ArticlesProduct Reviews & PreviewsBuyer's Guide: Enthusiast raw-shooting compact ...

Buyer's Guide: Enthusiast raw-shooting compact cameras

By Barney Britton | Published Dec 15, 2011 | Product Reviews & Previews

Tagged with: roundup

Recommendations

The compact camera market is in something of a state of flux at present. At the lower end, smartphones (subsidized of course through contracts) are starting to encroach on the cheaper point-and-shoots, and as mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras get smaller and cheaper, there's pressure at the top, too. That being said, as you can see from the six cameras covered in this roundup (and others like the Canon PowerShot S100 and the spiritually-similar Nikon Coolpix P300) the high-end compact market is as vibrant now as it has ever been.

The six cameras featured in this roundup are very capable, and none will disappoint. All six offer effective, enthusiast-friendly handling with plenty of manual control, most offer some degree of customization over their functionality, and all provide image quality at the top end of what we'd currently expect from compact cameras. Three of these six models are available for under $400, which makes them particularly attractive if your budget is tight. The most expensive camera in this roundup is also the newest - we'd expect the $599 Fujifilm X10's street price to drop once it has been on the market for a little while. Price aside, here's how the six cameras stack up:

Image Quality

As far as image quality is concerned, all the cameras in this roundup deliver excellent results in day to day use, but taking all things into consideration, we'd put the Canon PowerShot G12 at the top of the group. Only just though, and with one important caveat. That caveat, which I've already mentioned earlier in this article, is that because the G12's lens is relatively slow compared to some of its peers, you are more likely to have to reach for its higher ISO sensitivity settings to maintain useable shutter speeds. The same applies to the Nikon Coolpix P7100, and should be taken into account when making side-by-side comparisons between cameras. The Samsung TL500, for example, might give slightly worse pixel-level image quality than the G12 at ISO 3200, but its faster lens probably means that in the same environment, you will be able to get away with shooting at a lower ISO value.

Towards the lower end of their ISO scales the Nikon P7100 and Samsung TL500 deliver near-identical image quality to the G12, and it is only the slightly more refined noise-reduction of the Canon at ISO settings of 800 and above that gives it the edge. The Samsung TL500 and Olympus XZ-1 take lovely pictures, but the Samsung is let down by rather aggressive noise reduction and you have to watch out for the Olympus XZ-1's lens, which is prone to flare. To be fair though, all of the 'fast lens' compacts in this selection are rather flare-prone and care should be taken to avoid positioning powerful light sources towards the edges of the frame.

I'd like to give a special mention to the Fujifilm X10 here. It's a quirky camera, certainly, and although image quality is similar (albeit slightly more detailed) in its 12MP maximum resolution mode than to its 10MP peers it has a unique trick up its sleeve in the form of its 6MP DR EXR mode. If you're happy with 6MP capture, you get the option of 2EV extra highlight dynamic range, excellent detail and sharpness, plus the ability to capture all of this data in raw files.

My Picks: Canon PowerShot G12, Fujifilm X10

Handling/Ease of Use

This is tough - all of these cameras offer effective, enthusiast-friendly handling, but after extended use I'm much happier with some than others. At the bottom of the group is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 - a lovely camera with generous customization options but let down by a dated, button-driven user interface and sub-par LCD screen that is very hard to see in bright light. The Fujifilm X10 is a lovely camera to use as long as you stick to a single exposure mode, but its habit of resetting exposure and DR settings when you change the shooting mode is infuriating. Likewise, it's occasionally 'sticky' lens controlled on/off switch and confusing implementation of DR/EXR modes. The overall impression (remembering that we still have a lot of testing to do) is of a camera one firmware update away from being completely likeable.

The Samsung TL500 and Olympus XZ-1 offer simple, hassle-free handling, and we really like their OLED display screens, but the Canon PowerShot G12 and Nikon Coolpix P7100 sit at the top of this group, thanks to their useful electronic level gauges, well-positioned control dials, articulated LCD screens (semi-articulated, in the P7100's case) and generous number of well-sized external controls. Of the two models, the Nikon P7100 offers slightly better handling, arguably, thanks to its multi-purpose quick dial. This enables fast access to key shooting parameters from the same control point, independently of the camera's menu system.

My Picks: Canon PowerShot G12, Nikon Coolpix P7100

Versatility

One thing that compact cameras can do that interchangeable lens cameras can't, is provide generous zoom lenses in a small form-factor. Of the cameras in this roundup, the Samsung TL500 and Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 languish at the bottom in terms of zoom range, although both offer very fast, sharp lenses that deliver excellent image quality and - importantly - start at 24mm (equivalent).

The Fujifilm X10 and Olympus XZ-1 boast the same effective zoom range of 28-112mm, which is a very useful 'standard' range, but neither can compete with the Canon G12's 28-140mm or the Nikon P7100's 28-200mm. After using all of these cameras for this roundup (some for the first time, and some again, following their own full reviews), I have found myself reaching for the Nikon's 200mm setting more than I expected, partly because it is so sharp. Distortion can be an issue in raw files, but distortion correction is very effective in JPEG capture mode. With longer focal lengths also comes more depth of field control, which is especially useful for portraiture. The main downsides to the G12 and P7100 are their relative bulk compared to their peers, and their slower lenses.

