Great little compact but image quality / performance do not deserve the “enthusiast camera” label...

Started Apr 6, 2013 | User reviews thread
Kerusker
Contributing MemberPosts: 723Gear list
Like?
how did you check performance etc.?
In reply to Alan Ernst, Apr 7, 2013

Alan Ernst wrote:

The small sensor / high pixel density really lets this camera down!  If Olympus had chosen to go with a 9 or 10 megapixel sensor rather than the 12 megapixels, image quality could be far superior.
Why do manufacturers keep cramming more pixels into a sensor than necessary. The XZ-10 has 75% higher pixel density than the Lumix LX7, putting it at a severe disadvantage.

The LX7 has 12.7 MegaPix on a just slightly bigger sensor! Compare the Oly XZ-2 to the LX7 please.

What I love about the XZ-10 is pocketability, .......

On the down side, image quality is average at best and you will have to tweak the settings considerably or shoot RAW to get the best results.

How did you get your results? Please post images.

My Lumix ZS7 which is three years old and has a comparable sensor, provides better quality out of camera, even though it is not a stellar performer either...

The ZS7 has 14.5 MegaPix on the same sensor size as the XZ-10. I stll own the ZS3 (TZ7) which has about 12 MegaPix. After testing the ZS7 in 2010 I kept my ZS3 for better image quality.

Comparing my ZS3 to my XZ-10 I prefer the XZ-10 without hesitation.

Noise and detail smudging on the XZ-10 are prevalent and you probably don’t want to use it over ISO 200, so that’s where the faster lens is a great help. The lens itself seems to perform ok optically, with the usual distortion at wide angle and close-up and some loss of sharpness in the corners and at the tele end*. It is also very prone to flare.

some images available?

The other issue I find with the XZ-10 is that it is not very responsive and performance is very sluggish; clearing the buffer takes about 1 – 4 seconds and you cannot zoom, change any settings or access the menu, while you wait for the images to be written to the SD card.

Here's where your review is getting bad I think. What kind of SD-card was used? It should be UHS-I compatible! I'm using 16GB SanDisk Uiltra (UHS-I) class 10 cards (15 EUR) and my XZ-10 is very responsive (without detailed measurements compared to ZS3 or Pentax K-5).

Battery life certainly does not live up to the specs, but then a small camera makes for a small battery... make sure you carry a spare as it can only be charged in-camera, unless you purchase a separate charger.

Maybe 3 batteries and no extra charger are better and cheaper.

Other features that I would like to see added / improved:
- combination of bracketing and self-timer for tripod use, as no remote release is available
- an extra function button (the existing fn button can be customised though to allow quick access to one or more favourite settings)
- bracketing is limited to 3 frames at max. 1 stop, which is insufficient for HDR (in-camera HDR works but the resulting images are so smudged, you don’t want to use it)
- a menu which returns to the previously selected item rather than reverting to the main menu
- grid lines at 1/3 spacing rather than 40/60 and adjusting to aspect ratio changes
- single AF area should be adjustable in size

not that important to me,

but the following are:

- ability to focus manually is missing

- remote release (IR)

- AE-Lock button

- B-Mode

- more AF-modes (see XZ-2; but maybe some aren't advertised but present)

Currently the XZ-2 goes for 450 EUR and the XZ-10 for 400 EUR. That's the real hard part in deciding which one to buy/use.

-- hide signature --

][.Kerusker
we don't see that we don't see (eye's blind spot)

 Kerusker's gear list:Kerusker's gear list
Pentax K-5 II Pentax K-5 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow