B is Richo. 4 min into video. Hope I’m right. Pretty sure I’m right. Yeah. You get what you pay for. It was obvious. I’d get that Gr iii if that real dial didn’t break. Could not shoot that Canon with that awful delay. Also, the results were not comparable. Night and day difference. So yes, I’d pay more money for a better experience.
I think the dynamic range and the GR makes the comparison pretty obvious. Just picked up my moms old digicam about a month ago and I’m loving the experience. I also got the GR3X in December and really like that as well. If you have the money for the GR, get the GR or get both.
I've heard this before... how does the CCD behave more like "film"? (although I have to agree... I have some really old images on point and shoots from probably 2007 or so, and they look really pastel like, and don't have a huge "digital" feel to them).
I dunno. I think it was pretty clear which shots were the GRIII. Every photo was crisper, color and contrast looked better. The Canon's photos all look soft and smudgy.
@@vcuteverything I get caught up in a kind of thinking that goes like this "I get 80% of the abilities of the better one, but for 1/9 the cost, I should get the cheap one." It's a good way to analyze a lot of things. But having owned a GRii for a while, I know that there's no way the Canon is going to hit as often, and impart the kind of beauty the GR does. I wish I still owned it.
I have a little, palm-sized Sony RX100 II that is just a joy to use. I picked it up for a song pre-pandemic, now going for about $350. Can shoot RAW, manual, has a nice f/1.8 Zeiss lens. It's great when I don't feel like carrying around a camera bag.
The Ricoh was objectivly the better camera in every obvious way, but the S95 looked pretty nice. I think it would be hard to tell the difference between that and my Fujifilm X70.
I got the Canon S100 off eBay for $90. It's so small that I will just slip it in my pocket on my way out on days when even the X100V is too much extra stuff. It was a high end model in its day and it's still fun and easy to shoot with. As a casual "just in case" camera I'm completely happy with the price/quality/portability combination. I would never spend $900 on the GR-III, but that's just me. At that price, it just doesn't appeal to me.
@@Kids11111 They're not talking about the x series from Fuji. They're talking about the S series of point and shoot from Canon. Your comment is the one that makes no sense lol.
@@rajun50You should learn some comprehension. They own an X100V, which is what I was talking about. You realise that when a person mentions two cameras in their post, we are allowed to talk about any one of them?
Eh it wasn't hard to tell them apart at all. You just got to be aware of the shortcomings of the canon but if you're careful about taking a photo where it might not blow the whole scene out, weather too light or too dark. With a little color correction the canon has a look
I noticed immediately that B was the GR III because of his amazing colors and highlights protection. Although quality difference is hard to tell while watching them in a smartphone screen. However, it's not just the jpeg the reason to get the GR III but all other features it includes that make the the perfect camera for street photography.
I have always loved Ricoh!!!! My love with Ricoh goes wayyy back to the 80's!! I used to call my Ricoh camera the "MagiCam" because the photos just came out amazing!! It was years later that I realized part of the "Amazing" was also coming form me ;) I am happy Ricoh came back to life. Such a beautiful camera!!! Love it! Thank you!!
I instantly would choose B each time as my preferred shot the second the photos would pop up, but I honestly couldn't tell if it was the framing I was more drawn to. I think it would've been interesting if you guys swapped cameras a few times. But a nice video highlighting that just because it's an older camera doesn't mean you cant achieve great shots.
The Canon really seems to struggle in harsh bright light and the highlights get blown out so it was pretty easy to tell the difference - I just got a Lumix LX3 for 50€ a few days ago which also has a 10MP CCD sensor but I think it honestly produces better images than the Cannon S95 and it didn't struggle when I shot it today out in the bright sun even with the white snow.
@@MrDeeNicee yeah same, I had a much lower-end PowerShot but I pretty much always had the exposure turned down a little. It would be interesting to see a comparison when the exposure's balanced closer to the Ricoh
the Canon S95 is the best and most nicely drawing sensor lens combo. it makes the best exposure meterings from all my compacts and larger format cameras. it is even sharp and contrasty, just should not be handled by morons like in this video. because losers who can't expose a shot properly or work with raw to make the best of photos this tool can give you, don't deserve to judge this brillant piece of ecquipment.
@@krix0043 It is not a good camera in 2024, man. It was good for it's time and has good colours even now. But resolution, sharpness, metering are all crap. People need to look at things objectively, not with nostalgia tinted glasses.
The Canon is definitely softer even without zooming in, and it has kinda "bloom" on the bright parts. I feel like it's exposing everything a lot more than the Ricoh though, which makes it look less contrasty too - I used to use a PowerShot and I usually had the exposure setting turned down a notch or two, I thought it looked better for most stuff. It's not gonna get as nice as the Ricoh but worth a try!
Canon S series is literally the poor man's Ricoh GR. got my S120 from a marketplace and it's in bad condition along with a lens error, manage to repair it and so far this is by far the best point and shoot and will be a tool to document the moments i've had in life.
I got it right in the first shot because of the kinda of "halation" effect on the highlights on the S95 - kinda like a mist filter. But the result is very good for the price. And...just remembered last week that my wife have a forgotten S95 in her drawer. 🙂 Will charge the batteries and give it a go - I love CCD images, got a Fujifilm S5pro for almost nothing 2 years ago and the colors are simply perfect.
I own an old Fuji Finepix Z80 with CCD sensor and 14MP. Love its vintage output. Still leaning more towards my film cameras but this digicam is really great.
No doubt that you can really tell the difference because of the dynamic range. The highlights are blown out and shadows are really dark. It really doesn't matter whether the camera does have a good dynamic range or not, just bring out the possible potential and you can also always rely on post production :)
@@Christian6.1803 Why would you edit for hours? When you can just click the preset that you've created? For sure it doesn't need to be near perfect if you just want to have a decent picture?
@@r423fplip Of course no doubt that you should use the film simulation of the GR besides that's one of the reason why you did buy it, but I think you don't get what I commented? I didn't say anything bad about the GR but rather stating the fact that a cheap digicam can still bring out some nice photos if you tweak a little bit in post.
idk... I didn't try and guess which was which at first, and just chose what photo I like based on color, feel, overall look, and on about 30 percent of them I preferred the Canon.
As you said, It all depends on the end use of your photographs. People like Sean Tucker and also Samuel Streetlife, both use GR III for a more polished look and as we all know Samuel is a GR ambassador for Ricoh. As for just taking everyday snaps, with canon is just as good as any others in that price range. Loved the video!
Great comparison! I ordered a S95 the other day. With the cult following it has, I expected it to be closer in quality to the GR3-- to me the GR3 shots looked far better, particularly in how it captures the lower-light areas of an image. I won't complain for the difference in price and it being a decade old at this point though. Would love to see another comparison of how similar you can get the S95 to a GR3 photo with some editing in Lightroom.
I'm not looking at any comments as I post this. I paused the video. I noticed image "B" has lots of color and contrast, and is generally sharper and produces a better picture. Image "A" was washed out, lack of sharpness, and the contrast wasn't the best. I am going to hope that I am right, also because the Canon has a tiny 7.44 x 5.58 mm sensor, and the Ricoh is APS-C, at least my early Ricoh GR had that sensor, and I believe all of the 16mp GR's have the same sensor. Most importantly, I noticed in the beginning that the Canon lens had a film or fine haze, or some kind of crud on it, so that would cause some haziness and fog and lack of sharpness. I really believe that I am correct, as I have your video paused at 11:19. If I'm wrong, I will be devastated! So "A" is the Canon, and "B" is the Ricoh, final answer. Yay! I was right. I know my cameras! Although I really enjoyed my Ricoh GR, I had to sell it. Way too many options for me, and the lack of a viewfinder was the main reason I sold it. Too difficult to take pictures in the middle of the day in Arizona, trying to look at a washed out LCD screen. I really enjoy using my Fuji X-T10, as it has a viewfinder, and the images are on par with the Ricoh GR. In closing, this was a bad comparison, apples vs oranges, because of the vast differences in sensor sizes. You need to compare cameras that are both APS-C or M4/3's or full frame. Comparing the tiny Canon to the large Ricoh was going to make the Canon fail right away, in my opinion.
You overlook the huge difference in sensor size. I agree the gr produces better quality but I can make sharp detailed 11x14 prints with the Canon. Nice photos. Best. Mike
I mean, it also depends if you want those extra dark shadows and super contrast, or if you want to see some more detail in the shadows. The way a lot of high-end cameras do images straight out of the camera aren't to my liking because of this. I wish we could have a small number of contrast presets with cameras the same way we do color.
Have you looked at lumix g3 with 1.7 25mm lens just got it all for just over £100. In my opinion great value for it. Would love to know what you think.
I HAVE BOTH GR3...BUT I HAVE A S100! I LOVE THE S100!! IT PUTS OUT GREAT FRAMES!!! MY ONLY THING I WISH WITH THE S100 IS THAT IT WAS FASTER IN SHOOTING. I FIND MYSELF HAVING TO WAIT FOR IT TO DECIDE TO SHOOT...BUT ADVERB IT DOES IT LOOKS GREAT! THE GR3 ON THE OTHER HAND IS A STREET BEAST!!!!!!!!! GREAT VIDEO!🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
I got it right, but I own the Ricoh and positive film is my favourite simulation. The highlights were revealing. The bigger contrast of the Ricoh sim could make people believe, it is underexposing. But isn’t the comparison a bit flawed, if you’re using the same aperture f/2.8 on an APSC sensor and the much smaller sensor of the Canon?
I picked up an S95 about 3 years ago to replace my old A1000is. It had all the goodies I felt that camera was missing, although I may have liked a viewfinder, I really like the photos from it. I will probably get one of the newer 1" sensor p&s with the touch screens, probably a G5x, when their price drops enough. I am happy with the S95, but it's good to know that you can get more camera for more money though. BTW, I shoot raw and jpeg then if I have a shot I really like there is more room for adjustment. Shoot in neutral and go from there.
Is the Canon one-hand operable and its menu as easy to navigate? The answer to the $800 difference might just be there. I’ll pick the Ricoh GRIII anytime over other point-and-shoot just because I can operate it with one hand, that makes a huge intuitive difference, at least for me.
Oh, wow, this spun me around. For the kind of aesthetic I'd be going for in a street camera, I actually think the Canon could do me better. I would punch up the contrast in post and add some multidimensional grain, but that looks like a hundred bucks for a great foundation. Even considering it looks like I should be able to get a used GRIII for about three hundo, for lo-fi I'm leaning on the S95. Thanks for the video!
@@rokko_fableJust a few separate layers of grain stacked in Photoshop. It's a stupid-pet-trick, but it can work surprisingly well at looking analog-esque.
I like the Canon color science! If you print images up to 11x17 (A3 - 29,7cm x 42cm), the Canon S95/S100/S120 or G11/G12/G15/G16 will give you good results if you use quality paper and do some post-processing. Also you can use them in dangerous areas without worrying so much. I have a friend that is an award-winner professional photographer for half a century and he has stunning photos that he took with a Canon G11 a decade ago when it was the back-up of his back-up camera.
It depends. But given that software can be used to improve the image file in post, take the more affordable option, use it, improve your photography and outgrow it before moving on to a more expensive camera.
Great video guys! You both have great eyes and skills. I used to love that S95. Cameras have come a long way, but shoot what you want especially if its just for fun or social media.
I love my GRIII because it's portable, takes awesome crisp photos and I can mess with the formulas. Having said that, I also love my Sony and Canon Cameras. Love Canons color and Sonys autofocus but neither are as easy to tote around as my Ricoh. They're all perfect for different things. Oh and yes, I could tell the Ricoh right away.
