2 hours ago
 |
Rachotilko
Joined on
Oct 22, 2011
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
Thank you for the review.
I understand why the reviews are much shorter then they used to be 5 years ago: there's simply much more models being launched now then it used to be in the past. And that's especially true in the category of P&S cameras.
In the past, almost every review included at least a brief quantitative evaluation of sensor (noise, DR) and the lens (sharpness, distortions, CA). So I understand some readers are unhappy with the verbal-only a assessments.
Anyway, P&S cameras are much less interesting these days than they used to be, with manufacturers gradually lowering the quality of optics & pushing the sensors to extremes.
But in that light, dear DPR, I would really like you to do much more lens reviews. Especially in the mirrorless domain.
Knight Palm: Great feature set of this new Samsung camera. If I remember correctly, Samsung recently started with compressed RAW, previously raw was uncompressed and made the camera slow in buffering/handling.
Good to see the progress with BSI-CMOS, this time reaching 1/1.7" size. Previous record was held by Fujifilm at 1/2" size. But how much better will BSI-CMOS in Samsung EX2F be compared to Canon's traditional FSI-CMOS in S100?
Interesting test comparison ahead to watch the sensor technology progress!
@haypek
* Fuji HS30exr & F770exr have 1/2" BSI-CMOS (record holder in BSI size until now)
* Fuji X10 & X-S1 have 2/3" FSI-CMOS (the second smallest FSI after Canon S100)
iudex: I am really impressed. A used to own an EX1 and was really satisfied how it worked and what pictures it took. There were some flaws, however: 1. no full HD video, a bit too slow, only 1/1500 s was not sufficient in bright sunny day, f7,1 as well, 72 mm was a bit short and 370 g was a bit heavy. All this has hanged and the good remained (or even got better). That is what I call progress. My Canon S100 with its f2-5,9 is ashamed. :-)
Well, Canon S100 is still more pocketable.
Jogger: This would have been interesting 12 months ago.. now, all high end compacts are going to be compared to the RX100. This Samsung has too many gimmicks, and is going to fall short.
Boerseuntjie, using ethnic stereotypes to offend has been a taboo here on DPR, even among the most hardcore trolls. And I appreciated that fact very much. Please, don't introduce it here.
If you can not live without it, go ahead to comment section of youtube, there you can find plenty of it. Everyone is ready there to appreciate your contribution to the genre of ethnic stereotype offense. But not here.
Jokica: Such camera deserves 1" sensor
To make the lens slower ? No way !
Please, keep the sensors this small !
Large sensor forces the manufacturer to use slower lens, if they want to keep the thing compact.
Slower lens = higher ISO + deeper DOF = no advantge compared to small sensor.
My conclusion after pixelpeeping the DPR's studio shots: ZS15/TZ25 has the better overall IQ then any other Panasonic travelzooms present in the comparison (TZ8, TZ10, TZ18, TZ20, TZ30). Especially at ISO800.
Comparing with ZS3/TZ8 at ISO800, the output of ZS15/TZ25 exhibits much less sharpening halos/artefacts, much less colour bleeding and much less pronounced chroma blotches.
ARTASHES: Bit surprised from lab test shots it's isn't as good as FZ150 having less "intelligent" NR,
still it's funny to see how different are NR algorithms and amounts at highest ISOs between ZS15 and ZS20,
PS still persuaded that ZS15 uses Sony sensor cutted down with bit worse jpeg engine that FZ150 has
Well, I think it is the lens. NR algoritms can get fooled dramaticaly by optical imperfections of the lens.
Look at ISO100 images, FZ150 is sharper in corners than the travelzooms, as expected. ZS20's *corners* are even softer.
My opinion is that travelzooms are quite nice camera category, but their transfocation ought to be limited to 25-300mm eq, as the TZ6/TZ7/TZ8 used to be.
Outside this range the inevitable optical compromises kill the concept.
Jimmy jang Boo: Please, let me be the first to whine... It doesn't shoot raw! This is terrible! What a travesty! What was Panasonic thinking? If only someone would make the perfect camera...
@KonstantinosK
Fuji F770EXR. But you are right, travelzooms in its entire history had not been bestowed with this capability.
Why such a drop in IQ compared to P300, which has been loved for its high value/price ratio.
I just don't get it, does Nikon believe all P&S buyers have so low standards ? You are so wrong, dear Nikon.
