.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons5is/page9.asp

Personally, I'm not a big fan of cramming as much pixels as you can into a sensor so small and both can probably make nice prints of upto 8x10 or so.

I wouldn't let MP count be a factor at all, but rather value, feature, robustness/responsiveness, and image quality.

ziggy53

Tee Why wrote:

...

I wouldn't let MP count be a factor at all, but rather value, feature, robustness/responsiveness, and image quality.

Absolutely true!

This is the last image I have of my son in January, 2008, about to board an airplane back to Camp Pendleton before shipping overseas.

Very much a "grab", he didn't want any pictures, I had to get the camera from my pocket, turn it on, compose, focus and shoot rather quickly. I had previously setup for ISO 1600.

FujiFilm F30, ISO 1600, f5, 1.100th, no flash. A fair amount of PS and noise reduction (Neat Image). But it's ISO 1600!

GaryBakker

I won't try to answer nymusicman's question directly because I don't know the answer.

What I can do is provide an update from my OP of a year ago.

I went ahead and bought the S5 IS and used it on safari in Botswana. I was (and still am) very happy with its performance. It is small, lightweight, and has a great zoom. The pictures are terrific, unless I had a low-light situation where the ISO needed to be increased beyond 200.

For comparison purposes, my son has an S1 IS. It's only 3 megapixels so it's not really a fair comparison. But we often took the same shot with our respective cameras, and the S5 in almost all cases produced the superior photo.

sanaka

I may not have much that's meaningful to add here, but I'm compelled to pile on because I have an S3, and am looking to uptrade it for an XSi kit.

S3/S5 are indeed sweet little units. The zoom (430mm @ 35mm equiv.!) and macro (will focus at 0"! Zero!!) are both just pretty incredible. I opted for the S3 over the S5 largely based on full reviews of both at dcresource.com. I wasn't planning on using external flash, and the S3 was a fair amount cheaper at the end of it's production cycle back in Dec. '07. As mentioned, the increase in pixels is not a free lunch: the extra pixels crammed on the S5 sensor actually show more noise than the S3; however, read ziggy's post above :-)

However you slice it though, ISO over 200 is pretty brutal. Neat Image just can't produce the same result as shooting with a bigger CMOS sensor through bigger glass. In Green Fleurdelis' case: safari = outdoor daytime, strong zoom very useful, compact, low-hassle package a huge plus, the S3 or S5 seems like a perfect camera.

Peace,
Sanaka

nymusicman

Well maybe my camera "history" will help everyone understand my situation. I'm actually upgrading from a PowerShot A75 (3.2 MP, 3X optical zoom) and I've very much so enjoyed this camera for about 4 years now.

However I noticed one day that my camera could adjust manual settings and I wanted to know more. So after talking to some friends and photographers and reading books on how to take pictures I started experimenting with my A75 and took some phenomenal pictures with it.

My problem is that I've always been disappointed with the zoom and picture quality when I'd be at a wedding or party where I have to take quick pics and don't have time for accurate manual set up. So I thought, ah... one of these mega zoom cameras with higher mp (even 5 MP is high for me) and new Canon software should be wonderful. Well I only came to this conclusion about two weeks ago and as we all know the S5 IS has come down in price a lot. But just for fun I started reading forums and reviews and that is how I stumbled upon this S3 vs. S5 problem. My goal is image quality (when my camera is in manual mode I shoot at ISO 50). I just want to know if at low ISO's which camera will take better shots? Or are they quite comparable?

From the sounds of it either one of these cameras will kick the pants off of my A75, but I just don't want to spend the money and be disappointed. At this point some people will say to just go DSLR and I agree but I don't have $500+ to spend and I'm not that good of a photographer that I could handle it in quick shot situations.

nymusicman

Tee Why wrote:

You can look at identical studio shots with the two and see what you think.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons5is/page9.asp

Personally, I'm not a big fan of cramming as much pixels as you can into a sensor so small and both can probably make nice prints of upto 8x10 or so.

I wouldn't let MP count be a factor at all, but rather value, feature, robustness/responsiveness, and image quality.

Considering if I was to print these pics it would be max 8 x 10 but mostly 4 x 6, I think I would be okay with the S5 IS. Thank you everybody so much for you help.

nymusicman

ziggy53 wrote:

I'm afraid your question is moot because the Canon S5IS doesn't have a 6MP setting, only a 2592 x 1944 or 5MP setting.