Ha, I was surprised by how good the Canon was in comparison. I own a GRII. Also own a Panasonic GF1 micro four thirds camera and a 14mm lens which feels similar to the GR's lens. I don't see a huge difference. And I can swap lenses on the GF1 if I'm in a mood to. Which means I could have a GR-size camera with a 28mm equivalent lens one minute and a moment later, I could have a GRIIIx equivalent by putting Panasonic's 20mm pancake (40mm equivalent) on the GF. That's a pretty huge saving on owning a GRIII and a GRIIIx. Good video. Thanks for sharing.
In my opinion you can’t really tell a camera’s potential until you import into Lightroom or something similar. Once you start checking exposure, contrast, etc you’ll see whether the photo holds up or not (obviously things like autofocus and delays in shooting are apparent). Once you check these settings you’ll see how much light information your camera really captures.
I would have to see the images myself, but my photo editors and instructor all said that "the best zoom is your feet." And with proximity, other qualities can be kicked up a notch. There is absolutely a difference here, but I'm not sure it necessarily has to be as great as what we ended up with. I am not attacking the skill of either photographer. But every shooter is a little different.
Nice! The soft glow of blown out highlights in the Canon was the dead giveaway at this video resolution. :) You could see it as a bonus, and say that the Canon has a built in promist filter (or, maybe some finger grease on the lens?)
I'm still using old Panasonics DMC - SZ9 and Sony DSC - WX500 more for Video recording. I have better camera in my phone Huawei mate 10 pro that I'm still using with original battery all day, no issue. I'm using old Digit camera because phone for most of the time, at work for paper photo and other small stuff. Furthermore, I do not know how to name that feeling When I'm taking photo by the phone, I'm not feeling that I'm taking photo but with Digit camera I feel that I'm taking photo that making me feel better.
I don't know what it is, but the prize of all compact cameras and older digicams have (at least) doubled over the last year. I thought it would be nice to get a small, pocketable, not so expensive camera without an interchangeable lens to keep the cost down in the event of me or someone else dropping it for fun and parties, but looks like that option is long gone now with the prices today. Might as well grab my NEX C-3 with the kit lens.
I recognised the S95 because I have the S120 (the 12Mp version). I'll most likely never sell the S120 because it's a great pocket camera. 24-120mm zoom and a decent sensor. It's just a pretty good modern "Snap" camera. It reminds me a lot of my old Olympus XA2 but with a useful zoom range.
i have a feeling that this buil-in dark exposure is mostly Ricoh's default programmed filter. pretty simple one. not about the gear itself at all. ricoh still looks cool as hell tho.
The s95 was one of 1000s. a very common spec of camera but the GR is really specialised for serious shooters; cameras like it aren’t super common. Especially being a “unicorn” pocket cam (fixed and fast lens). They stay popular and expensive but these zoom consumer grade point and shoots lose value like nothing else in the camera world. Not to mention the apsc sized sensor of the GR
Noticed b was the gr from the first image. More contrast, highlights not blown out, more dynamic range,more detail. Can't say I saw it was sharper, but when you zoomed in, it clearly was. The gr is way better.
My deal is I'm a bargain hunter and score some obscure and shelf dusted cameras for less than a pizza. While there's no match for the GR if you had bought that camera for $20 and played with the settings and saved to the custom mode you'd still have a blast. Shooting in black and white is what I try to do with p&s's anyway. Fun video good premise. My new cheap old P&S is a Kodak Z950. I have 2 Canon G11 and various Panasonic Lumix's with Leica lens. Those are good glass and just fun to shoot.
I can’t help feeling like if the composition of the shots with camera A were better, it wouldn’t have been such a stark contrast. The quality difference is obvious, but I think it’s a factor.
Hey guys, liked your video as the canon was my first serious digital cam. And I liked a lot shooting with it as it's so versatile and handy. But let me ask you in which format you were shooting for this comparisation? jpeg or RAW? I was always shooting in jpeg on the Canon, so I don't know the results in RAW and how much could be done about them. But I might get back to it giving it a try...
I own the Canon S200, Canon G9X II, Panasonic LF1 and the Ricoh GR3x. The Ricoh is in a completely different league, it has clarity the other cams cannot match, even in the best conditions. But that’s only the case, if you stop look at photos on a phone screen.
I have Canon Powershot S95, bought it in 2012, and still use it like a pro, shoot in raw, lowlight 😁. It was high end compact camera at the time. The image quality is so good for a small camera, and it's very pocketable. I have other compact cameras - Canon G1X & Ricoh GR3 but they're too big to put in the pocket(due to APSC sensor size). For me, the purpose of compact camera is must be pocketable. If they're too big to put in the pocket, I'd rather bring my mirrorless camera
Easy to tell them apart but… how sharp is sharp enough? Most people never look at their photos other than on a small screen so the Canon may be good enough.
I could tell the definition was clear from GR, but I want to buy S95 for my trip to Turkey. The Price is $500 here in Australia. So I am going with something High end. Thanks for making me Homesick for SF..
If you wait little while, I found for example the Canon PowerShot G7X ii for 120€. So the cameras used market is 400-500€ but like, I got it for a steal. Sold it aster two weeks, and bought Sony ZV-E10 for it's video and photo capability. Got the Sony fro 450€. Sold the Canon for 450€. To me, a great upgrade.
The GR's Dynamic range is like the smart kid in class that is always so excited to raise their hand cause they know every answer. I see that hand frantically waving to be called on. Next test, Ricoh VS Nikon Coolpix A
You could tell that the Ricoh images in colour were better than the canon however it would have been interesting if you had taken photos purely in B&W because judging by your photos I would say you would find it harder to tell unless the Ricoh III has got a better B&W pre editing stage going on in camera. My Ricoh 8.1mp B&W are really nice so close to film images however the colour on my camera is very poor and I never use it that mode. It would be great to see this video done again but next time B&W please.
Even whatching on a phone screen, I found the differences very obvious. (Because Imam sooo incredibly good 😂😅) But seriously The Ricoh contrasts, the blacks and especially the details in the brighter areas were much clearer. The canon seems to have a glow or at least gets very washed out in the bright parts of each image.