Overall, which of these cameras you think is the most versatile comes down to the sort of photography that you do. The built-in optical viewfinders of the Canon G12, Fujifilm X10 and Nikon P7100 immediately make them more useful in bright conditions or if battery life is a concern. If you want a fast lens though, neither the G12 nor P7100 would be a great choice. If you're a fan of wideangles, you should look at the Panasonic LX5 and Samsung TL500, but if you need more reach (and don't mind losing a little maximum aperture) you can't beat the larger, chunkier Canon G12 and Nikon Coolpix P7100. If dynamic range is your priority, and you can live with 6MP resolution, you should definitely take a look at the Fujifilm X10. I'm choosing the Nikon Coolpix P7100 and Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 as the standout cameras in terms of versatility - the former for its long-reaching zoom lens, and the latter for its sharp, fast 24mm (equivalent) wideangle.

My Picks: Nikon Coolpix P7100, Panasonic LX5

Value for Money

It is very difficult to quantify value for money (which is why we generally place little importance on price in our reviews) but in researching the street prices of the cameras in this roundup it became very clear to me that some of them - those that have been on the market for a while - can be picked up for bargain prices. The Samsung TL500/EX1 is great value at less than $350, and the same goes for the excellent Panasonic LX5, which continues to be a popular (and very well-regarded) camera even 18 months after its launch. The Nikon Coolpix P7100 is very good value too at around $400, but given its combination of generous external controls, versatile lens and excellent image quality, the Canon PowerShot G12 is a steal for less than $400.

My Picks: Canon PowerShot G12, Panasonic LX5

LIKE 14

Flag as inappropriate

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by dpreview.com or any affiliated companies.

Pin It

Print view

Comments

Total comments: 278

Personally I would've liked the Ricoh GXR to be in that group also. Be interested in the comparison. Sadly, it doesn't seem to register on the DPR radar too often.....

0 upvotes

I'm a little confused about dpreview's ratings. On one hand, XZ-1 scores 74% Gold award, top score vs all other cameras with P7100 scoring a terrible 69% yet it is recommended for Versability, Handling & Value but XZ-1 is not mentioned in any parts, esp IQ. I can understand if XZ-1 is oldest camera and newer cameras may have surpassed its dated standards, but XZ-1 is reviewed later than most of other cameras being judged, so its score of 74% should have been given more weight.

Sure this is about best 'RAW' but reading the conclusion I wouldn't have known as it include most of categories of in-dept reviews. And most believe that XZ-1 jpeg is quite good but the RAW even better. If XZ-1 Raw IQ, handling, versatility, value can't even beat the other 4 cameras, how in the world did it receive 74% Gold Award??

I'm sure the camera gurus have better empirical evidence than me. But having used my girlfriends G12 and my XZ-1, my XZ-1 is the one closer to DSLR quality and performance.

0 upvotes

the lens of Olympus XZ 1 is the better and, my opinion is that, it is the best value for money.

1 upvote

Just bought mine. Can't wait to play with it.

0 upvotes

I have owned a fuji X10 for the last 2 weeks. I must say that I am impressed. I am glad about the 2 wheels that I can setup like my 5DII and 1DIV. I really like this camera has my pocket camera. The handling is great, menu is simple, clean. The lens is great and see a whole lot of light.

There are 3 things that bother me.
I wish they would have put the information in the optical viewfinder like in the X100.
I wish they could do like Canon and actually show you the exposition in real time. (underexposure or overexposure)
I wish that it would have ND filters since the maximum speed is low in wide apertures.

1 upvote

Took it to Paris last week: it's getting better learning how touse it properly:

The X10 is: surprising everybody
good looking
easy(ier) to handle
a GREAT (little) camera

Next city trip will be whitout bulky SLR
(Exif read out shows that the zoom range is just right)

Regards from Holland (sadly enough ;-)

0 upvotes

enjoy your orbs!

3 upvotes

Having used the XZ1 and the X10 for more than 2 months now (as a former G7, 10 and 12 owner) you'll get much better results from both the XZ1 and the X10, build around very good optics, being very different camera's.

Colors on both are better, and being brighter gives them advantages (fe creativity, shallower DOF etc. which is about the same: the XZ1 being slightly brighter vs the X10's bigger sensor).

Both of the "low light"modes work well, though the X10 is less noisy in both EXR and low light mode.
In low light ( one of the main reasons to buy brighter lenses) the XZ! is not as fast or responsive as the X10.
The X10 is solid and responsive (almost Slr like,i think it will cause less use of my bulkier slr sets).

Regarding the so called ORB's of the Fuji; firmware is on the way, but in everyday photography it isn't that obvious as claimed by some:

so start taking pictures, and stop writing about camera's you've never really used, and enjoy..

Best regards from Holland

4 upvotes

Not surprizingly, the Olympus XZ-1 with its Zuiko has the best lens and that's evident in dpreview's widget test-shot comparisons available in its review. The glass is always of utmost importance when it comes to making good photographs and Olympus/Zuiko has always been the most consistent in that department. The rest is just a light-tight box with processing bell and whistles more or less.

4 upvotes

thi sis the first good thing i have heard about this camera

0 upvotes

I don't have any of those but I'm considering getting me the Lumnix LX-5. Camera and price seems right.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

LX5 is a very good choice.

1 upvote

P7000, with firmware updates, crushes all these in the value department: New at Amazon for $229

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

You sure are right about that. Can't beat the results you get at that price.