"Now, HDR resides in the basement of color photography from where it may never come out"
Has the Politbyro come out with a decree prohibiting people from utilizing HDR skillfully ? Has any gifted photog been sentenced to forced labor for doing such a despicable act ?
What's up with the lens ? And why has the reviewer not mentioned that ?
Has anyone noticed the drop in sharpness compared to SX230HS ? The longer zoom = more compromises in the optical quality department. The same sharpness degradation has happened to "Leica" lens on latest Panasonic travelzooms.
I just hope the successor of Panny FZ-150 won't follow this pattern.
Rachotilko: 12MP on 1/1.6" CMOS
That's what I want, oh, yeah
that's what I want.
Is that not a bit sad that we have 3 cameras with this spec (Canon S100 and Fujis X-10 & X-S1). But there is an absurd number of cameras with 1/2.3 sensor with 16MPix, slooow and low-quality lens ?
Oh yes, and one can have a fast lensed mirrorless for only $1500.
What a brave new world !
12MP on 1/1.6" CMOS
That's what I want, oh, yeah
that's what I want.
Rachotilko: Hey, for $469 you can get this: http://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/lenses/sigma_17-50_2p8_os
It seems digital photography's golden times are over:
Some 4-7 years ago it was possible to buy P&S compact cameras with excellent optics and 1/1.6" sized sensors for reasonable price. DSLRs were expensive, sure, but their prices descended constantly.
Then the 2008 came, and P&S compacts started their descent into the hell of disposability with a complete disregard of any decency optics-wise (too much of a decentered lens lottery) and the crazy MP and MZ races.
As I am not keen on mirrors (& resulting bulk), so my hope was named "mirrorless". I also hoped mirrorless stuff gets cheaper over time, basically replacing both DSLR's and small sensored compacts. But the opposite happened with mirrorless equipment prices rising each new generation.
Nowadays, the only option for me is a DSLR as the compacts turned rubbish, and mirrorlesses are offered for these exorbitant prices.
@tkpenalty:
I was comparing 17-50 on APS-C to 12-35 on M43. Both of those configurations give range of 28-80 eq 35. Both are F2.8 (with APS-C having advantage in DOF).
And I really think things are worse now then they were 4-5 years ago. The P&S compacts have much slower lens, often decentered (and much more often then it used to be the case), with way too many Mpixels.
There used to be segment with 1/1.5" to 1/1.7" sensors and fast 300mm telephoto lens (was called bridgecam). Nonexistent now. Today's superzooms with 1/2.3" sensors and slow 800mm lenses cannot compare.
There used to be segment of P&S with 1/1.5" to 1/1.7", very fast lens. This segment exists, but is on the verge of extinction.
No, mirrorlesses means less choice, not more. They are destroying the enthusiast P&S segment, with lenses that are much more expensive then their DSLR counterparts.
Hey, for $469 you can get this: http://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/lenses/sigma_17-50_2p8_os
It seems digital photography's golden times are over:
Some 4-7 years ago it was possible to buy P&S compact cameras with excellent optics and 1/1.6" sized sensors for reasonable price. DSLRs were expensive, sure, but their prices descended constantly.
Then the 2008 came, and P&S compacts started their descent into the hell of disposability with a complete disregard of any decency optics-wise (too much of a decentered lens lottery) and the crazy MP and MZ races.
As I am not keen on mirrors (& resulting bulk), so my hope was named "mirrorless". I also hoped mirrorless stuff gets cheaper over time, basically replacing both DSLR's and small sensored compacts. But the opposite happened with mirrorless equipment prices rising each new generation.
Nowadays, the only option for me is a DSLR as the compacts turned rubbish, and mirrorlesses are offered for these exorbitant prices.
suum cuique pulchrum est
Thence the technologies of 1950's are best served by the mirror.
But it does not suit the technologies of the 3rd millenium.
I am surprised to read all the negative comments here. This camera's output is not meant to be cropped, rather downscaled. Especially when raising the ISO.
You may ask: why increase the resolution then, if it ought to be downscaled afterwards. The simple answer is: contrasty edges. If you compare the shot taken by any old 3MP compact camera and the downscaled output of this beast, you'll surely see much better defined edges in the latter sample.
This is really prophetic:
I can see an era (not so distant), when the traditional true experiences of human life (wooden house, sheep, green grass, even stone axe and flint knife) will be reserved for the privileged few.All tThe rest of us will be deep down in the disposable hitech facebooked waste dump.