For me the highlight bloom on the Canon was a giveaway, bit I loved it nevertheless! Those cameras share some principles but are not comparable... The difference in sensor size alone is huge! No matter the megapixels... Also any zoom would perform worse than an optimized fixed prime lens with the whole camera constructed around it! Having a small camera with capable zoom in your pocket is the only smartphone photography alternative! Unfortunately manufacturers stopped investing in this form... Ricoh GR is better than a phone in image quality but less versatile as far as focal length is concerned. It's crazy if you think that the majority of the photographs we produce for the last 10 years is around 24-28mm, so why pay so much money for something you already have with you all the time? Only true enthusiasts can justify the cost of Ricoh GR when digicams used to be for everyone!
This isn't really fair or sensible comparison, to be fair. One is a huge aps-c cmos sensor versus a tiny 1/1.7" old ccd sensor in the other. One was sold as a luxury point & and shoot, and the other is sold as a niche street shooter. Also, both cameras have manual controls, yet they were used as point and shoot cameras. The quality of images you can get on the older canon (or the Ricoh, for that matter) can be really impacted by one's choice of shooting parameters, yet I have no idea what aperture, shutter speed or iso each camera image was shot at in order to judge relative performance and image quality. The canon, being a small sensor camera, (which I myself own) is capable of shooting tack sharp images with the right exposure triangle settings (for example a small aperture for huge depth of field at low iso and fast shutter speed). Just my two cents. Love your channel.
I think u picked the best ccd canon camera. F2 and raw and ibis. I have the ricoh gr3x as well and its great. But the canon actually wins. Spec and out put. It has a zoom with a decent wide aperture. For 90% of situations. I think the canon s95 is the winner
I know you said positive film preset in the GR, but it would be nice to know what specific tuning you had applied to that preset, and if it was the same across the board. The positive film in the GR III is much more subtle than GR/GR II out of the box, and it's been difficult to replicate the older look for me with the III. These shots looked pretty good, wondering if there was some adjustment beyond the default.
Guys youre comparing 12 years old pocket Canon with 1 inch 10Mpix CCD sensor to a high end camera with APS-C size 24Mpix (!) CMOS sensor that came out 10 years later! Considering this fact Canon did remarkable job! And CCD sensor will always be softer its a completely different technology behind it. Youre comparing apples to oranges. I am actually impressed that this old Canon S95 could keep up with much more advanced camera. Buying a used one right away.
I think the price difference is worth it if you plan to print your work or show it off on a larger scale (i.e., website portfolio). Like you said, it always depends. If you're an experienced photographer, I'd say skip the Canon and go right to the Richoh cause you're going to upgrade at some point anyway.
But if you're printing then skip the ricoh and go Fuji X100V (or F)... not much bigger in size. Or go Sony's premier point and shoots. I guess I don't really get the ricoh, or maybe it's because it's the one camera they make that really anyone knows? Is their whole company based around this one camera?
You can pick up a SONY RX100 OG and it’ll be on par with the Ricoh Gr 3 would love to see that real life comparison and the Rx100 you can snag for like $200-$300 all day
Very easy to tell the difference. You probably should have equailzed the exposure a but more if you wanted to make it more difficult. I own a GR II and I have to say I don't really like the colors. People rave about the positive film preset on this model in particular but I find the color shifts and the way it blows out oranges hard to deal with. Prefer the old GR DIgital III with he 10 megapixel ccd sensor color wise. Wish I hadn't sold.
well it was pretty obvious cause almost all "A" photos had this distinct digital "blur" or like "dirtiness" on the sides of the image. but yeah, cool video idea! maybe you can also compare "film" presets on something like Ricoh and relatively cheap film camera with a similar lens nex time 🙂
Can you tell the difference? If so which camera would you buy?! Let me know down below gang! Hope you guys enjoyed this episode :)
What's next?
DSLR's? 😅🤣
Warmer colours from the Ricoh.
Canon S95
you forgot to clean canon's lens, there was a layer of grease on the glass, so it's pretty clear why it looked that bad
B is Richo. 4 min into video. Hope I’m right. Pretty sure I’m right.
Yeah. You get what you pay for. It was obvious. I’d get that Gr iii if that real dial didn’t break.
Could not shoot that Canon with that awful delay. Also, the results were not comparable. Night and day difference. So yes, I’d pay more money for a better experience.
I think the dynamic range and the GR makes the comparison pretty obvious. Just picked up my moms old digicam about a month ago and I’m loving the experience. I also got the GR3X in December and really like that as well. If you have the money for the GR, get the GR or get both.
Yeah, I totally agree. The Canon's photos looked a lot flatter all the time.
I also think a light edit on the Canon would make it harder to tell the blacks in the photo were gray.
I still use an original Ricoh GR digital with 8.1 megapixels for black and white at 800 iso
The results always amaze me
Just replied the same. Should have read the comments first 😂
The S95 has a CCD sensor which is one of the reasons those wishing to emulate film images often experiment with this camera.
I've heard this before... how does the CCD behave more like "film"? (although I have to agree... I have some really old images on point and shoots from probably 2007 or so, and they look really pastel like, and don't have a huge "digital" feel to them).
I dunno. I think it was pretty clear which shots were the GRIII. Every photo was crisper, color and contrast looked better. The Canon's photos all look soft and smudgy.
It was obvious which was which but is it $900 better?
@@Christian6.1803 It's $1000 better.
@@vcuteverything I get caught up in a kind of thinking that goes like this "I get 80% of the abilities of the better one, but for 1/9 the cost, I should get the cheap one."
It's a good way to analyze a lot of things. But having owned a GRii for a while, I know that there's no way the Canon is going to hit as often, and impart the kind of beauty the GR does. I wish I still owned it.
Very clear
100%
I have a little, palm-sized Sony RX100 II that is just a joy to use. I picked it up for a song pre-pandemic, now going for about $350. Can shoot RAW, manual, has a nice f/1.8 Zeiss lens. It's great when I don't feel like carrying around a camera bag.
The Ricoh was objectivly the better camera in every obvious way, but the S95 looked pretty nice. I think it would be hard to tell the difference between that and my Fujifilm X70.
I got the Canon S100 off eBay for $90. It's so small that I will just slip it in my pocket on my way out on days when even the X100V is too much extra stuff. It was a high end model in its day and it's still fun and easy to shoot with. As a casual "just in case" camera I'm completely happy with the price/quality/portability combination. I would never spend $900 on the GR-III, but that's just me. At that price, it just doesn't appeal to me.
The GR iii produces sharper images than the x100 series, and is more portable to boot, so your comment makes no sense.
@@Kids11111 They're not talking about the x series from Fuji. They're talking about the S series of point and shoot from Canon. Your comment is the one that makes no sense lol.
@@rajun50You should learn some comprehension. They own an X100V, which is what I was talking about. You realise that when a person mentions two cameras in their post, we are allowed to talk about any one of them?
Eh it wasn't hard to tell them apart at all. You just got to be aware of the shortcomings of the canon but if you're careful about taking a photo where it might not blow the whole scene out, weather too light or too dark. With a little color correction the canon has a look
I noticed immediately that B was the GR III because of his amazing colors and highlights protection. Although quality difference is hard to tell while watching them in a smartphone screen. However, it's not just the jpeg the reason to get the GR III but all other features it includes that make the the perfect camera for street photography.
I have always loved Ricoh!!!! My love with Ricoh goes wayyy back to the 80's!! I used to call my Ricoh camera the "MagiCam" because the photos just came out amazing!! It was years later that I realized part of the "Amazing" was also coming form me ;) I am happy Ricoh came back to life. Such a beautiful camera!!! Love it! Thank you!!
I have had my S95 for a few years now, and I still love it.
Just found an old digicam in our house and started shooting again because of your videos. Love the digicam videos keep up the kingjvpes🔥
I instantly would choose B each time as my preferred shot the second the photos would pop up, but I honestly couldn't tell if it was the framing I was more drawn to. I think it would've been interesting if you guys swapped cameras a few times. But a nice video highlighting that just because it's an older camera doesn't mean you cant achieve great shots.
I noticed the difference in the composition too.
The Canon really seems to struggle in harsh bright light and the highlights get blown out so it was pretty easy to tell the difference - I just got a Lumix LX3 for 50€ a few days ago which also has a 10MP CCD sensor but I think it honestly produces better images than the Cannon S95 and it didn't struggle when I shot it today out in the bright sun even with the white snow.
I always shoot with my s95 set to -1/2 or -2/3 exposure compensation for this reason.
@@MrDeeNicee Yes! That was my idea too. With this setting two cameras would be harder recognize over youtube.
@@MrDeeNicee yeah same, I had a much lower-end PowerShot but I pretty much always had the exposure turned down a little. It would be interesting to see a comparison when the exposure's balanced closer to the Ricoh
the Canon S95 is the best and most nicely drawing sensor lens combo. it makes the best exposure meterings from all my compacts and larger format cameras. it is even sharp and contrasty, just should not be handled by morons like in this video. because losers who can't expose a shot properly or work with raw to make the best of photos this tool can give you, don't deserve to judge this brillant piece of ecquipment.
@@krix0043 It is not a good camera in 2024, man. It was good for it's time and has good colours even now. But resolution, sharpness, metering are all crap. People need to look at things objectively, not with nostalgia tinted glasses.
The Canon is definitely softer even without zooming in, and it has kinda "bloom" on the bright parts. I feel like it's exposing everything a lot more than the Ricoh though, which makes it look less contrasty too - I used to use a PowerShot and I usually had the exposure setting turned down a notch or two, I thought it looked better for most stuff. It's not gonna get as nice as the Ricoh but worth a try!
Canon S series is literally the poor man's Ricoh GR. got my S120 from a marketplace and it's in bad condition along with a lens error, manage to repair it and so far this is by far the best point and shoot and will be a tool to document the moments i've had in life.
I got it right in the first shot because of the kinda of "halation" effect on the highlights on the S95 - kinda like a mist filter. But the result is very good for the price.
And...just remembered last week that my wife have a forgotten S95 in her drawer. 🙂 Will charge the batteries and give it a go - I love CCD images, got a Fujifilm S5pro for almost nothing 2 years ago and the colors are simply perfect.
I own an old Fuji Finepix Z80 with CCD sensor and 14MP. Love its vintage output. Still leaning more towards my film cameras but this digicam is really great.
Nothing beats my canon powershot SX210 IS. My $8 treasure
No doubt that you can really tell the difference because of the dynamic range. The highlights are blown out and shadows are really dark. It really doesn't matter whether the camera does have a good dynamic range or not, just bring out the possible potential and you can also always rely on post production :)
Think how many hours of your life you could save by having jpegs that look that damn good right out of the camera tho.
@@Christian6.1803 Why would you edit for hours? When you can just click the preset that you've created? For sure it doesn't need to be near perfect if you just want to have a decent picture?
@@senbismonte just use the film profile built into the gr cameras.
@@r423fplip Of course no doubt that you should use the film simulation of the GR besides that's one of the reason why you did buy it, but I think you don't get what I commented? I didn't say anything bad about the GR but rather stating the fact that a cheap digicam can still bring out some nice photos if you tweak a little bit in post.
It's a huge difference. I would not say they are similar. Absolutely worth it.
idk... I didn't try and guess which was which at first, and just chose what photo I like based on color, feel, overall look, and on about 30 percent of them I preferred the Canon.
Wherever there was a blue sky, I could tell immediately which camera was the GRIII. Fun video!
As you said, It all depends on the end use of your photographs. People like Sean Tucker and also Samuel Streetlife, both use GR III for a more polished look and as we all know Samuel is a GR ambassador for Ricoh. As for just taking everyday snaps, with canon is just as good as any others in that price range. Loved the video!
Great comparison! I ordered a S95 the other day. With the cult following it has, I expected it to be closer in quality to the GR3-- to me the GR3 shots looked far better, particularly in how it captures the lower-light areas of an image. I won't complain for the difference in price and it being a decade old at this point though. Would love to see another comparison of how similar you can get the S95 to a GR3 photo with some editing in Lightroom.
GR images are superb, especially in challenging light conditions. Way better than the S95 at any ISO. I hardly touch my S90.
Lol you are dreaming. These old digicams are crap compared to the newer GR's. I have the GRii and even that blows the S95 away.
Every time I watch a King JVPES video, I feel fomo. Let’s shoot again bro
I'm not looking at any comments as I post this. I paused the video. I noticed image "B" has lots of color and contrast, and is generally sharper and produces a better picture. Image "A" was washed out, lack of sharpness, and the contrast wasn't the best. I am going to hope that I am right, also because the Canon has a tiny 7.44 x 5.58 mm sensor, and the Ricoh is APS-C, at least my early Ricoh GR had that sensor, and I believe all of the 16mp GR's have the same sensor. Most importantly, I noticed in the beginning that the Canon lens had a film or fine haze, or some kind of crud on it, so that would cause some haziness and fog and lack of sharpness. I really believe that I am correct, as I have your video paused at 11:19. If I'm wrong, I will be devastated!
So "A" is the Canon, and "B" is the Ricoh, final answer.
Yay! I was right. I know my cameras! Although I really enjoyed my Ricoh GR, I had to sell it. Way too many options for me, and the lack of a viewfinder was the main reason I sold it. Too difficult to take pictures in the middle of the day in Arizona, trying to look at a washed out LCD screen. I really enjoy using my Fuji X-T10, as it has a viewfinder, and the images are on par with the Ricoh GR.
In closing, this was a bad comparison, apples vs oranges, because of the vast differences in sensor sizes. You need to compare cameras that are both APS-C or M4/3's or full frame. Comparing the tiny Canon to the large Ricoh was going to make the Canon fail right away, in my opinion.
You overlook the huge difference in sensor size. I agree the gr produces better quality but I can make sharp detailed 11x14 prints with the Canon. Nice photos. Best. Mike
I mean, it also depends if you want those extra dark shadows and super contrast, or if you want to see some more detail in the shadows. The way a lot of high-end cameras do images straight out of the camera aren't to my liking because of this. I wish we could have a small number of contrast presets with cameras the same way we do color.
Would love to see you playing with fuji X70 & fuji XF10
Have you looked at lumix g3 with 1.7 25mm lens just got it all for just over £100. In my opinion great value for it. Would love to know what you think.
I HAVE BOTH GR3...BUT I HAVE A S100! I LOVE THE S100!! IT PUTS OUT GREAT FRAMES!!! MY ONLY THING I WISH WITH THE S100 IS THAT IT WAS FASTER IN SHOOTING. I FIND MYSELF HAVING TO WAIT FOR IT TO DECIDE TO SHOOT...BUT ADVERB IT DOES IT LOOKS GREAT! THE GR3 ON THE OTHER HAND IS A STREET BEAST!!!!!!!!! GREAT VIDEO!🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
I got it right, but I own the Ricoh and positive film is my favourite simulation. The highlights were revealing. The bigger contrast of the Ricoh sim could make people believe, it is underexposing.
But isn’t the comparison a bit flawed, if you’re using the same aperture f/2.8 on an APSC sensor and the much smaller sensor of the Canon?
I picked up an S95 about 3 years ago to replace my old A1000is. It had all the goodies I felt that camera was missing, although I may have liked a viewfinder, I really like the photos from it. I will probably get one of the newer 1" sensor p&s with the touch screens, probably a G5x, when their price drops enough. I am happy with the S95, but it's good to know that you can get more camera for more money though. BTW, I shoot raw and jpeg then if I have a shot I really like there is more room for adjustment. Shoot in neutral and go from there.
Camera B looks better its a lot more sharper and it looks more contrasty idk honestly but it looked more expensive
Is the Canon one-hand operable and its menu as easy to navigate? The answer to the $800 difference might just be there. I’ll pick the Ricoh GRIII anytime over other point-and-shoot just because I can operate it with one hand, that makes a huge intuitive difference, at least for me.
Judging from the first image, its A for Canon, hahaha. The colors and detail gave it away. Tropa! Galing nyo!
Oh, wow, this spun me around. For the kind of aesthetic I'd be going for in a street camera, I actually think the Canon could do me better. I would punch up the contrast in post and add some multidimensional grain, but that looks like a hundred bucks for a great foundation. Even considering it looks like I should be able to get a used GRIII for about three hundo, for lo-fi I'm leaning on the S95.
Thanks for the video!
Multidimensional grain!? Far out man.
@@rokko_fableJust a few separate layers of grain stacked in Photoshop. It's a stupid-pet-trick, but it can work surprisingly well at looking analog-esque.
I like the Canon color science! If you print images up to 11x17 (A3 - 29,7cm x 42cm), the Canon S95/S100/S120 or G11/G12/G15/G16 will give you good results if you use quality paper and do some post-processing. Also you can use them in dangerous areas without worrying so much. I have a friend that is an award-winner professional photographer for half a century and he has stunning photos that he took with a Canon G11 a decade ago when it was the back-up of his back-up camera.
Is there a way to find his work with the G11? Thanks for sharing!
It depends. But given that software can be used to improve the image file in post, take the more affordable option, use it, improve your photography and outgrow it before moving on to a more expensive camera.
Great video guys! You both have great eyes and skills. I used to love that S95. Cameras have come a long way, but shoot what you want especially if its just for fun or social media.
I love my GRIII because it's portable, takes awesome crisp photos and I can mess with the formulas. Having said that, I also love my Sony and Canon Cameras. Love Canons color and Sonys autofocus but neither are as easy to tote around as my Ricoh. They're all perfect for different things. Oh and yes, I could tell the Ricoh right away.
As a gr3 user
pros of gr3 is 28mm 2.8 lens, ibis, nice raw, 24mp aps-c sensor, snap focus, internal 2gb storage.
How did you take the picture with the closed sign? Whats's the mode called and is it Canon only?
