ArticlesProduct Reviews & PreviewsRoundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras

Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras

By Barney Britton, R Butler | Published Dec 18, 2012 | Product Reviews & Previews

Tagged with: canon fujifilm nikon olympus panasonic review samsung sony

Fujifilm XF1

12MP | 25-100mm (4x) Zoom | $450 (US) £320 (UK) €460 (EU)

The Fujifilm XF1 is the latest in its reputation-building 'X' series - with the company showing off what it's capable of doing. It's impressive in terms of specifications but it also tries to offer something distinctive in terms of design and technology. Conceptually the XF1 sits towards the Canon S-series end of the spectrum - prioritizing small camera dimensions over direct control or a bright lens (it's the X10's job to fulfil those needs).

Key Features

12.0MP 2/3" CMOS EXR sensor (offering 6MP output with higher dynamic range or lower noise)
ISO 100-3200 (up to 12800, at reduced resolution, JPEG only)
25-100mm (equivalent), F1.8-4.9 optically stabilized zoom lens
Rear clickable thumb dial and four-way dial
1080p30 video with stereo microphones
3.0" LCD screen with 460k dots
300 shot battery life (CIPA)
Built-in ND filter
In-camera Raw conversion option

The XF1 is built around the same 2/3" sensor as the X10 - which means it's able to offer the clever pixel-combining EXR modes as its bigger brother. But, away from the technical specifications, the XF1's two great strengths are its user interface and its design. Fujifilm has worked hard to ensure the XF1 is both attractive and usable. It's one of the smallest cameras in this group, making it a clear contender for photographers for whom pocketability is important.The XF1 also has a very useful 25mm equivalent wide-angle end to the lens, making it impressively flexible, despite its relatively compact dimensions.


The XF1 is a beautifully understated camera. It's much more than simply a compact camera with classic styling - it's a well thought-out photographic tool	Like the X10, the XF1 has a manual zoom. This means less battery drain and more precise control over framing, since it gives continuous, rather than stepped, control over the focal length.

Although the rear panel has very few direct controls, the E-Fn button at the bottom right helps the XF1 offer a pleasant shooting experience for shooters wanting to take control over the camera.	Pressing the E-Fn button switches the function of each button on the camera to an alternate, user-defined setting - allowing quick access to all the settings you change most often.

Performance and Image Quality

The XF1 has three modes - a full resolution mode or two 6MP modes that combine pixels to improve either dynamic range or noise performance. Confusingly, the camera also has a second mode to capture more highlight information, but doesn't ever make it clear which you're using. And, while the EXR capability means the XF1 can capture 6MP images with unsurpassed highlight detail, for a compact, it imposes some limitations on the full resolution output. Shoot at 12MP or in Raw and you can't quite match the resolution performance of its more conventional peers. More problematically, fine detail - particularly fine green detail - is often rendered in a rather blurred, smudgy way.

However, the Fujifilm's images are pretty good unless you dig around at the pixel level - the camera behaves very well in terms of exposure and its color rendition is on the pleasant side of realistic. The imperfect corners of the lens at its widest setting, plus the camera's rather disappointing demosaicing mean the image quality doesn't live up to the standards set by many of its rivals.


Wide Angle (25mm Equiv.)	Telephoto (100mm Equiv.)
The XF1's lens seems to feature a lot of correction at the wide-angle end of the zoom - the corners aren't a patch on the performance at the long end of the lens, where it's rather good.

The portrait test is perhaps a fraction too bright but doesn't clip any detail and still represents the subject's skin tone nicely. Sadly the fussy bokeh means that, while the slow maximum aperture at the long end of the zoom allows some subject/background separation, the effect isn't as attractive as some of its rivals.	The flash result is one of the best of the bunch though. Nothing else in this group has done such a good job of balancing the ambient light with the flash output. Color rendition is good and the skin tone is attractively warm - a really good result.

The XF1's lens starts at a usefully wide 25mm equivalent focal length. This doesn't quite match the Panasonic LX7, Samsung EX2F or Canon S110 but is still pretty handy.	The 6MP EXR modes can be useful - this DR800% image, shot straight into the sun, shows the kind of dynamic range that is usually impossible in a single shot for more conventional cameras.

Summary

The XF1 is undoubtedly a pretty camera but it's also one that does a good job of balancing the needs of the different potential user - it works well as a stylish point-and-shoot but is still quick and enjoyable to take control over. The XF1's output lives up to the standard of its exterior design - the metering is reliable and the color rendition is attractive. The manual zoom lens, once you've figured it out, gives precise control over your framing in a way that powered zooms don't.

Ironically the one thing the XF1's interface doesn't do well is to give easy access to its EXR capabilities - one of the features that should help the camera stand out. Getting to the EXR features in anything but the EXR Auto mode is unnecessarily difficult, but the XF1 is still a pretty good camera, even if you choose not to use them. Overall, though, the XF1's slightly glitchy image quality takes the sheen off a camera that looks great and is a pleasure to use.

Studio and Real-World Samples (links open in new tab)


Studio Comparison Tool	Fujifilm XF1 Samples (25 images)

What we like: Classy styling and good build quality. Useful lens range. Well-designed user interface. Flash performance.

What we don't like: Disappointing lens corner performance at wide-angle. Poor detail rendition in full-size images.

Comments

Total comments: 382

I ended up going with the RX100. My life changed a lot soon after buying it. Women paid more attention to me. The local paper did a full-page feature about me in the Sunday edition. The mayor started inviting me down to city hall for lunch every couple of weeks. People I'd had differences with in the past came to me and asked for forgiveness. It's been really great!

1 upvote

Hello,

I'm wanting to upgrade my compact from a Nikon P310,

I had the chance to test out the Canon G15, what i really liked was the capacity of a sort of "Live Settings Preview" in the screen, i mean, depending on your F and shutter it would show you how "more or less" the light would look like on your pictures.
This feature is not possible in my Nikon P310, which you have to take several photos testing settings until you get you want, since i'm just an amateur/hobbie/occasional photo guy, i'm wondering:
which compacts besides the Canon G15 have this "Live settings preview"?
To be honest i'm do not like the Canon G15 for its size, so looking alternatives?

Many thanks guys

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

So I guess DPReview's recommendation is that those of us who need real wide angle and a hot shoe should just forget it and settle for an XZ-2 or RX100 because they're "better". The whole idea of a "comparison test" of things that really aren't comparable is just daft.

I have an LX3 that I use all the time and am thinking about going to an LX7. There are some really nice cameras in this group, but there is no other camera of any kind that will do what I need done.

0 upvotes

You're suggesting that no-one goes into a shop and decides between two slightly dissimilar products?

Clearly we aren't recommending any camera over and above specific requirements you may have - our recommendations can't help but be for what we believe to be a 'typical' use-case.

0 upvotes

My wife likes taking pictures with her Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH25 from the touring bus as it is winding its way through the countryside. But she misses her shots most of the time due to the slow response of the shutter button !! My question is : Can the Sony RX100 assure 100% success rate for her ?

Her birthday is coming up in a few weeks , I would love to get this camera for her if it really does the job . Thanks ...

0 upvotes

I reach for the Sony RX100 more often than any other I own. And I own many cameras, including enthusiast compact models like the XZ1 and LX3. The RX100 offers far more bang for the buck, in terms of image quality, than any other small camera I've tried. The RX100 is not the most fun or intiitive camera.. But the images it produces, for its size, in almost any light, are superlative. The LCD has let me down in bright light. it can be hard if not impossible to see. The RX100 needs a small EVF like the one the tiny Nikon P60 has, or an optional hot shoe-mounted viewfinder like the XZ1. I also use a third-party adhesive filter adapter, and t for even more creative possibilities, and it would be great if Sony provided a lens adapter tube attachment. I hope the follow up to the RX100 has at least an optional viewfinder, a wider, faster lens, and a control wheel with detents.

0 upvotes

As someone who actually owns a P7700 I can say the only place this camera disappoints me is the write speed, it could have used a buffer that it seems not to have. The photos that I get are quite good, sometimes it’s hard to tell its photos apart from my D300’s without a closer look. The lens on the P7700 is just excellent! I also get great flash results from putting my SB-700 on the P7700 using the Speedlight as bounce and the flash on the P7700 as front fill. If I could change anything (in addition to write speed) on this camera I would give it environmental sealing. I do recommend this camera if you can live with the write speed issue, I love mine and it’s just fun to use. If you want something simple though it might not be a first choice due to its enthusiast versatility making it more complicated.

0 upvotes

Hi Nikon doc! When I check P7700 reviews almost everyone talks about the slow write speed. I didn't have the chance to test it myself yet but would be grateful if you can tell me if your concerns are related to RAW or standard JPEG write speeds? I am seriously inclined towards P7700 as my 2nd camera (as companion to D90) for travel needs. Also I couldn't see any night shots with P7700. As it has a longer zoom than others, it is a bit slower at the telephoto end. How does it fare in low light? You would be doing me a great favor if you could let me know. Thanks...

0 upvotes

The specs say stabilization is via sensor-shift. In the review it says "optically stabilized zoom lens." Anyone know which is correct?

0 upvotes

For which camera?

0 upvotes

I've settle with carrying around my 60D even when its bulk is inappropriate to the occasion. I gave my S90 to my wife which she soon wore down. I then gave her my LX5, a sad farewell. I enjoyed the LX5's fast metering, focusing presets, fast focus, and generally great image quality. I sold my G10 - not happy with its range, though the image quality was okay.

Now, that the game has changed, I'm back in the market for one of these "enthusiast" cameras.

I'm hung up on sensor size. I'm leaning towards the RX100. Am I for all the wrong reasons?

Could someone tell me what the sensor size accomplishes in terms of resolution, etc?

My pick would be the LX7 only because I loved the responsiveness of the LX5. What does "largest image area" accomplish in terms of resolution, etc?

0 upvotes

Better low light quality and Swallower DOF.

0 upvotes

A better thing to get hung up on (though it's still only an approximate proxy for image quality) is the combined effect of sensor size and maximum aperture.

See the graph at the bottom of Page 2 and you'll find that the RX100's larger sensor doesn't give shallower depth of field (or, in theory, better low light quality), at the long end of its zoom, thanks to the slower lens.

0 upvotes

Hi everyone. I own a D90 and honestly can't take it to holidays with me because of size and weight issues (my 18-300 is on it most of the time when I am not running after bugs with my 60 mm micro). As can be seen, macro capability is important for me. I have made a shortlist with Fuji X20, Olympus XZ2, Panasonic LX7 and Nikon P7700. Much as Sony RX100 looks to be a good choice in terms of technology, I can't bring myself to like it. It looks too much like a point-and-shoot and the slowness at the zoom end kind of kills it for me. Can anyone with similar needs and prejudices (!) help me? I would really appreciate it.
Thanks...

0 upvotes

Cloner,

I to own a D90 but I'm having trouble coming to grips with carting it all over Canada in August. I've also been looking at pocketable cameras in the above test and am coming to the conclusion that none are perfect. The Sony RX100 worries me a little, the small size, while good in some respects may well get dropped easily. After some soul searching I'm coming around to the XZ-2, it seems to be a little more solid and the tilt rear screen may be handy on a small tripod. I also note that some camera shops are not stocking Sony cameras the reason I was told is the lack of after sales support?
Regards Robbie62

0 upvotes

Just purchased the Canon S110 and am impressed by the quality and controls. It has a bright lens and the image quality is very good. Wide angle is good and ISO capability is there beyond the competition for the price range. I like that it fits in my pocket. It also shoots in RAW. The only criticism so far is that I had a heck of a time threading the wrist strap. I found from dpreview posters that using dental floss can help threading it through the impossible. Recommend this camera.

0 upvotes

why there is no pentax mx-1?

1 upvote

Because this article was written around a month before the Pentax was announced.

0 upvotes

OK here I go again... returned the Fuji X20, shoot with a D7000 and Cannon S100, gave the 95 to daughter. So is the RX100 the answer. All cameras have, as we know, pros and cons. I want carry anywhere, a camera that will take me away from my (don't freakout now) iPhone, because I love to edit and share with family the moment I shoot (yes was a professional photographer for decades and now enjoy instagram and email my life "as it happens"). I believe we are all a bit nuts with the number of cameras we have/buy/sell/test/, but its what we do. I am guessing if the iPhone had an optical zoom I'd do fine. I also digress. I love to shoot, (as we all do), so aside from phone/photo haters who may not wish to answer :), can "you" say that the RX100 will deliver the images I want when I dont want to drag my D7000 around? Thanks for listening..

0 upvotes

Similar experience; I misplaced my Oly XZ-1 and am looking for a replacement. I also ended up returning a Fuji X20, and have been shooting with a S110 for over a week.

The X20 is a nice object, but hardly suitable for full-time availability (as in 'in your pocket"), and it's RAW is not supported in Aperture, which was a killer for me.

It turns out the S110 is much nicer than I expected, being so responsive. The touchscreen is well integrated and provides a very useful and quick interface to common functions, for instance focus aiming and exposure compensation. It's very clean up to ISO 1600 and useable a little further up, too bad you *must* resort to that when zooming in...

Now all that's left is for me to check out the RX100... The larger sensor is appealing...

0 upvotes

I've been most impressed with the controls on my Fuji XS1, and there is consistency across the board with Fuji. With their innovative Xtrans sensor, and it being larger than all but the RX100, the X20 would be an easy choice for me.
Too bad the X20 doesn't have a larger sensor (or too bad that the rx100 doesn't have Fuji's wonderful controls), but at least the X20's sensor is larger than the rest of the pack. And zoom range is quite satisfactory too. Now just to wait for prices to drop... if I can wait that long.

(and just in case someone brings it up, the X100S is both too expensive, and I'd rather have a f1.4 50mm equivalent lens on it - I'm not a buyer with a 35mm equivalent - not when I can get, for a smaller and price, a Samsung NX300 with 30mm (45mm equivalent) - but that's a different category anyways).

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

1 upvote

I'm an LX-3 user and while I have been really satisfied with it overall I would like a little more reach, and a little more than the LX-7 offers. I'm a Canon DSLR shooter and may have to purchase my first G-series soon!

Saijem is right though. If this is your first foray into the "premium" p&s market you really can't go wrong with an LX-3 for as cheaply as they are selling these days...

0 upvotes

pretty much all cameras discontinued so long ago are cheap, especially the least desired (sorry to say). that is nothing special.

indeed the very bulky g15 doesn't seem like a bad choice, although you might be able to do better. although this would not be my personal choice, an LX7 with familiar interface may be a pleasant upgrade for you.

1 upvote

@ Timmbits: the G15 is "very bulky"? -- really?! It's truly pocketable, and seems downright diminutive next to its direct competitor, the very nice P7700. Have you actually handled a G15? I have, and found it astonishingly light. If you describe that camera as very bulky, what words are left to describe larger cameras -- like everything in Sony's NEX series, or Fuji's X series, let alone DSLRs (and last I checked, DSLRs seem to remain pretty popular)? Seems your reference point is a smartphone.

0 upvotes

I wouldn't say the G15 is "bulky", but I also would say it's "diminutive" compared to the P7700, which is one of the larger compacts on the market. Both are excellent cameras, but not pocketable like an S110 or P330.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#383,364

0 upvotes

Save your money and buy a good LX3 and you'll be pleasantly satisfied. I am looking at all of these cameras and I find that they all have their pluses and they are all great in their own way. Credit is due to all of them. But... You can go to B&H and get a used LX3 with a 24-60 f/2.0-2.8, extremely well built, for just over $150.00.

Kick this one around until the next batch of super compacts come out and you'll be happy you did. Just my opinion. Thanks for the great comments!

1 upvote

It's impressive how much better these tiny sensors got in the past few years, even beating some older yet much bigger sensors in the noise and DR department...

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Really? You think so?
If you owned a large sensor camera, you wouldn't be saying that.
I used to say the same thing, before I experienced large sensors.
Results and user experience in the field and real life situations are quite different from results on paper or these test shots they do in a controlled lab environment.
Of course, everything is relative... I'm assuming you mean sensors smaller than the rx100 or Fuji, and are referring to large sensor cameras more recent than the stone age of digital, because that's not hard to beat.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Having a look at the studio scene comparison, it seems that the Canon S110 provides slightly worse image quality than its successor the S100 (having a look at letters e.g. bottle or watch). This is explainable for the JPEG results as the default post processing may reduce the detail. However, this effect is also visible for the RAW results. Both have the same sensor and lens. Is it possible that you had a slightly different setup in your studio scene regarding lightning or focusing?

0 upvotes

There has been much inconsistency and quality control variations with the Canon. You must be quite the Canon fan in order to even look at that series, because a shot in the dark, any one of these, beats the canon by a mile!

2 upvotes

RX100 is a great camera, but it is not 20x zoom. Suggest you read the review.

1 upvote

Looking for a pocket size only 20 x zoom with phot stitching
And fast shutter sped fr a safari. Is the rx100 right ? Thanks you

0 upvotes

I chose the RX100 for a trip to Germany rather than taking my Canon T3i along. I also took a Panasonic 3D1 along for 3D. I had each in a small case attached to my pants belt. I used the 3D1 for most snapshots and the RX100 for scenics. And wow, the RX100 truly did the job, and the panoramic mode is jawdropping. I've got some outstanding castle/river shots. I created a 15'x11.5' photo book through My Publisher using their hi-res glossy lay-flat paper, and far exceeded my expectations. The panoramas fit across two pages thus some being 11.5"x30" and everyone that sees them are amazed at the image quality. The 3D1 does a reasonable job for 2D images as well. The two cameras were a great combination, and I'm now selling my T3i on ebay. If I do miss something about the DSLR, it would be the need for a greater zoom, but as I found out, the resolution is so good on the RX100, you can simulate a 200+ zoom with little loss. I feel the need, the need for more travel.

1 upvote

Well I have never got on with my LX5 ... something about the colour rendition.
Also I want to have a camera that will fit in a relatively small pocket.

Looking now the Fuji ... is ok to hold , looks fabulous, has a larger sensor and is in the UK about £100 + cheaper than any of the others.

I would have looked at the XZ2 but really do like having the wide angle ...more important to me than the tele

0 upvotes

I'm an Olympus c-5060 enthusiast since 2004 when I read it's full review in dpreview! I love it's image quality, It's external direct controls, It's manual features, It's compact body and it's fully articulated LCD for macro pictures.
I would like to buy a new compact camera and I'd appreciate comments about macro features of Nikon p7700 and olympus xz-2. Thanks in advanced

0 upvotes

You might get more info if you post this in the Nikon Coolpix or Olympus Compact forum(s)- I'm sure you'll get a bunch of feedback as well as images.

0 upvotes

Thanks, I'll try it.

0 upvotes

I am a novice and although this article was descriptive and informational, I am still not sure which would capture the Aurora Borealis best. The viewing is at night between 10PM and 5AM and I am taking pictures of the sky. Any suggestions? It will be used for other trips but this is coming up and I want to be able to take the best pictures possible. Suggestions??

0 upvotes

I'm also a novice and bought the RX100 for just this purpose. The downsides are that the camera is a bit difficult to operate with gloves on, but otherwise very happy with it.

0 upvotes

IMHO, the RX100 is the best camera for doing astrophotography or getting photos of the Northern Lights. The second best would be the LX7, with its bright lens and super long exposures (250 seconds). I'd avoid the Canon G15 and Canon S100- both are limited to ISO 80 on longer (> 1") exposures, which will make getting good shots of the Northern Lights very hard IMHO.

Not sure if this lets me post links- but here's a great example from the RX100 taken in AK:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mkbergy/8099176525/

0 upvotes

I just want to contribute, concerning Nikon's night scene mode, and the software algorithms they use. I used to own a Nikon P7000. You'd think that cameras with a faster lens would beat the pants off of it. I replaced it with an Olympus XZ1 with a fast 1.8 lens. But night shots from the Oly were disastrous compared to the Nikon with f2.8 lens. Numbers don't tell all. You need to try them out.
For aurora, you don't need high resolution. You need a bigger sensor, a bright lens. They move, dance, so you don't want to keep the shutter open too long. Which disqualifies many small sensor cameras and ones with tiny photosites.
Ideally, FF or APS-C. Something like a Fuji X100S or XE1, or perhaps a Samsung NX series with their fast 30mm lens. Any apsc really, but Samsungs are affordable and compact. Other choices are Sony NEX but the lenses are heavily criticized, Fuji XE1 is nice although it's rather expensive but great 35mm f1.4 lens, and there's Canon M but heavily criticized camera.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

1 upvote

I read this article with great interest and really wanted to buy the Nikon 7700 - especially since I am a Nikon DSLR user with compatible flash etc. But then I looked at the price and considered a P7100. In the UK you can buy a new P7100 for £229 whilst the P7700 costs at least £150 more. Would I feel/see the benefit? Now I like the latest technology as much as the next man but ....... I bought a P7100 and really don't regret it.

0 upvotes

The P7100 was even slower in operation than the P7700 and its lens is a stop slower across its range. The P7700 is better than the 7100 in many respects.

1 upvote

I don't question the improvements of the P7700. My post simply questioned the value of the improvements over the P7100 taking into account the price differential.

0 upvotes

I purchased the P7700 and i am extremely pleased. Picture quality is very good with the external controls very intuitive. Every review i have read has mentioned the slow write times for raw files, it takes two seconds with an Extreme 45mb/s so i can only assume that i have a one off (lucky me).Although not super compact i personally walk around with the camera in hand so the bulk isnt a problem to me. I can use my existing Nikon flash gear and commander mode works very well indeed. Auto focus could be faster but thats on everyones wish list. I managed to find this genuine U.K camera for £300, bargain.

0 upvotes

Predictions for next generation, imho:
Panasonic, Olympus: we doubt they cannibalize MFT sales by offering 1" sensors... they will drag out the small sensor as long as they can, adding only phase detection, while Olympus catches up with a brighter lens.
Fuji will likely stay with 2/3" but hopefully moving to brighter f/1.4 lenses.
Samsung will likely add phase detection and more zoom range.
Nikon may wake up and offer fixed lens version of their 1 series, to compete with the rx100 - although terms of their sensor sourcing contract with Sony are not public - there may be a non-compete provision in there to protect the rx100 - and having the longest zoom range in the group phase detection is the only place left to go.
Sony is an exciting one to watch with their 1" sensor and fast lens, we are all eager to see if they can further improve the lens technology, stretching sharpness towards the edges and making it brighter at telephoto.

Comment edited 11 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

I got my wife the Fuji XF1 for Christmas. She's a hopeless point and shooter so I thought the EXR mode would give her a helping hand. I wasn't quite expecting the results she got. Beautiful colours, sharp, well framed and great exposures. Even silhouetted shots towards the sun were stunning.

The EXR really helped her out. This is genuinely a high end P&S. I find the lens mechanism slightly convoluted and vulnerable but everything else is just perfect for a pocket camera. Good looks. Feels good in the hand and the output is fantastic.

3 upvotes

indeed the exr modes are something that get overlooked in head to head technical comparisons.
have her give the b&w film modes a try too.

1 upvote

How come the G15 has Gold Award but recommended others do not?

3 upvotes

Because the G15 has undergone the full review process and most of the others haven't.

0 upvotes

To say that the Olympus is better because of the longer lens is to ignore the unique utility of 24mm wide angle. I love my LX3 and now would not buy a pocketable camera with less than a 24mm lens. It is a big issue for me, obviously not for everyone. Good pictures can be had by all these cameras. I wish that the RX100 had a wider lens.

1 upvote

although I have stopped using 1/1.7 format sensor cameras,
many of these would make an excellent gift for my 7 year old,
for her to learn photography with.
which one of these is coming down the most, and the fastest, in price?

1 upvote

Hi,

I own a Fuji XF1 since 2 month and I'm not disappointed at all.
I usually shoot with reflex (D90, D5100) and one year ago I decided to buy something "more" pocketable, so at that time, I went for a P7100 which was a serious compact (not really pocketable but more purse-able). Problem: IMHO the color rendering is not satisfactory, so I use it only in B&W and it's doing really good in monochrome!
So, I was still looking for a good compact. When I saw the XF1 that was love at first sight: classic design, manual zoom, 12 MP CMOS sensor.It had to be mine. And I'm not disappointed: colors are great, dynamic range is outstanding with the EXR mode and even at 6MP you can have big enough photos on your monitor or on paper. The opening of the lens is a bit fiddly, but you get rapidly accustomed to and really enjoy this lovely camera.

2 upvotes

Hi,

I've been doing lots of research on a advanced pocketable camera. I'm very near purchasing the S110, but could anyone tell me if there is another camera thats very slightly bigger than the S110 but with a faster lens (but still 24mm), still able to put in your pocket, with manual control, and a better battery life. It probably doesn't exist as I think I've exhausted the possibilities!

I have mu Nikon D7000 for my work, a Lumix LX3 for carrying around, but I've really not taken the LX3 out with me for a while as its still not really pocketable and I'm pretty sure the Lx5 and now the LX7 aren't any smaller, but I would still like a smaller wide lens camera with the same sort of control over the shot and a bright lens. On top of that I really don't want to spend the Sony RX100 type of money (plus it's not as wide.)

Any ideas on something in this advanced class that's between the S110 and a LX# in size?

Cheers

0 upvotes

You might like to take a look at the aperture equivalency graphs of this test group. The S110 is the worse choice you can make - any shot inthe dark and you will do better. Not only that, also consider manufacturing inconsistencies and problems that have been plaguing this category for Canon over the past years.
You already own the wide angle you want- why not get something different? Or why not just order extra batteries on ebay. You can get worse batteries, but you can get better too - look at the mAh. With each camera I purchase, I order two extra batteries - a spare to carry just in case, and an extra in case I didn't get around to recharging them which might come at the wrong moment.
Have you considered the Fuji XF1? It's sensor is nowhere nearly as large as the RX100's, but it is about 50% larger than the 1/1.7" in most of these cameras. The Fujis has 3 EXR modes, including dynamic range.
BTW, another talent of your Nikon D7000 is it's exceptionally good night mode.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Correction: I've been looking at the X10 in the graph, not realizing there were 2 Fujis in the graph above (page 2). The XS1's data isn't much better than the S110... unless you consider 2 of it's 3 EXR modes that double the effective size of the pixels through pairing, which would change this significantly (but those 2 modes also halve the resolution).
If I were you, I would hold it out until next round of product launches, to see if there will be more offerings with larger sensors, especially 1".

0 upvotes

So I walked in the Camera shop with a handful of hard earned cash all set to buy the RX100 (£479) after reading the great review, however, when I actually had a quick go with it I found the operation a bit fiddly (big hands) and the lens ring adjuster really frustrating. The helpful chap in the shop said that Canon has better features for much less (S110 On offer at £359) it just can't match the sensor and the f1.8 the RX100 offers as discussed in the review. I hadn't really considered the S110 as I thought it was expensive for what you get at the original price of £430 and too close to the price of the RX100

So what to do, is it really worth the extra £120 for the RX100 20MP or is the Canon a bargain at £359. I fear I would always live to regret not spending the extra, if I did could I live with its shortfalls and lack of features the S110 now has? I own a D90, which I love, but I travel light for work so a compact at the ready is where I want to go

I would really welcome any advice

0 upvotes

I own an RX100 and have used an S100 extensively (pretty similar to the S110). The image quality of the RX100 is another world. The RX100's f1.8 goes away very quick but at wide angle (not even 35mm, it's already much less bright) it delivers better image quality than your D90. Really, I'm not exaggerating. It has better low light performance than most kit lens APS-C DSLR's at 28mm. In comparsion, the canon gives results much more like a compact camera. The wide end of the S110 is outclassed by nearly everything with a larger sensor.

Operationally, the RX100 has foibles it's true. However, if you intend to leave it at 28mm auto and fire away, there is nothing short of a very good APS-C lens on a current DSLR that is noticeably better. I shoot wide, so that works for me.

Now, if you shoot tele only and never wide, the RX100 is way overpriced and the S110 is no better than a standard elf for 3x the money. They're both wide focused cameras.

3 upvotes

Mosc, many thanks for your advice... the key, as you say, is the image quality and that is essentially what you pay for. Interestingly I have seen the RX100 advertised at £404 on the SLRHUT website, which certainly makes the difference.

0 upvotes

sggclark,
I have used the S100 extensively, and I would say go for the RX100. The S100's image quality is really not that great, and the color rendition is rather poor with Adobe RAW conversion. The S100/110 is likely best for it's very small size, but if you don't mind the extra bulk (and, I hear, potentially frustrating interface) of the RX100, I imagine the cost would be well justified. (I grabbed the LX7 for much less than either, and while IQ is a far cry from the RX100, I am still extremely satisfied.)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

If you absolutely can't stand the RX100's ergonomics, I believe that in terms of IQ, there are better 1/1.7" cameras than the s110... just look at the aperture equivalency graph - a shot in the dark and you'll do better - literally, with any one. The Fuji X10 should be going into liquidation and a steal (with the introduction of the x20), with it's 2/3" sensor and great showing in the graph. it has nice EXR modes too, not evaluated in this lineup. Panasonic LX7 has been reported at astonishing savings.
You may have just been dealing with a crafty salesman who knows they have to unload their s110 models in light of the reviews. Also, the s100 model has had important quality consistency issues with the lens.