1 upvote

Hmm..it was at 229$...unfortunately amazon increase the price by 50$...now it's 279$...I missed the deal....:( :(

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00427ZLRO/ref=s9_simh_gw_p421_d0_g421_i2?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-3&pf_rd_r=03BN6WBAK7BPZVYBPV0Y&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938811&pf_rd_i=507846

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

LENS HOOD QUESTION: I can't believe no one has picked on the lens hood for this camera. Even Fuji seems unaware of the design flaw.

How many of you are using the (ridiculously pricey) lens hood system?

FLAW: the piece behind the filter threads is slotted. This allows in much dust which ends up on the BACK of the filter. BAD DESIGN!

I would really like my money back ($59) - but realistically will find a jury-rig fix.

Any others notice this gaping flaw? I believe the hood for the X100 is the same.

nikonfotomatt in colorado
http://blog.LITfoto.com

0 upvotes

My experience with cameras is enough to choose a path and understand enough to learn. I would like to be able to take a portrait shot in auto and not have it overexposed. Also holiday indoor photos. Outdoor scenes in our travels.
Pretty simple, I am willing to go more in depth if I have to. I had the Canon AE1 before. Now with digital I am using a Canon Power Shot sd1100, when used on auto, I am not happy with the results.
The Canon SX40HS has been recommended to me.
I don't have to stick with Canon, I am open to others.
I have heard once shooting in raw, one does not go back. Wondering if this is something advisable for an everyday shooter?
PSE knowledgeable.
Looking to buy another camera...any suggestions would be helpful

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Choose Fuji, if price not important, Nikon - for zoom or Pana for small camera with good fast lens.
Cheap and simple is Nikon P300, if you don't need raw, but prefeer PSAM

0 upvotes

The Canon G12 seems the one to go with.
I've been wanting one next to my SLR, so I could sometimes carry one in my pocket for events like concerts and such.
So that I don't have to walk around with a big camera on my neck or on my hip and it doesn't feel so cumbersome.

But it's too bad the price is so ridiculous... I'm not spending that on a secondary compact camera...
Also, what's up with the only 5x zoom?? While other compact Canon-cameras with the same or similar lenses such as the SX100 have 10x zoom.
These are 2 major points that keep me from buying it...

0 upvotes

Also worth considering is that while the G12 is a wonderfully reassuring solid compact, it's not exactly pocketable for the events you mention. It's a camera for around the neck or in a satchel bag or something. I've had the G10 and G11 and it IS possible to have it in you pocket if you're not wearing jeans – they are chunky. (hey there, is that a brick in your pocket?)

0 upvotes

some of the canon G models (such as my G7)does not have RAW mode where as my venerable "Brick" , the G2 (cost me $1100 Canadian way back when...)but renders excellent RAW material to work on (perhaps because it was a simpler Raw engine design ?).My general opinon on taking RAW shots with any compact is if you don't have time for Harvest or Post Production then shoot JPEG or get a entry level SLR with as big a sensor as possible (thats a tall order I admit).Also .I encounter compact enthusiasts on a weekly base that,when asked, say they are disappointed with the zoom quality and IQ thereof.All Digi zoom should be outlawed ...instead users shoud be given a cd to show them how to adjust the settings for particular light conditions (of course one could also say...read the manual first).I think 90% of compact users would be better off with a fast prime wide angle built in and that is why complete beginners more often come up with "keepers".

\\\

1 upvote

People keep thinking about the G12. I don't get it. I think most folks end up taking a lot of shots indoors, especially in the fall and winter. Flash is undesirable...the rooms natural light is what you want to see; so a faster lens and control of flash is critical to having nicely lit indoor shots. The XZ is the clear winner in this regards because it has the best lens (by far) in the group. It is also better for fast action because of this.

1 upvote

My experience is with the G11, but had I to do it over again, I would have no reservations about buying a G12. This article nails it; for the enthusiast, RAW is the way to go, and the G12 is high quality in a convenient package.

Regarding the flip-out screen, like pbailey4, I initially felt it to be an annoyance, but changed my mind as soon as I put my newer T2i on a tripod and had to assume the fetal position to compose a live view shot with a stationary screen.

1 upvote

Ever since my first tilt-swivel screen 7 years ago with the Canon S2 IS, I've never looked back. Using almost any DSLR is absolutely frustrating. I spent 10 days with Sony's A55 and thei version of tilt-swivel with the hinge on the bottom of the camera nearly had me throwing it to the ground in frustration at such horrible design.

Even point-n-shoots are a pain, though my experience with Panny's compact travel zooms with the auto brightening and wide angle screen are an exception. I actually found them pretty usable, for what they are.

I followed the S2 up with the Canon SX 20 and then, after waiting years for a good combination of stellar stills, video & tilt-swivel, I now own a GH2.

Given the neck and neck the G11 and the P7100 go here, I'd lean to the Nikon because of the microphone jack for audio and the longer zoom. The tilt up and down may be good enough for me, but I'd be guessing.

0 upvotes

The G12 delivers outstanding results - but I absolutely dislike any camera that has the flip out screen - so is back to the G10 for me. Shame the handling and feel of the G12 is spot on.

Generally - I avoid cameras with pop-up flash, more to break and a delay in shooting and while we all seem to desire the optical viewfinder on the high end camera the amount I use it is it really necessary? I am beginning to think not, even the x100 I have while it has a clever viewfinder its placed away from the lens axis as Leica range finder cameras, very off-putting.

0 upvotes

I strongly disagree with the conclusions as well.

I have now used the G12, the X10, the XZ1 and I i certainly put the G12 at the bottom of these 3 cameras which have much better lenses (just this is enough to make it more versatile).