Ha, I was surprised by how good the Canon was in comparison. I own a GRII. Also own a Panasonic GF1 micro four thirds camera and a 14mm lens which feels similar to the GR's lens. I don't see a huge difference. And I can swap lenses on the GF1 if I'm in a mood to. Which means I could have a GR-size camera with a 28mm equivalent lens one minute and a moment later, I could have a GRIIIx equivalent by putting Panasonic's 20mm pancake (40mm equivalent) on the GF. That's a pretty huge saving on owning a GRIII and a GRIIIx. Good video. Thanks for sharing.
Hey, that orange cross body bag looks nice. Which brand model is it?
I liked the image A results and therefore thought A was the Ricoh. So, now I'm impressed by the Canon.
A ---> Canon, B ---> Ricoh, and I didn't fast forward :-) But in some situations it is difficult to distinguish between them.
In my opinion you can’t really tell a camera’s potential until you import into Lightroom or something similar. Once you start checking exposure, contrast, etc you’ll see whether the photo holds up or not (obviously things like autofocus and delays in shooting are apparent). Once you check these settings you’ll see how much light information your camera really captures.
It's easy to tell, I've recognized Ricoh by it's colors and shades resolution from the first shot.
The wrong photo shown at 11:30 totally confused me
Ive been too long use Canon i recognise that blue sky colour right away
The teal shade of blue gave the Ricoh positive film colours away on photo 1. Nice comparison though.
After this video prices for the $100 camera on eBay skyrocketed to way over $300!!!!!
I would have to see the images myself, but my photo editors and instructor all said that "the best zoom is your feet." And with proximity, other qualities can be kicked up a notch.
There is absolutely a difference here, but I'm not sure it necessarily has to be as great as what we ended up with.
I am not attacking the skill of either photographer. But every shooter is a little different.
Nice! The soft glow of blown out highlights in the Canon was the dead giveaway at this video resolution. :) You could see it as a bonus, and say that the Canon has a built in promist filter (or, maybe some finger grease on the lens?)
I chose the canon each time, prefer the colours and the softness over the sharp contrasty gr
I'm still using old Panasonics DMC - SZ9 and Sony DSC - WX500 more for Video recording. I have better camera in my phone Huawei mate 10 pro that I'm still using with original battery all day, no issue. I'm using old Digit camera because phone for most of the time, at work for paper photo and other small stuff. Furthermore, I do not know how to name that feeling When I'm taking photo by the phone, I'm not feeling that I'm taking photo but with Digit camera I feel that I'm taking photo that making me feel better.
what color preset did you use on your GR3? the images look amazing!
i like the ash orange bag :) , do you know wick model is? Thanks
Can you say the model please? Thanks
hello! one question. Did u edit these images or did they come straight out of camera ?
I don't know what it is, but the prize of all compact cameras and older digicams have (at least) doubled over the last year. I thought it would be nice to get a small, pocketable, not so expensive camera without an interchangeable lens to keep the cost down in the event of me or someone else dropping it for fun and parties, but looks like that option is long gone now with the prices today.
Might as well grab my NEX C-3 with the kit lens.
I recognised the S95 because I have the S120 (the 12Mp version). I'll most likely never sell the S120 because it's a great pocket camera. 24-120mm zoom and a decent sensor.
It's just a pretty good modern "Snap" camera. It reminds me a lot of my old Olympus XA2 but with a useful zoom range.
11:08 you can see the finger print or smudge on the lens kinda gave it away for all the shots
Maybe next time you can compare the Ricoh GRIII with a Leica Q2. I think the price difference is about £4000. That would be interesting!
i have a feeling that this buil-in dark exposure is mostly Ricoh's default programmed filter. pretty simple one. not about the gear itself at all. ricoh still looks cool as hell tho.
For photography, I'd say worth it. For lightheartedness & fun sure, the s95.
Todays $900 GRIII is tomorrow's $100 S95....
Doubt it, you can’t buy the grii for less than £400…if you can find one.
I’ve been watching the gr for a few years and the price never changes.
The s95 was one of 1000s. a very common spec of camera but the GR is really specialised for serious shooters; cameras like it aren’t super common. Especially being a “unicorn” pocket cam (fixed and fast lens). They stay popular and expensive but these zoom consumer grade point and shoots lose value like nothing else in the camera world.
Not to mention the apsc sized sensor of the GR
Correct. But tomorrow i am dead……
You can't find any GR (all of them) for less than $250
Noticed b was the gr from the first image. More contrast, highlights not blown out, more dynamic range,more detail.
Can't say I saw it was sharper, but when you zoomed in, it clearly was. The gr is way better.
You guys started to shoot comparison with only 1 bar left on each camera?
My deal is I'm a bargain hunter and score some obscure and shelf dusted cameras for less than a pizza. While there's no match for the GR if you had bought that camera for $20 and played with the settings and saved to the custom mode you'd still have a blast. Shooting in black and white is what I try to do with p&s's anyway. Fun video good premise. My new cheap old P&S is a Kodak Z950. I have 2 Canon G11 and various Panasonic Lumix's with Leica lens. Those are good glass and just fun to shoot.
I can’t help feeling like if the composition of the shots with camera A were better, it wouldn’t have been such a stark contrast. The quality difference is obvious, but I think it’s a factor.
Did you try the snap focus on the Sony ?
Hey guys, liked your video as the canon was my first serious digital cam. And I liked a lot shooting with it as it's so versatile and handy. But let me ask you in which format you were shooting for this comparisation? jpeg or RAW? I was always shooting in jpeg on the Canon, so I don't know the results in RAW and how much could be done about them. But I might get back to it giving it a try...
The funny thing is we can get a 5D mark II for around $200-250 ($2700 originally) or an S95 for $200 ($400 originally). The digicams are hot now.
I own the Canon S200, Canon G9X II, Panasonic LF1 and the Ricoh GR3x. The Ricoh is in a completely different league, it has clarity the other cams cannot match, even in the best conditions. But that’s only the case, if you stop look at photos on a phone screen.
I have Canon Powershot S95, bought it in 2012, and still use it like a pro, shoot in raw, lowlight 😁. It was high end compact camera at the time. The image quality is so good for a small camera, and it's very pocketable.