2 upvotes

I've had great results with my Canon S95. If you're willing to shoot in raw and edit your photos the results are very good. Took my S95 on a Mediterranean Cruise, shot 1500 photos, and have no regrets. Loved that I just could stick the camera in my shorts pocket (it was summer) and it was always with me, safe, immediately at hand.

0 upvotes

Reading this review makes me question the bias that DPR has for longer reach zooms over wide angle. Personally, I'd much rather opt for a wider angle than say a zoom that is 112mm equiv instead of 80 or 90mm. In most cases the longer reach can be countered by a tighter crop. However, the difference between 24mm and 28 is there is a whole lot of image that will never be recorded in the first place. Let's face it many people will be using these cameras in social situations often close up group shots. My experience is I'm often using a camera at it's widest setting 24mm, even 18mm equiv when I'm using my wide angle zoom on my Oly epl-2. The same goes for landscapes. So it is with some frustration that the options for me are limited with compacts. I'd buy either the RX100 or the XZ-2 in a flash if they had a wider angle lens.

I'm just wondering does anyone feel the same, or am I the odd one out here?

4 upvotes

Agreed.

0 upvotes

I couldn't agree more!
I really can't imagine that manufacturers don't know they could sell twice as many camera's if they had 24mm.

0 upvotes

I agree, and therefore the LX7 is the choice

0 upvotes

Definitely. Hopefully Sony somehow manages a 24mm wide end on the next RX camera. Even if it makes it a little bigger (but only just a little), I think it would be worth it.

I would also like to see an option to use the NEX EVF. And while I'm dreaming, add a tlit/swivel screen too. It would only add a few mm in thickness, and would be so worth it. The tilting screen on my NEX F3 is damn useful and fun.

0 upvotes

Is it only the Canon G15, Fuji X10 and the Samsung EX2F that have a dedicated AEL button ? Of the others, can they all have it allocated to a programmable function button?

Also,

1. What is the maximum aperture of each camera at 50mm equivalent?

2. From a purely image quality basis (in RAW ) how do the cameras compare at 50 mm ?

Any guidance would be appreciated, thanks.

0 upvotes

Thanks guys for a fantastic review, I was dithering on what to get and the article really helped in formulating my priorities. Thanks also to the people that wrote to Comments which also helped in making up my mind.
I loved the feel of the RX100 so that's what I ordered.
Cheers everyone.

0 upvotes

What about the shutter lag comparison fro these cameras? I consider this as a one of the most important parameters, much more than a design or wifi or touchscreen.
Do the Dpreview has some data on this matter?

2 upvotes

I just bought the Olympus XZ-2 after reading this, and many, many more articles between the RX100 and XZ-2 - I went with the Olympus mainly because I really find flip out screens very useful, the image quality is very close to the RX100, and it just seems to be more versatile all around. Having a usable camera is always top of my list, and while I appreciate the large sensor in the RX100, that seems to be its one trick, whereas the XZ-2 many.

Also was able to find the XZ-2 for $100 less than the RX100, but that weighed little on my decision. If they wanted perfect - I wish it had a 24mm wide lens, but hey :) - its got most everything else I was looking for.

Haven't got it yet (should be here in a couple of days) but looking forward to it. Have not read a poor review on it yet, so hopefully it fits me well.

3 upvotes

I have a question for the RX100 owners :

If you have the genuine Sony leather case, does it procure a better/suffisant grip with the half case on ? I Like this case...

Because the Richard Franiec grip don't fit in it. So I have to choose one of the two...

0 upvotes

Yes, I think you'll be quite happy with the case. I bought the Franiec grip but never applied it as the case was sufficient for gripping. IMHO of course.

1 upvote

Thanks !

0 upvotes

I bought Franiec's grip but haven't received it yet. Good to hear that the case helps with grip, since it would also help with dropping the camera, which I fear I'm likely to do...

0 upvotes

The Sony RX100 is impressive.....I downsized from a Sony A55. Photo quality is exceptional as is low light performance. Video is also impressive. And you can go from full automatic with auto selection of scene....to full manual...or something inbetween. Buy the third party grip if you buy the RX100. It works very good. I would highly recommend this camera..........

1 upvote

Hey DPR guys... :)

On the S110, did you not skip that the rubber grip is missing on both the front and rear of the camera vs the S100? To me that's a major selling point for the S100. It's the best handling super compact I've used yet for exactly that reason.

Worth mentioning because to me the S110 (and I presume others too) is a down grade to the S100 missing those grips and GPS.

Carl

3 upvotes

I recently purchased XZ-2 (having read this review) and I have been extremely disappointed with its focus performance. It can't lock on most of the time indoors with low light levels. So I end up being forced to use manual focus - it works great, but definetely not for moving objects: by the time I'm done setting it up, the moment is gone (when taking pictures of my child).

Everything else in the camera works quite well for me.

The focusing problem is really bothering me though and I am looking to buy a different camera that would perform better indoors - in low light conditions. Could anyone recommend what to go with, out of your own experience?.. Any advise will be much appreciated!!

3 upvotes

I also just picked up an XZ-2, after reading this review and being quite impressed with the samples. And I have to agree completely with your comments about the terrible autofocus performance. And not just in low light. Even in average lighting, I find the camera hits focus maybe 50% of the time at full telephoto. One odd thing myself and someone in the forums noticed: Focus performance is much better when using multi-point autofocus, in comparison to single point (center point, in my case.). Which is pretty strange.

I was hoping I just had a defective camera, because I otherwise love the thing. But hearing you echo the same sentiments doesn't give me hope that another xz-2 will be any different.