Regardless, both cameras are pretty terrible by ISO 800 so if that is your need, there are much better choices.

Of these two cameras, the Canon S5IS has a hot shoe and that alone would be my determinant, given similar cost. An external flash, used properly, can make a tremendous improvement in image quality.

Also at low ISO, the S5IS has more usable resolution and detail than the S3IS, and at ISO 400 that extra resolution could allow subsequent software noise reduction, concentrating on color random noise, and make arguably superior images, especially shooting RAW.

For snapshot sized photos, they would both look about the same printed from the same ISO capture.

I don't know if I need ISO 800 because my A75 only goes to ISO 400, therefore I have no experience with these higher ISO modes. I'am curious though, you said there were much better choices. What are they if you don't mind listing a few?

ziggy53

nymusicman wrote:

I don't know if I need ISO 800 because my A75 only goes to ISO 400, therefore I have no experience with these higher ISO modes. I'am curious though, you said there were much better choices. What are they if you don't mind listing a few?

In my mind, it's a very short list.

There is only one P&S currently available as new that yields decent high ISO performance, the FujiFilm F40fd.

The F40fd is capable of really nice ISO 800 and the ISO 1600 is OK, after noise reduction software, for snapshots.

Here is my quick review and link to full sized test images:

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=77225

nymusicman

The pictures are really impressive however I do need more than 3x zoom. I guess unless I go with DSLR I'm going with the S5 IS. Thanks.

sanaka

At low ISO, like 80 or 100, i.e. with plenty of light and good shooting conditions, either the S3 or S5 can give you excellent, just amazing shots. Here is one I'm kinda proud of from the zoo last weekend, shot with my S3 at full zoom:




While the S5 sensor is a little noisier due to the extra pixels crammed on it, this is only an issue when you're pushing the exposure envelope. In good light the quality edge would probably go to the S5 just because more pixels always = better resolution when they are good pixels, i.e. again, at lower ISO.

Peace,
Sanaka

nymusicman

sanaka wrote:

At low ISO, like 80 or 100, i.e. with plenty of light and good shooting conditions, either the S3 or S5 can give you excellent, just amazing shots. Here is one I'm kinda proud of from the zoo last weekend, shot with my S3 at full zoom:




While the S5 sensor is a little noisier due to the extra pixels crammed on it, this is only an issue when you're pushing the exposure envelope. In good light the quality edge would probably go to the S5 just because more pixels always = better resolution when they are good pixels, i.e. again, at lower ISO.

Peace,
Sanaka

How terrible is it in low light situations? i.e. church wedding, home party etc..
That counts as well for me, because it may still be better than what I have.

sanaka

How terrible is it in low light situations? i.e. church wedding, home party etc.. That counts as well for me, because it may still be better than what I have

Well, as was covered above, it's pretty terrible, or not too bad, depending on your expectations and/or just how much light there is. I personally am migrating to a DSLR largely because of the noise issue. A tiny CCD just can't compete with a bigger CMOS. If you want low noise at high ISO in a P&S, then the Fuji that Ziggy discusses may be the only good option. If the strong zoom is most important, the S3 or S5 seems like the bizness. Having it all may mean a $1500+ DSLR rig.

Which set of compromises you can best live with, only you can determine...

Peace,
Sanaka

powershotter_marc

LeeSC wrote:

RAW mode is available is you use the software hack put out by end users.
Lee

I am a long-time user of the S3 and am thinking of upgrading to the S5... I've never heard of the software hack for RAW mode! Please expand on this.... it seems this would help with the lesser-quality shots at higher ISO in back-end user editing...?

ziggy53

powershotter_marc wrote:

I am a long-time user of the S3 and am thinking of upgrading to the S5... I've never heard of the software hack for RAW mode! Please expand on this.... it seems this would help with the lesser-quality shots at higher ISO in back-end user editing...?

Powershotter_Marc,

First, welcome to the Digital Grin.

The method that allows RAW capture on "certain" Canon P&S cameras (and yes, it appears both the S3 and S5 models are supported) uses an additional bit of firmware extension added to your SD card and then loaded onto your camera prior to shooting.

Details are at:

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