I have other compact cameras - Canon G1X & Ricoh GR3 but they're too big to put in the pocket(due to APSC sensor size). For me, the purpose of compact camera is must be pocketable. If they're too big to put in the pocket, I'd rather bring my mirrorless camera
Easy to tell them apart but… how sharp is sharp enough? Most people never look at their photos other than on a small screen so the Canon may be good enough.
I could tell the definition was clear from GR, but I want to buy S95 for my trip to Turkey. The Price is $500 here in Australia. So I am going with something High end. Thanks for making me Homesick for SF..
If you wait little while, I found for example the Canon PowerShot G7X ii for 120€. So the cameras used market is 400-500€ but like, I got it for a steal. Sold it aster two weeks, and bought Sony ZV-E10 for it's video and photo capability. Got the Sony fro 450€. Sold the Canon for 450€. To me, a great upgrade.
The GR's Dynamic range is like the smart kid in class that is always so excited to raise their hand cause they know every answer. I see that hand frantically waving to be called on. Next test, Ricoh VS Nikon Coolpix A
You could tell that the Ricoh images in colour were better than the canon however it would have been interesting if you had taken photos purely in B&W because judging by your photos I would say you would find it harder to tell unless the Ricoh III has got a better B&W pre editing stage going on in camera. My Ricoh 8.1mp B&W are really nice so close to film images however the colour on my camera is very poor and I never use it that mode. It would be great to see this video done again but next time B&W please.
Even whatching on a phone screen, I found the differences very obvious. (Because Imam sooo incredibly good 😂😅)
But seriously The Ricoh contrasts, the blacks and especially the details in the brighter areas were much clearer.
The canon seems to have a glow or at least gets very washed out in the bright parts of each image.
For me the highlight bloom on the Canon was a giveaway, bit I loved it nevertheless!
Those cameras share some principles but are not comparable...
The difference in sensor size alone is huge! No matter the megapixels... Also any zoom would perform worse than an optimized fixed prime lens with the whole camera constructed around it!
Having a small camera with capable zoom in your pocket is the only smartphone photography alternative! Unfortunately manufacturers stopped investing in this form...
Ricoh GR is better than a phone in image quality but less versatile as far as focal length is concerned.
It's crazy if you think that the majority of the photographs we produce for the last 10 years is around 24-28mm, so why pay so much money for something you already have with you all the time?
Only true enthusiasts can justify the cost of Ricoh GR when digicams used to be for everyone!
Are the sample photos edited or these raw?
This isn't really fair or sensible comparison, to be fair. One is a huge aps-c cmos sensor versus a tiny 1/1.7" old ccd sensor in the other. One was sold as a luxury point & and shoot, and the other is sold as a niche street shooter. Also, both cameras have manual controls, yet they were used as point and shoot cameras. The quality of images you can get on the older canon (or the Ricoh, for that matter) can be really impacted by one's choice of shooting parameters, yet I have no idea what aperture, shutter speed or iso each camera image was shot at in order to judge relative performance and image quality. The canon, being a small sensor camera, (which I myself own) is capable of shooting tack sharp images with the right exposure triangle settings (for example a small aperture for huge depth of field at low iso and fast shutter speed). Just my two cents. Love your channel.
It's kinda easy to go with the guess. Nice job film stream like of GRIII
I like the shots labeled B. I hope that is the Ricoh GRIII.
Easy tells for the Canon and GR, fun episode.
I think u picked the best ccd canon camera. F2 and raw and ibis.
I have the ricoh gr3x as well and its great. But the canon actually wins. Spec and out put. It has a zoom with a decent wide aperture. For 90% of situations. I think the canon s95 is the winner
Fun and light-hearted, sure, it's fine to go budget. But when it comes to documenting my family, the quality difference is well worth the price.
Dynamic range, colors, sharpness... so many differences. With the GR you can shoot in a multitude of light situations, not with a cheaper one.
I know you said positive film preset in the GR, but it would be nice to know what specific tuning you had applied to that preset, and if it was the same across the board.
The positive film in the GR III is much more subtle than GR/GR II out of the box, and it's been difficult to replicate the older look for me with the III. These shots looked pretty good, wondering if there was some adjustment beyond the default.
Guys youre comparing 12 years old pocket Canon with 1 inch 10Mpix CCD sensor to a high end camera with APS-C size 24Mpix (!) CMOS sensor that came out 10 years later! Considering this fact Canon did remarkable job! And CCD sensor will always be softer its a completely different technology behind it. Youre comparing apples to oranges. I am actually impressed that this old Canon S95 could keep up with much more advanced camera. Buying a used one right away.
I think the price difference is worth it if you plan to print your work or show it off on a larger scale (i.e., website portfolio). Like you said, it always depends. If you're an experienced photographer, I'd say skip the Canon and go right to the Richoh cause you're going to upgrade at some point anyway.
But if you're printing then skip the ricoh and go Fuji X100V (or F)... not much bigger in size. Or go Sony's premier point and shoots. I guess I don't really get the ricoh, or maybe it's because it's the one camera they make that really anyone knows? Is their whole company based around this one camera?
You can pick up a SONY RX100 OG and it’ll be on par with the Ricoh Gr 3 would love to see that real life comparison and the Rx100 you can snag for like $200-$300 all day
I have looked but don't see the s95 under $260
Love the griii want to buy it again. Only sold it bc I was more into portraits
Very easy to tell the difference. You probably should have equailzed the exposure a but more if you wanted to make it more difficult.
I own a GR II and I have to say I don't really like the colors. People rave about the positive film preset on this model in particular but I find the color shifts and the way it blows out oranges hard to deal with. Prefer the old GR DIgital III with he 10 megapixel ccd sensor color wise. Wish I hadn't sold.
well it was pretty obvious cause almost all "A" photos had this distinct digital "blur" or like "dirtiness" on the sides of the image. but yeah, cool video idea! maybe you can also compare "film" presets on something like Ricoh and relatively cheap film camera with a similar lens nex time
🙂
have you edited the photos?