Other things completely left out in the review are the amazing versatility of the XZ1 on the remote flash capability, the fantastic optional EVF on the XZ1, the great panorama and profocus functions on the X10, and amazing EXR dynamic ability of the X10. I found the various options retained through the various modes of the X10 a gift for easy setups in many situations. So is the G12 more versatile? Just because of the swivel LCD screen???

I am not the only one to have found the G12 frustrating in the settings and so it seems that Canon G12 is just taking advantage from its older models performance and from marketing.

3 upvotes

I agree. I love the X10 and have gotten much better results than my G11, G12 or P7100. I prefer the P7100 over the G12 because of the longer lens on it. That camera also has a lot of functions that you normally do not find on these types of cameras. But I think all of these cameras do a decent job if you know what you are doing. After all, if you take lousy pictures, it doesn't matter what you use, it will still look lousy and maybe be worse because of your flaws.

1 upvote

I'm not an Olympus "Fan Boy" and I don't buy into the idea that a particular camera will make you a good photographer... BUT you did not do your homework.

The Olympus XZ-1 does have an EVF, though it is an accessory. That should have been at least mentioned to keep the article honest and it pushes the cost of the camera up a good bit in doing so. Both points would have helped us in deciding about this particular cameras.

It would have also been of interest to us that the XZ-1 is fully capable of controlling remote flashes and with it's Underwater case.... and remote flashes controls it becomes a very interesting and accessible and useful tool for underwater work.

I know it must be tough to know all of these cameras inside and out but that is the job you took on. These omissions make me wonder what was left out about the other models that would have left us much better informed and shakes my trust in DPReview. You provide a valuable service to us, please respect that and protect it.

1 upvote

with a login of "MainOlyGuy" it's hard to assert that you are not an Olympus "Fan Boy"... lol Just bugging u.

2 upvotes

While I understand you had to make the cut somewhere, I feel that the highly intuitive handling of the GRD and GXR systems continues to get ignored by the media. Perhaps it's because they do not buy enough ads, perhaps it's because they are targeted towards a more "Professional" market. I don't want to get all grassy knoll and all but damn they are great cameras.

You mention that the GRD has only a prime lens as a major reason you left it out. Again, while not mainstream, there is a dedicated group of users (yes, I am one) that say it's one of the best lenses on the market today.

Nothing comes close in size, handling and quality of glass. I happen to put a black metal 28mm CV bright line finder on the top of mine and turn the LCD. Very retro looking and extends battery life big time when shooting in the cold.

As always a lot of good work in your review.

1 upvote

I ended up with the X10 as my sidekick. First impressions, the camera looks retro and is certainly made of high quality material. I have not had the chance to test it yet because I'm debating whether I should exchange it for the X100. As far as the other 5 cameras in this review, the top two after the x10 were the LX5 and Nikon 7100. Despite the huge price difference, I still went for the X10 for having a CMOS and the much higher build quality than any of the others. For price and quality alone, I would have probably chose the LX5. The bottom line is that all of these cameras are and will perform about the same, it's really a matter of what system you prefer and what price fits in your budget.

1 upvote

I have been looking for a sidekick to my Canon T2i system for about 6 months. Having poured over the reviews here, I keep coming back to the G12. Yes, I would like a bit wider and longer lens, and a bit more aperture range...but, I need a quick grab camera (with RAW and manual capabilities) with an efficient User Interface. I tried using a Panasonic DMC-ZS10 (borrowed), and while the camera takes fine images, negotiating the UI was just too time consuming (when bouncing back and forth from the T2i). I suspect that users who favor other brands will have the same perspective on familial UIs.

0 upvotes

i have a canon t2i (500d) and the fuji x10, and i can tell you that the fuji is better in most of the situations, compared with the t2i with the kit zoom lens.

1 upvote

Me (Canon T2i with kit lenses only) and my girlfriend (G12). A year ago, we took over 3,000+ wedding pictures between both of us, both exchanged cameras at some point, and when all said and done, after editing and brush-up - T2i is the clear winner. I can always tell which camera took what pics, especially those with very nice color tone. There was no doubt. Now when compared to my XZ-1, it isn't so clear, especially in low-light situations. Granted weddings are mostly in low-light situations, but ALOT of situations I use the cameras for are in these challenging light conditions. Of course during daylight is where G12 shines but then, most cameras are good in daylight also.

0 upvotes

To me, the winner is the XZ-1, with the VF-2 viewfinder. Amazing camera, and even better if you buy the UW housing, that take 67mm Canon 500D close-up lenses. Versatile and easy to use, decent pictures in even rather low light, due to f1.9 and ISO 3200. Steve Huff likes it, and that says a lot in my book!

1 upvote

steve huff also says that the fuji x10 is better.

0 upvotes

forget about Steve Huff...what's important is what you do best with...even if it is a WWII Brownie!

4 upvotes

Nice article. I read it with interest, even if I totally disagree with the conclusions. In my opinion P7100 and G12 aren't even in the same category of XZ-1, LX5, EX1 and X10. They can't be compared because of their slow lenses. That's all. My preference went to XZ-1 but X10 was noon the shelves ye. LX5 was an option too for its great wideangle. S95 was not an option because of its slow lens at tele end, but I consider it far better than G12. S100 wasn't available yet.

6 upvotes

I wish DPR did a re-shoot with the EX1, considering that the lens looked decentered in the original review and many complained about that fact. It's not a perfect camera and essentially, Samsung has abandoned it and not fixed weird firmware holes, but it is a good performer.

I've tried most all in the class and in terms of IQ, it absolutely holds its own. The shooting experience is subjective and some of the firmware holes take away from that (no RAW bracketing, remote use during bracketing not allowed, sometimes slow operation, switching to backlit while in RAW results in lockups, so jpeg must be manually selected, and a host of others).

The SRW files are huge (21megs per shot). The hardware is slow. However, the lens is fantastic and so is the swiveling screen.

0 upvotes

The first EX1 I got produced images that were sharp in the center, but noticeably softer on the top lef corner than on the top right. I exchanged it; the second sample's images were sharp throughout. I do believe it performs better than the sample DPR reported on. I realize that there's a practical limit to the number of camera samples DPR can be expected to test for a review, but my experience and DPR's experience with the S100 suggests that getting a good sample is something of a crapshoot.

Bob

0 upvotes

We looked at more than one EX1 and this one was representative of the ones we'd seen.

It's a fine camera and that lens is nice but it's up against very, very good competitors here and it just falls a little short.

0 upvotes

Thanks for clarifying that.

0 upvotes

what you wrote kind of confirms the fact that mathematically one can crunch 21 megs into a sensor that's a couple of times smaller then say a full frame sensor but should one expect the $900 compact camera's chip to process that amount of info in the same manner and time?

0 upvotes

You nearly ignored Olympus XZ.

Like a lot of families, our use is often travel, sports and family dinner gatherings. The other cameras are slower and usually need flash indoors; to me this pollutes the results with unnatural lighting. With the XZ, I set the flash indoors to 1/4 or 1/16...perfect results. I have a D90 with a 35mm 1.8 lens and I barely use it! The speed of the XZ lens means that one rarely needs over 400 ISO. With the others you can't use the zoom at all and maintain low light capability and they can't easily control flash intensity. Flare just hasn't been a problem.

For sports I set the aperture to 2.5 and have full zoom. At equivalent zoom, the other cameras are at F5.0 or more and need high ISO, that doesn't work well for sports. A DSLR lens with equivalent speed/zoom would be $1000.

Small for travel and fast lens for sports that stays fast at full zoom. Most importantly you get natural lighting results at family gatherings. I think the XZ is the best choice.

7 upvotes

I think You did your home work before you bought...smart man!

0 upvotes

Um, the X10 has a 2.0-2.8 aperture lens and shoots noise free up to ISO 800. Perhaps a little more time spent on homework young man ;-).

1 upvote

Yeah and it takes great, orb-free pictures. Maybe YOU should do your homework better.

2 upvotes

CMOS Sensor is better (fuji) or CCD like all others have?? What is the important difference for enduser?

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

CMOS sensors are cheaper to make and use less power. The quality of CCD sensors are a little better in terms of IQ and noise because they are an older technology, however CMOS sensor have advanced significantly and are almost as good.

The difference mainly is cost and power consumption.

0 upvotes

If you plan on shooting video, CCD will render all motion accurately and flashes that are not yours (from other cameras or strobes) will appear full frame, just as we perceive them with our eyes. CMOS fails at both.

But CMOS is far more agile in terms of offering different frame rates, image size readouts from the chip, including "high speed" to offer some slow motion capabilities. CMOS also doesn't deliver a vertical "tear" with super bright lights or the sun.

I can't speak to the difference for stills.

0 upvotes

What has happened to the button at the top of the review that allows one to skip between different pages? Typically one expects to read the front page, read the conclusion, go back and read the details and then maybe read the conclusion again. Leafing through the pages consecutively is tiresome and unhelpful, and I really can't be bothered.

3 upvotes

We're working on improving the navigation in articles, we know the current way of arranging pages isn't ideal. This is an article though, not a review. The way reviews work (and are navigated) hasn't changed.

0 upvotes

What happened to the studio comparison tool?

0 upvotes

Fixed now, we had a corrupted image. The link works (and always did).

0 upvotes

Does any of these cameras have GPS? Couldn't find a mention in the reviews. It's an essential feature for travel photography and I won't buy a camera without an onboard GPS.

0 upvotes

They do not. However, you can use our camera feature search tool to find cameras that fit your size requirements and have GPS: http://www.dpreview.com/products/search/cameras. GPS is under the advanced search options.

0 upvotes

Essential ? hardly it might be a would like but surely the critial thing is to get the image. If you don't know where you are or what you are taking pictures of perhaps you need a map.

0 upvotes

Dumb question to the other owners of the Fuji X10...
Is there any way to get RAW files when using the EXR mode or is that a contradiction it itself since the camera computes EXR output from "triangulating" the RAW data?
Thx for enlightening me.

0 upvotes

It's not a dumb question. You can certainly shoot RAW and dynamic range compressed jpgs at the same time. If you're asking if the X10 applies the DR adjustment to the RAW file, I don't think so because (a) an altered RAW file wouldn't be a RAW file and (b) you should be able to recover the highlights from a RAW file without any help from the camera. However, the idea behind EXR is still a good one, especially for a point & shoot camera because if you take the experts' advice, you're supposed to pour on the exposure ("expose to the right") and then carefully check the histogram to make sure you haven't gone over the edge & blown the highlights to a point where no post processing can recover them. Great advice, but who wants to worry about that when using a little point and shoot camera?

0 upvotes

Actually the X10 EXR mode isn't like the Active D-Lighting on Nikon or similar. When in EXR mode the camera uses adjacent pixels to make larger ones (goes from 12MP to 6MP)

Read the preview page from dpr

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/fujifilmx10/page3.asp

You can certainly shoot RAW EXR files.

To Element42, I'd suggest asking in the Fuji forum, this tech has been around for years now, and there's several people well versed in it esp. Kim Letkeman.

0 upvotes

Thanks folks. Appreciate your answers.
The camera gives the answer itself. When in EXR mode, it seems that RAW can not be activated (for good reason since the camera does the RAW conversion). However I wonder whether in 6MP mode I automatically benefit from the EXR technology. In let's say the M mode I can activate RAW capture and so I would hope what the RAW file gives me is the benefits from lower noise and higher dynamic range.
I will post to the Fuji forum as well.

0 upvotes

Yes, you can get EXR data in raw files - I explain how in the article (on the X10 page).

0 upvotes

„The Cameras
[…] There are six cameras on the market which meet these criteria“

Ricoh GRd is another one meeting these criteria. Why not at least mention it?

0 upvotes

Because it's not sensibly comparable in terms of everyday 'real world' shooting. It has a fixed, wideangle lens. The GR-D IV is an excellent camera though and we'll be publishing more about it in the new year.

0 upvotes

Thanx for reply!
See your point, yet the quoted sentence is not correct ;) Sorry, must be annoying with all this pendantry from readers...
Good to hear you're planning a review (if that's what you meant)! The usefulness of your review system is unrivalled.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

The summary of the XZ-1 in this article seems inconsistent with the full on test of the camera where it received much greater praise. Just read the conclusion page of the test.

Where did this lens flare issue come from? I've barely seen mention of it anywhere and only experienced it once or twice, yet this author chose it as the only thing to note in the IQ comparison. Odd article.

4 upvotes

Flare tends to mar low light shots at wide aperture. Any lamps in th frame or even ones off the frame tend to cause all sort of ghostly light effects. However, few camera tests involve the conditions that incite the problem. Maybe the only workaround is to use lens hoods or narrow the aperture and resort to a tripod. Low light photography is a sort of oxymoron anyway. Astronomers get sharp shots of stars with time exposures, but I have no clue what flare reduction techniques are necessary for 3m reflector telescopes.

0 upvotes

Anyone know when the Canon G13 will be released?

1 upvote

Sigma DP1x and DP2x should have been included.

1 upvote

Fujifilm X100, Leica X1 and Ricoh GRD III/IV didn't make it either. I guess all of these are considered niche cameras because of their fixed focal lengths.

0 upvotes

Great article, Barney! I'm not even in the market for a camera of this class (or didn't think I was), but I found this to be one of the best in a long time. The British usage and spelling ("different to," and "neighbouring") took me back to the early days of the site, too. Thanks.

0 upvotes

The correct use of English is "different from" and never "different to".

2 upvotes

So we're telling the English how to use English, now, are we? What shabby behaviour.

3 upvotes

@ rogerslade: different from/to/in are all correct English!

2 upvotes

well, I do not see the canon S100 in this group. If the IQ of G12 is good, what will the one of S100 be ?

0 upvotes

Yeah, I kinda skipped the rest of it when I saw that neither the S95 or S100 were in there. WTF...

0 upvotes

While I think the sensor size, manual controls and RAW capability of S95/S100 are enough to elevate them above the simple P&S cams, I would hesitate to call any camera enthusiast-level if it didn't have a hotshoe for external flashes as well as the option to use a viewfinder.

0 upvotes

We have a full review of the S100 very nearly finished :)

0 upvotes

Barney,

I just finished reading the review on the S100 and found it to be excellent. It resolves the lens decentering issue. People can understand it before throwing down on an otherwise faithful iteration of a great little camera line.

Based upon the scoring criteria I felt that if the camera was re-reviewed by a fresh set of eyes it would actually get slightly higher marks in the area of "Features", which is the second most important category in DPR's scoring process. The S100 feature set is one of its strongest suits and I really feel that the tabulation process did not account for all that it offers. Along those lines I would have expected a score much closer to 75.

Although the S100 is obviously not a gold award winner, I believe that it is a stronger silver award winner than what it was given credit for. I don't fault DPR for that since you guys put an enormous amount of effort into these reviews... to the point of exhaustion.

Gordon

0 upvotes

I love the independent PASM settings, finally the x10 allows me to change immediately between varied shooting situations!

P is for normal shooting, everything at auto (speed turned up in light scenes)
A when using a tripod outdoor, high aperture and low iso, IS off
S for moving subjects, high shutter speed and high (auto)iso plus low aperture
M at fixed lighting situations with best aperture for sharpness on base iso

Having these settings ready makes my workflow much more easy, though i can understand that people who have different work situations would like settings to be dependent; i suggest fujifilm make a option to choose either setting!

1 upvote

Did the reviewer mean that the settings reset to defaults when you change, or that the settings reset to what they were the last time you used that setting?

0 upvotes

Dear Santa Claus,

for christmas I wish a full review of the P7100 and the X10.

Please please please.

Thank you
Thomas

PS.: I belive in you ;-)

2 upvotes

Alberto,

For me, spelling and typo issues are so minor and lame. I focus more on content. But, that's just me!

8 upvotes

Content is king, no doubt, but one of the pleasures of reading dpreview - for me - has always been the care with which articles were written, as well as the general level of most discussions in it. Getting careless is a first step towards degradation. Sounds dramatic I know, but there are standards for a reason.

4 upvotes

Wish Panasonic come up with an LX6 having a fixed flash unit where "LUMIX" is written on the LX5 body, an EVF where the popup flash is and a less glaring LCD.

0 upvotes

I have never read such a poorly written article from dpreview before. Could you at least spell check?

1 upvote

Typo, Picture caption, page 3: highligthts

0 upvotes

I love reading the comments as much as the educated reviews. What other forums have such well informed and opinionated people? I'm always left thinking that everyone has their own criteria so a combative tone (sometimes found here) is a little silly.

...the criteria I'm left with after all of this is shutter release speed. At the end of the day, you should be able to get a good image from any of these but it's the ongoing issue of shutter lag that still gets me. It's avoided with DSLRs and I'm still gonna always take the most shots with my iphone (best camera=onya) even though it's delay in the new OS and when you've got a lot on the phone kills me.

So who's got some real world thoughts on which of these as quickest shutter release/bursts/record times. Didn't see it in there (maybe it is).

Thanks.

1 upvote

Imaging Resource always seem to go large on shutter lag and other timings. eg:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NIKONV1/NIKONV1A6.HTM

0 upvotes

There are few new model digicams, even compacts, with any noticeable half-press to full-press lag.

0 upvotes

As a long time film/digital SLR user, I too wish for better reaction times from compact cameras. I'm hoping that our awaiting S100 and the new G13 will be better in that respect.
Renard: True, but it is the time getting to the completion of the half press point that's always an issue with non-DSLRs.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

The LX5 has fast autofocus after the new firmware. Check it out.

0 upvotes

The X10 is NOT 10mp.. it's a 12mp camera. I'm referring to top of X10 page (page 3)

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting

1 upvote

I agree with the reviewer - IQ is best in X10 and Canon G12(looking at the sample galleries of all). X10 even better in situations where you have to just turn the dial to EXR mode.
PS: I own X10 and I felt that wow factor when I compared out of camera shots from my previous compact cameras including SX10IS, P300, Oly- E-PL1. Long time ago I had a Sony 1/1.7" CCD W series P&S and those images were just brilliant. Sadly there is no Sony here to compare. All they are thinking about is, NEX.

0 upvotes

"For the purposes of this roundup, I'm restricting my coverage to those compact cameras which offer full manual control over exposure, are capable of shooting raw files, and have flash/accessory hotshoes. There are six cameras on the market which meet these criteria, and all six are covered, but the fullest treatment is reserved for those cameras which offer optical viewfinders (and arguably the ultimate in enthusiast-friendly ergonomics) in addition to their rear LCD screens:"

You missed two cameras that meet all the criteria you listed:
Sigma DP1
Sigma DP2

2 upvotes

Including the DP1 is unnecessary as it is 3 years old and has been superceded by the DP2. Just like the Canon G11 etc.

0 upvotes

The DP1 has a 28mm equivalent lens and the DP2 a 41mm. Therefore, they can hardly supercede each other. Both cameras integrate an APSC size sensor. You most likely would like them under good light conditiosns, unfortunately this is not very applicable to situations where Compacts are usually used...

0 upvotes

41mm equiv., yeah that's limiting! The DP1 is an interesting camera and still available but quite expensive.

0 upvotes

Sorry DPReview but you haven't convinced me to shoot in RAW.

You've claimed that shooting in JPEG is a terrible experience. Could it also be a fact that certain companies just have a poor JPEG engine design?

Olympus has created a truly excellent JPEG engine. It isn't just in the XZ-1 but also the E-P/E-PL series as well. Why can't other manufacturer's do this?

Most P&S cameras have awful JPEG engines that can't even compete with an Apple iPhone image. If Apple can make this work, then certainly a *camera* company should be able to -- (a leer towards Canon/Nikon.)

If everyone would invest the time to create a good JPEG engine then RAW mode really wouldn't be necessary for the average user. Sure, RAW has some advantages but it shouldn't be a requirement to justify the camera's IQ.

Personally, I find it sad when I read a review that says "well, the JPEG engine sucks but RAW is great. So, we'll give it a Gold award."

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

4 upvotes

Hi
couldn't agree more..i don't have time to Process every image
JPG's are important to me if the JPG is crap i don't buy the camera simple eh ! I own Olympu ZX1 Canon 5D2 and 50D all produce good jpg's in my opinion !

4 upvotes

I used to agree with this sentiment.

However, since converting to Lightroom my workflow does not care if it's RAW or JPEG so given that both formats require the same level of effort, I'll take the RAW any day for better post processing flexibility.

3 upvotes

Some of us don't really want anything complicated enough to call a "workflow". Just want to shoot and use (i.e., upload somewhere)

6 upvotes

If it's important enough to get the shot might as well check your white balance at the time and capture in Jpeg.

0 upvotes

IMO, those who need "convincing" to shoot RAW will best be served to stick with jpg. You can lead a horse to water, but...

2 upvotes

I just spent loads of money on a camera with an advanced sensor. I know I'll use a file format that throws away all that extra information...