Note: I'm comparing the xz-2 against the xz-1, nex-c3, x100, e-pl2 and countless other CDAF cameras I've used extensively over the years, and the xz-2 is way behind them all in AF performance. It definitely feels like a bug in the firmware, to me.

1 upvote

For anyone wondering about the autofocus performance of the xz-2, I've thrown together this short video demonstrating how bad the autofocus is when using a single, center point at full telephoto:

https://vimeo.com/56734277

As you can see, focus is much more snappy and reliable when using multipoint focusing (even though it's consistently choosing the same focus point I manually selected). In my opinion, this appears to be some sort of firmware bug.

Luckily, using the touch screen to chose a focus point is fast and easy, as is manual focus using the nice big focus ring and MF lever.

2 upvotes

Thanks for the video - that's exactly the problem I've been experiencing. For except i primarily use some other focus point than center and in that case it doesn't lock onto the manually selected point when in multipoint focus mode.

In this demo the camera manages to choose the subject correctly with all focus points selected - however in slightly more challenging circumstances it simply locks focus on some arbitrary spot in the frame. I'm no expert by all means, but it seems odd to me that if i am setting up a portrait shot, the camera chooses to focus on the chin / neck area... To answer my own concern, it probably locks onto wherever it can see most contrast in this case. Again, this is true for dimly lit indoor scenarios.

I love the camera, and i am torn between the option of exchanging it for either p7700 or G15, each most likely having their own problems, or just keeping it and using workaround solutions (just that for its price it's a shame to have this limitation!).

1 upvote

Thanks for contributing to the discussion Airina. It makes sense you'd find the same thing occurring when you manually select a focus point in multipoint focus mode. In that case, the camera is probably temporarily reverting to single point focus after you selected the focus point. If I get bored tonight, I'll try to run the same test manually selecting the focus point.

You're absolutely correct in you assessment of how difficult it can be to work with multipoint focus. I personally can't stand having the camera try to guess where I want to focus, which is why I've never even tried to use it until I started experimenting with this issue. You're probably correct thought that the camera looks for the area of most contrast.

I also love the camera, and can't seem to think of a good replacement, for my purposes (the P7700s raw write times would be a deal killer for me). Hopefully this is something Olympus can fix in a firmware update.

1 upvote

In the conclusion: "The Fujifilm X10 is also worth a look for two reasons - its excellent lens, and an EXR sensor which offers the option of incredibly good dynamic range and somewhat better high ISO image quality than its peers. The tradeoff is that you only get these benefits if you're happy to shoot at 6MP, and the way in which the EXR functionality is implemented can be confusing."

That overlooks the third EXR mode at 12MP, and more importantly, overlooks the Advanced "PRO LOW-LIGHT" Night Mode which combines 4 exposures to give great 12MP images.

DPR, could you please confirm that these modes are common to both the XF1 and the X10, just to make sure? Thanks.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

The HR mode essentially isn't an EXR mode, in that it's just doing what almost all other cameras do (it doesn't make use of any special properties of the sensor or colour filter array, it's just a full-res demosaic).

The Pro Low-Light mode is on both the X10 and XF1 but we didn't have the time or space to go into every single feature on every single camera. Multi-shot noise reduction (which is what Pro Low-Light mode essentially is), isn't unique to the Fujifilms which put it beyond the scope of this roundup.

0 upvotes

With so much emphasis on lens brightness plus sensor size for good low light performance, it might be a test parameter to be added, so as to compare cameras' night scene modes' performance, as they vary immensely from one model to another. Beyond basics, this should be of interest to many.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting

6 upvotes

I noticed that in 99.99% of tests or when a camera is presented, the lens cover is NO shown!!! Why?! For example, for me a major issue is to take the camera in my pocket ready for unexpected street photo. In such case, I need only to pull the camera out, to turn the button "on" and take photo. In case of Panasonic LX7, there is NO integrated lens cover, therefore I have to take out the manual cover, to put it aside, and only after to take photos. Hopefully the manual cover will not be lost! With this example I try to understand why, in 99.99%, no camera is shown with the closed cover, manual or integrated, it would be possible to have already information on how the lens is protected. In our specific case, LX7, needs a manual cover thet is NOT in delivery scope! Eugen-CH

0 upvotes

The solution to your problem is an add-on filter ... like a skylight filter: it costs very little in terms of light to the sensor ... AND ... it protects the lens. When it gets smudged wash with warm water and liquid soap, rinse well in distilled water, blow off and presto ... clear eye.
I have had this since my Kodak P880, later my LX3 and works very well with my LX7. BTW instead of a skylight filter I use a "bandpass" filter that cuts off on both ends of the visible spectrum .. UV and IR. I don't now if it's available via normal consumer camera outlets, but is used with industrial/scientific cameras ... ''BP550' x thread size' from midopt-dot-com.

2 upvotes

although I get your point, I doubt you'd settle for a bad camera just because it has a cover - otherwise you wouldn't even be reading this section. an elegant solution for you, are those add-on auto-retractable covers.

0 upvotes

Timm ... the filter serves two purposes -- 1) protects the lens, and, 2) improves the image capture at very little cost in terms of light. Auto-retractable covers are great in that there is no impediment to the light reaching the lens, YET, they do not protect the lens when the camera is used.

Given a choice I prefer my solution, based on my experience.

0 upvotes

I have printed images from my Panasonic LX3 at 36x24 inch and the image was very good. This is a jpeg straight out of camera no pp Sure if you put your nose up to it it the image wasn't as clean but from a metre or 2 it was very good! A raw file would have been perfect! Just putting it out there.

Now how often would I print that big, very rare if ever so printing from the LX3 at 20 inches is no problem at all. Even a raw file at 50 inches would be doable. I haven't tested that but will one day at work.

Now I have my new LX7 and it is a super camera with images better than myLX3! So the statement that the LX5 produces exactly the same images as the LX7 I find hard to believe! My LX7 easily betters the images of my LX3 and I love my LX3, with the LX7 I question wheter I will use the LX3 as often? The lens and images are just must sharper!

