Review or Mini-Review Canon S95 or S100 for Aerial Still Photography

Discussion in 'Misc. Quadcopter & Multirotor discussions' started by webman, May 6, 2014.

  1. webman

    webman Administrator Staff Member

    One truth about this hobby - once you get a taste of what you can do, you often want to do it better!

    This can be said, in my case, for aerial photographs. The Mobius is a great camera and takes very nice stills. But I am longing for the next step up - maybe a better lens, better sensor and a higher resolution.

    I don't want to fly an expensive camera yet, so looked around for something nice which comes in at less than $200. I also want a rig which could be setup and flown by advanced beginners or intermediate flyers.

    After a bit of research, I decided to try the Canon S95 point and shoot - and rig it up for my Phantom. Keep in mind that this experiment is for still photographs. If video is your game, you really can't do better than the Mobius (IMHO) at a price point under $200.

    The S95 has rave reviews as a point and shoot camera. Canon has since moved onto newer models, but you can find the S95 on eBay or Amazon - I purchased a used one from Amazon for under $150 delivered. This comes with the usual Amazon guarantee...which means I am assured of getting a working camera.

    Here is the model page - note that the used models are "Fulfilled by Amazon"....
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003ZSHNGS/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B003ZSHNGS&linkCode=as2&tag=droneflyers-20&linkId=7HCDPJMDVFKTFT7Q"

    The first order of business was testing the camera. I took a couple still pictures to make certain it was working - the camera seems to function well. Here is a (reduced in size) picture taken by the Canon S95 as well as a screen shot of a part of the picture at full resolution.

    canons95sample1.jpg Screen Shot 2014-05-06 at 11.32.50 AM.png
    (Canon S95 Pics above)

    Here are some similar pics taken by the Mobius:
    IMAG0002mobius.jpg Screen Shot 2014-05-06 at 12.18.24 PM.png
    (Mobius Pics above)
    The Mobius is actually very impressive - almost makes me wonder whether the S95 is going to be worthwhile! However, it may be that the capability of RAW photo files combined with the narrower view make for some shots of houses and other subjects which are more realistic. Obviously, the proof will be in the pudding...or not!

    Details such as the bark on the tree (left of pic) are much more clear in the Canon when blown up to fuller sizes.

    Watch this thread for more information as I go along!

    There are two steps needed before attempting a test flight with this camera:
    1. Install the Canon Hack Development Kit (CHDK) on the camera so that it can take a picture every "x" second (intervalometer) . Without this software hack, the camera is incapable of this feature.
    2. Rig up a simple mount for the camera - so as to properly and securely mount it to the Phantom.
     
    Last edited: May 9, 2014
  2. webman

    webman Administrator Staff Member

    The Canon Hack Development Kit information is contained here:
    http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK

    Those who are not technically inclined may feel their eyes gloss over when reading all the various instruction. Fear Not! There is an easy way to install this software with only a few clicks:
    http://zenoshrdlu.com/stick/stick.html

    It is a Java program which works on Mac, Windows and even Linux. It will not work if Java is not installed on your machine - Java is free to install and may be available through your software update program or at http://www.java.com/en/

    Installing is a matter of these few steps:
    1. download the STICK Java program
    2. Have at least one picture taken with your S95 on your computer
    3. Insert the card into your computer or an SD card reader.
    4. Open the STICK program - note that users of the newer Mac OS's must provide a password through the terminal as explained on the STICK page. This is also very easy, as they provide a clickable script which sets this in motion.
    5. Drag a sample picture into the STICK window and push the buttons needed to go through the steps.
    6. Eject the card, LOCK IT, and install it back into the camera - even though it is locked, it will work!
    7. Your camera is now ready

    Screen Shot 2014-05-06 at 6.13.34 PM.png

    It's time to test out the camera and the scripts. There are many sites which describe the functions of the various menus in CHDK, but since we want to keep it simple I will start by testing one of the included scripts - a simple intervalometer - which can make the camera take a picture every X seconds.
    Some basic screen shots are here - one is the list of included scripts and shows the interval script being selected, the other shows the installed intervalometer (timer) which you can set at a number of seconds.
    Screen Shot 2014-05-06 at 9.43.41 PM.png Screen Shot 2014-05-06 at 9.44.06 PM.png

    Once selected, I pressed the camera shutter fully and the camera started taking pictures every couple of seconds. I'll want to get fancier with my settings, but this is good enough to move on to mounting of the camera on the Phantom.