I've never looked back once form using RAW. I think the only thing that neeeds an extra step is outputing jpegs for photo books. But before I used RAW i pp the jpgs any way

Lightroom uploads straight to facebook and flickr

When I'm out walking I'd far rather snap and correct latter than miss the view and get left behind worrying about white balance

0 upvotes

To my mind comparing Raw with JPEG equates to comparing Negative with Polaroid -
Lightroom has been the most rewarding investment I've made; simultaneously simplifying and accelerating my "workflow" managing my files, cataloging and, with .DNG, embedding descriptive metadata into the files themselves, applying image adjustments and embedding them non-destructively. If one's serious enough about photography to invest in a raw capable camara then I see little excuse for overlooking raw's (DNG's) numerous advantages.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Please help me decide. I already have the Samsung, LX5, and Oly, and for Xmas I just know I'm getting the X10. I can see Santa with my X10 in his bag, travelling.
The question is, what do I do in January, when I should really only keep two at the most? Pick two for me.

0 upvotes

Keep the two that have an 'X' and a '1' in their name.

2 upvotes

What makes someone buying third camera of the same type? What do you do with them? I understand having 2 different kinds of camera (DSLR + CSC or compact), but having 3 almost identical cameras is beyond my understanding.;-)

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting

1 upvote

I know, I agree. It's a transitional phase I guess. Ever since I dumped all my heavy glass and gone "compact" ( my smallest camera is the Oly Epl2), I seem to be on a quest for the perfect small package. Which of of course doesn't exist and possibly never will..

0 upvotes

So you dump your DSLR gear and replace it with many mediocre compacts that you know you'll hardly ever be happy with? Ummm, ok?

0 upvotes

Alberto, first of all, you should go and see a doctor, because you suffer from "compacts-buying disease". :-)

I like my XZ-1 a lot, but it is too similar to the X10. So I advise you to keep either EX1 or LX5: They ad 24mm, one with good video, the other with a tilting screen.

1 upvote

I picked one and got to know it really, really well. Read the manual, set my preferences for various shortcuts and controls, and now it fits me.

You should make sure you have exhausted the capabilities of one of those excellent cameras before believing that you should buy another one. Much less a third.

0 upvotes

The lens, I would say. How else can you get 28-112mm f1.8/2.5?

0 upvotes

I'm not seeing the Studio Comparison Tool. Is this link broken?

0 upvotes

Me too, What happened? Anyone else with this problem?

0 upvotes

Which page are you having this problem from? (the tool itself is working for me).

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Works fine with Chrome, but not with Explorer?

0 upvotes

Everyone should be using Chrome now anyways.

0 upvotes

The Olympus PEN Mini is $449 right now. Why on Earth would anyone buy one of these tiny sensor cameras over an intechangeable lens model that costs less, has a much larger sensor, supports wireless flash control, 7-frame bracketing, etc., and is much faster?

I'll put the PEN Mini RAW files against any of these things, any time...

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

Because they just want a small camera, not an outfit with lenses, accessories, etc. On the other hand, if they do want to build an outfit but for some reason don't want an SLR, I would agree, absolutely.

4 upvotes

because they don't want any of the things you mention, but are prepared to pay a little more to get what they do want.

5 upvotes

And again, you would have to figure out which lens to pick for what occasion. Granted 1 lens approach of all these cameras is not perfect but that is what they are for. I have an E-PL1+kit and X10 beats it all (and I mean all) departments.

0 upvotes

"I'll put the PEN Mini RAW files against any of these things, any time..."

Even when you have to shoot two ISO notches slower with the Mini? The Pen Mini with the 50mm macro looks great in the DPReview test lab, but I found the Fuji performs as well in real life in most scenarios. I didn't like the lack of physical controls on the Mini, nor the lens lock PLUS on switch to get started using it out of the pocket. The Mini is a much better choice if you are heading into an MFT system, and by adding a viewfinder and one or two fast primes you can do a lot more with it - but if you compare it solely as a compact P&S replacement it doesn't offer a whole lot more. It doesn't even offer more depth of field control than the Fuji or Panny/Oly fast lens P&Ss until you add more lenses.

2 upvotes

Because the "compacts" can fit in a coat pocket, don't require $XXX eXtra for lenses to attain comensurate ranges, and because the PEN's all have bad rolling shutter in video mode.

2 upvotes

And does that PEN Mini have a flash? Does it have a viewfinder? How much do they cost extra? And what is it´s kit lens like? f3,5 and worse?

0 upvotes

@Dark goob - Why the XZ-1 over the PEN. simplicity. Some people are not interested in carrying multiple lenses. ALSO the XZ is full capable of working your remote flashes.... I can do all the same work with the XZ-1 that I can with my DSLR E-5! AND as an Under Water camera with the accessory case the XZ-1 is a wonderful option. I've used it and it is a great little camera.

0 upvotes

Because the kit lens is really slow and sticks out

the real killer. These tiny sensor have more dynamic range...

0 upvotes

I have a GH2.
And I STILL want a compact travel zoom with a lower MP and 12-15x-ish range where the "focus" is on image quality. I want this so I can have it in my pocket, and with one hand holding my son from getting lost in the crowd... I can take the camera from my belt pouch, turn it on, zoom in, assess the shot, change modes, adjust settings, and snap the picture I want... with one hand, in 10 seconds.

Why on earth would anyone want to constantly fumble with interchangeable lenses or want something with 7-frame bracketing, wireless flash support, and a smaller depth of field for more focusing issues? (sic)

0 upvotes

Total comments: 278

Buyer's Guide: Enthusiast raw-shooting compact cameras

Recommendations

Image Quality

Handling/Ease of Use

Versatility

My Picks: Nikon Coolpix P7100, Panasonic LX5

Value for Money

My Picks: Canon PowerShot G12, Panasonic LX5

Comments