Compared to the Canon PowerShot G2
Canon's PowerShot G2 stands out as the benchmark 4 megapixel prosumer
digital camera, so it's an ideal candidate for comparison to the QV-4000
The only problem with this comparison is that the G2 has an ISO 50 sensitivity
option and that the QV-4000 doesn't allow you to select sensitivity. To
make the comparison fair it was shot twice, first at ISO 50 and then at
ISO 100 (results from both tests shown below).
Scene comparison, Canon G2 @ ISO 50
Cameras were reset to factory defaults. Aperture priority was used on
both cameras to use an aperture of F5.0 (or as close as possible). White
balance was set to Manual Preset. Lighting - 2 x 800W studio lights with
dichroic daylight filters bounced off a white ceiling reflector.
| Casio QV-4000 |
Canon PowerShot
G2 |
| ISO ???, 1/2 sec, F5.6 (est. ISO
80) |
ISO 50, 1/3 sec, F5.0 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Casio QV-4000 |
Canon PowerShot
G2 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Starting with colour balance and the G2 just takes the edge, its general
balance is a little better than the QV-4000 which comes out especially
strong on reds and weak on blue and green. Next resolution, both cameras
show good resolution, however it looks to me as though the QV-4000's aggressive
flat area noise reduction (as mentioned earlier) is taking its toll on
the image detail, this leads to a blotchy 'water-colour' look to some
areas of the image and strange speckled artifacts against detail.
Scene comparison, Canon G2 @ ISO 100
Cameras were reset to factory defaults. Aperture priority was used on
both cameras to use an aperture of F5.0 (or as close as possible). White
balance was set to Manual Preset. Lighting - 2 x 800W studio lights with
dichroic daylight filters bounced off a white ceiling reflector.
| Casio QV-4000 |
Canon PowerShot
G2 |
| ISO ???, 1/2 sec, F5.6 (est. ISO
80) |
ISO 100, 1/6 sec, F5.0 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
| Casio QV-4000 |
Canon PowerShot
G2 |
|
 |
|
 |
Once more the G2 wins for colour balance, detail and overall resolution.
Thanks to the QV-4000's noise reduction it trades off detail for cleaner
flat areas, not a choice I'd make. What a shame, the lens and CCD clearly
have the resolution but in places it's being "wiped clean" by
algorithms which are just too aggressive.
|