    Here is a video of setup on another Canon model - one, BTW, which can be had new for as little as $80.

    IS 130 shown in video above is on sale at various places for $89 - quite a nice price for a camera to fly!
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AWYN0BU/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B00AWYN0BU&linkCode=as2&tag=droneflyers-20

    Also, the older Canon A2200 is available refurbished for about $50. Can't beat the price, although it does not have the same sensor quality as the S95
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2014
  3. webman

    webman Administrator Staff Member

    Curiosity killed the cat - but not the quad.
    Since I am impatient (about some things!), I went out into the garage and put together a mount for the S95 out of some scrap aluminum. I used a hardwood block to mount it into the standard GoPro-type mount which I already had. I taped some foam blocks to the rear of the legs so that the quad could sit and land somewhat on a level.
    mount.jpg
    (click to enlarge).

    The rig is fairly strong, although I am going to make up additional protection and better extended legs (landing gear). I also want to protect the extended camera lens mostly from small crashes or rollover on landing or takeoff.

    I took a couple sample pictures - without changing stock "auto" settings on the Canon. For comparison, I flew the Mobius afterwards and took a couple shots from approx. the same location and angle.

    The thumbnail on the left is the Canon - taken as a jpg and completely unprocessed.
    The right thumbnail is the Mobius. You may have to click them twice to get them to full size - or, download them and study on your computer.
    IMG_0127.JPG IMAG0079.JPG

    I have a lot more work and testing to do - so I will avoid any judgements. I will be taking some "raw" photos with the Canon and then seeing what can be done with those.

    As a quick comparison, the first two pics below are actual size (full pixel) screen shots of two parts of the Canon picture - one is the house and the other a cell tower and the peak of a nearby hill with antennas on it.
    Screen Shot 2014-05-08 at 6.57.10 PM.png Screen Shot 2014-05-08 at 6.57.36 PM.png

    Approx. the same view - which required some enlargement on the Mobius:
    Screen Shot 2014-05-08 at 7.01.06 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-05-08 at 7.02.12 PM.png

    As I'm sure you will agree, the Canon has an edge simply because of the resolution of the photos - the S95 is 3648 x 2736 while the Mobius is 2304 x 1536 pixels.

    None of this matters very much if your intended use is for posting pics on a forum or web site. However, if you intend to print the pictures, crop them or work on them in post-processing programs (lightroom, photoshop, etc.), this will certainly make a difference.

    I'll report more results as I learn more.

    Thanks for reading!
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2014
  4. webman

    webman Administrator Staff Member

    Here are some additional pics - taken RAW and then slightly post-processed and saved as jpgs which are less than 2 MB.
    I'm going to forward them to a more professional photog and see what can be done with the RAW files. If any of you want to download the RAW files, go to this URL:
    https://www.droneflyers.com/images/raws.zip (40 megs, 3 raw files)

    If you want to download the processed jpgs, go to:
    https://www.droneflyers.com/images/S95jpgs.zip

    I've set the camera shutter to 1/1000 - in the hopes to avoid most shaking and blurring. That should work OK for bright weather, although I may set it even faster.

    As far as the weight on the Phantom, I am OK with the prop guards, the S95 and the various camera holders - but I would not want to add any more weight. It takes off much better using ATTI mode (not GPS), and also flies best that way, although you can switch to GPS once it's in flight. My guess is that I have a total of about 270 grams payload in addition to the stock Phantom- this include prop guards, the various mounts and the camera and battery. This should put the whole assembly at approx. 1000 grams, well under the max. flying weight of the Phantom, but IMHO a good number to shoot for.

    Weight of Actual Camera with battery and memory card=195 grams
    Weight of my fabricated camera holding frame=42 grams
    Add to this the weight of the camera holding brackets and rubber vibration mounts on the Phantom.