All this talk about my sensor is bigger than yours is a bit overdone if I must say so myself! A camara is much more than a sensor!

Lex.

0 upvotes

Love my S90 which is simply brilliant (yes I know it has a Sony sensor) if it was lost I'd get another quick as (or its updated replacement) it's just so quick and direct - it puts my Canon & Nikon DSLR's to shame...

2 upvotes

I know this isn't the best/appropriate place to ask, but please forgive me as I want to get people to answer this that have read this guide.

I have never owned a "real" camera. I don't know how to use one. I have decided to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 as B&H had it for $299 (oddly the white versions was $449).

I am going to buy a book and some online courses to learn how to use it and take photos.

*My Question is* What low cost flash should I purchase that will work with this camera that will be good enough to use while learning? I have no idea what I need/should buy.

0 upvotes

Just my two cents: you're doing it backwards. Shoot your shots. See if you need a flash. These days, the low light capability of modern cameras makes flash photography unnecessary most of the time. If you find you do need one, the built-in flash of the DMC-LX7 might well be enough. One of the biggest lessons to learn in photography is to buy the gear you need, not to invent needs to justify buying gear.

8 upvotes

@ Reg Natarajan

Brilliant post...where were you thirty years ago?

3 upvotes

At the beginning you should consider that all Cams (from 50€-8.000€) don't do anything else than: measure the light (in different ways), regulate the shutter-time, the aparture and the focus and sometimes they change the iso-settings. The different cams do that in 1 million different ways.

I would recommand you to use the manual-modus. And try a little bit, check the cam and the results (that you can immediately see on the screen). Use the histogramm on the display.

Flash: dont' buy a cheap flash. The flash of the Panas work realy well and is enough for short distances and for fill-up-light.
Only if you realy need more flashpower than buy a good one (not a cheap one). At the beginning the on-bord-flash should be enough.

Another advise: go through the manual, page per page. Usualy the manuals of the manufaturers are realy good to learn about the cam AND about photographing itself.

Goot luck with your LX7 - it's a real good cam!

2 upvotes

You might be interested in National Geographic's book "Complete Photography".

2 upvotes

Thanks for the replies and tips. Camera arrived and I am anxious to play with it, but I have too much work to do. I hope to find some time during the week to cuddle up with the manual and read it before even turning the camera on.

0 upvotes

Get the Metz 24AF dedicated for Olympus/Panasonic. It's not expensive. Guide number 24 is just about the minimum for bouncing light off ceilings, and you gain the extra benefit of decent TTL metering. Bounce flash looks natural. It's also brilliant for close-ups of small things, using a couple of reflectors.
You can of course use the flash straight ahead indoors for a bit more reach.
External flashes of any description will save your camera's battery, too. A flash gun using AAs might drain those cells after 120 shots, although it varies a lot because the flash won't be firing at maximum power all the time. All you want is a touch of light, so it doesn't look like flash.
Don't waste money on any flash that won't tilt. Large ones that both swivel sideways as well as tilt are better, and more power is better for bouncing, but they would be larger and considerably more expensive.
Once you start using bounce flash you'll not want to be without it.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Of course many good cameras had to be left out of this short list, but I'm surprised at the choice of the Canon G15 over the Canon G1X (ignored).

The G1X has an almost APS-C sized sensor while the G15 features about the same small one than its predecessors G11 and G12 albeit with more resolution. Worse, the G15 reintroduced the fixed LCD long fased-out on the G series.

Granted, the G15 has a faster lens than the G1X (not by much, mind you), but as a current owner of a G1X and formerly of a G11, I'd always choose a larger sensor over a big aperture.

DPReviews's choice seems weird to me indeed.

3 upvotes

Faster lens, longer lens, cheaper price, The G15 fits this grouping well.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting

1 upvote

And the G1X is known for being quite sluggish and for having poor macro capabilities.

0 upvotes

It is strange the G1X wasn't included in the comparison (too big? too expensive? you tell me) but according to the reviews it's poor AF speed is a big draw back.

0 upvotes

The G1X doesn't easily fit in a pocket. The old saying that "the best camera the one you have with you" defines this class of camera. I picked the G15 because it's pocketable and has a OVF (as limited as it may be). I've got other cameras for higher IQ.

0 upvotes

This can't be right, is it: "The LX7 has done well here, balancing the subtle ambient light from outdoors (just after sunset) with flash to expose our subject. Colors are a little cool, but the resulting image is nice. "

Low sun, but hardly sunset, with that sunshine?!

Nice review, otherwise!

The RX100 and the XZ-2 seems very attractive, both and the Nikon P7700 seems to have a really nice lens ;-)!

0 upvotes

Thanks for a nice review, kids. Due to physical problems I have to give up my beloved Canon 40D and EFS 17-55 f2.8 and EF70-200 f4. The Nikon P7700 will, I believe, allow me to continue shooting with only a minimal loss of quality.

2 upvotes

There is also another compact camera to consider:

I'd propose the V1 instead (that now is for sale at a very friendly price), with the needle-sharp 18.5/1.8 (equals 50/1.8 on a full frame), and the superb 30-110 VR (equals approx. 80-300), as a superb kit that weigh very little, and with a good viewfinder!

The V2 is better organized (button-wise), but quite a lot more expensive!

0 upvotes

Thanks, Tord, I really appreciate your advice. My spine is my primary problem and an eyelevel view finder is not as valuable to me as an articulated screen.

0 upvotes

The Nikon P7700 is a good choice. I have the P7100 which has a tilt screen, I'd rather have articulated. I would give up the viewfinder for articulation.

1 upvote

Total comments: 382

Roundup: Enthusiast Zoom Compact Cameras

Fujifilm XF1

12MP | 25-100mm (4x) Zoom | $450 (US) £320 (UK) €460 (EU)

Key Features

Performance and Image Quality

Summary

Studio and Real-World Samples (links open in new tab)

Related Links

Comments