    Takeoff and landing are probably the most dangerous for the camera - some of that can be mitigated by hand launching and capturing, although some people don't approve of that danger. Future mods will protect the camera better so I can be more confident about not destroying it.

    Here are links direct to the three pics after post-production by a pro photog in Lightroom - and then downsized to under 3 MB and saved as jpg you may have to click on it again after it displays to see full size:
    https://www.droneflyers.com/images/pro1.jpg
    https://www.droneflyers.com/images/pro2.jpg
    https://www.droneflyers.com/images/pro3.jpg


    CRW_0185.jpg CRW_0180.jpg CRW_0169.jpg
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2014
  5. IceFyre13th

    IceFyre13th Guest

    webman likes this.
  6. begreen

    begreen New Member

    The Canon clearly has better resolution and gamut. Add to this the ability to shoot raw images and it is a good choice for stills.
     
  7. webman

    webman Administrator Staff Member

    Last edited: May 12, 2014
  8. webman

    webman Administrator Staff Member

    As an interim summary, let me offer the following opinions and experiences.

    For most flyers, 'purpose built" cameras such as the Mobius, GoPro and others with fixed focus and shockproof designs will offer a better way of obtaining quality still and videos. Use of consumer point and shoot cameras involves some hacking and playing with the settings and mounting. Most are extremely sensitive to vibrations, so blurring of the photographs is often evident. Many point and shoots also cannot shoot as quickly as the Mobius, which can be set at one per second and even quicker (at lower-res). One crash is also likely to finish your fragile point and shoot.

    Those who want good experiences right out of the box may want to consider the Phantom Vision (about $1K or less now) or the Vision plus (about $1300).

    There are a number of improved sport cameras ready to hit the market, including one from Shimano (the bike maker). Sony has some nice units, also, although some are pricey. I suspect that a "super Mobius" will eventually emerge at a price and performance point which makes a lot of sense (<$150). Flyers don't need a lot of the features such as complete waterproofing, wireless settings, gps, etc. That's the whole idea of the Mobius.

    Although the S95 beats the Mobius, the cost and difficulty of use offsets this improvement. I'm going to try various methods to do away with some vibrations, however I suspect it's not easy. As it stands, the unit is suspended by rubber grommets and also encased in foam and pads. I'll report back as to whether I am able to reduce blur.....note - updated posts below show that I was able to reduce blur by using sorbathane foam on the mount and not using a screw to attach the camera. I also am currently using the S100...and experiencing good and fairly consistent results.

    Given that this camera was available refurb from Canon for less than $150, I don't think you can beat the quality for the $$$. However, as noted above, you do need to install the CHDK software and make up your own mounting systems.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2014
  9. webman

    webman Administrator Staff Member

    Another update - I traded the S95 for an S100 - pretty much the same camera with a tiny difference in the sensor. But, more importantly, I moved the camera backward on the mount to get it closer to the center of gravity - and, I also made sure it was isolated more from the vibrations of the Phantom(no screw attachment - just rubber bands and foam). I also set the min. shutter speed at 1/1000th of a second.
    I used my dremel to shave every possible gram off the camera holder - weight is everything in flight!

    Keep in mind that I have not balanced my props nor replaced them since buying the Phantom 6 months ago.

    The results are definitely getting better - to the point where the Photos (stills) are as good as what I got from the Phantom 2 Vision+.
    They easily beat the GoPro Hero2 and other sports cams I have tried.
    Here are a few samples - not taken RAW (so they could be even better), and not much in post processing. The enlargements of my facing myself are comparisons from just about the same distance - the Canon shows much better color gradients and less noise. This is normal for a larger sensor.
    All of the larger pics are downsized in order to upload here - to about 1/2 the original width (now 2000 pixels wide).
    IMG_0511.jpg
    I think the conclusion is that proper mounting, vibration dampening and the settings in the CHDK program can make this camera perform as well as most any rig under $1300 or so.

    twocraigs.jpg 2000-4.jpg 2000-3.jpg 2000-2.jpg 2000-1.jpg
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2014

Share This Page