Reading mode: Light Dark

DSC-W300 - ISO 1600 & 3200 samples

Go to last post
Have a look at this thread on another site. Whilst it is not definitive is does seem to show that at last Sony sensors are in the same league as Fuji - not saying better, but maybe too close to call overall.

website is openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthreadphp?

Don't dismiss the possibility.

Nick
 
NIK11 said:
Have a look at this thread on another site. Whilst it is not
definitive is does seem to show that at last Sony sensors are in the
same league as Fuji - not saying better, but maybe too close to call
overall.

website is openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthreadphp?

Don't dismiss the possibility.
Click to expand...
I surely would not. As I said I have no loyalty to any company and I truly hope Sony has improved and pushes the other companies to stop putting a useless ISO1600/3200 even 6400 on their cams but instead market those settings as actual ones that can be used/printed if need be. Up to now Fuji has had an advantage over the other companies IMO - if Sony has leveled the plain then that's great ... Matt
NIK11 said:
Nick
Click to expand...
 
based upon what I've read and his needs. Hopefully he'll be happy!
As always, I enjoy your great input on many forums!
Jim
 
summerfunk said:
To be honest, given that your thought process is so
immature, I'm surprised you even know how to use a digital camera.
Crayons would be a better tool for you.
Click to expand...
So much about immature. Can you draw me a picture?
summerfunk said:
Can I suggest medication?

Certainly if I was an employee of Sony, I wouldnt own a D40x.
Click to expand...
Not if the Nikon provides better IQ. lol
summerfunk said:
You think that reviews are reality, and because you have an F40, you cannot
accept that a non Fuji camera may be better.
Click to expand...
I don't care about the brand. What matters for me is IQ and price only!

If the w300 is better than a Fuji F30, great, give me real prove and I will considering this 'gem'. Otherwise I will wait for a dependable review and maybe, if the review is good, I will touch the w300.

--
Fuji F40
 
If you had just simply taken the time to read the entire review you would have noted the enthusiasm about the Sony W300's IQ was relative to all the small dcs that he has experience with. Matt realized that after he read the review. Read Matt's follow up comment.

If you look at the reviews that are posted and linked to in that article, you will see a well versed articulate and knowledgeable reviewer who is not blinded by brand prejudices. Matt is also a clear thinker in the same mold as the reviewer.
azumimm said:
jimr said:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/shirt-pocket.shtml
Click to expand...
As Photofreak7 already stated comparing the w300 with a Samsung
NV24-HD is not a feat at all.
Click to expand...
 
At least there is no echo.. ha ha ha... :)

--
N i k o n D 4 0 x + 1 8 - 2 0 0 m m V R + 3 0 m m F 1 . 4
S o n y 7 0 7 & T 9 & W 3 0 0
 
I have a Fuji F30 and it's a great little camera, built like a tank; it goes everywhere in my pocket, but even though it's famous for it's high ISO abilities, I just can't stand the grain in the images. It's ugly. I only use the F30 at ISO 100.

The top face here is full of that ugly Fuji grain. I would be much happier working with the second image in Photoshop.
--
John Dunn

Portraits: http://www.fototime.com/ftweb/bin/ft.dll/pictures?userid= {8B9B811D-AD1C-4A7D-923E-A4D0930BB5EE}
 
You jump between the 100fd the 40fd the 30fd. Get consistent dude.

100fd is echo city - and I have posted two samples now to prove it.

That's the latest and best Fujicam... and unlike you, I have tried it :)

--
N i k o n D 4 0 x + 1 8 - 2 0 0 m m V R + 3 0 m m F 1 . 4
S o n y 7 0 7 & T 9 & W 3 0 0
 
from that review:
First comment:

"My first thought when I read about the W300 was – Good grief – 13.6 Megapixels from a 1/1.7" sensor on a body the size of a tin of Altoids. Will the madness never end?

But then, after just a few hours of shooting with the W300 my thoughts were – How come nobody is talking about how astonishingly good this little camera is? "

Second comment:

"The 100% crops seen above tell the tale. To my eye the Sony W300 simply trounces any other small camera of its type

when it comes to high ISO noise, particularly when one considers that this is an almost 14MP camera.

My experience thus far is that speeds between 100 and 400 produce good looking usable images at any

appropriate print size. No additional noise reduction is needed. At ISO 800 noise is still not too bad, but apparent

resolution starts to deteriorate, likely due to in-camera noise reduction. ISO 1600 is usable, and cleans up fairly well

with some additional external noise reduction, while ISO 3200 is not usable except for strictly documentary purposes"
 
They sure do. Go figure.

BTW, I'd love to see the same in a Panny FZ18, Panny TZ5, Nikon P80, Sony H50 and Oly SP570 comparison!
 
jimr said:
They sure do. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Yep the NR in the W300 is way to strong IMO - the F100 is actually pretty impressive here to my eyes. BTW the W300 was resized to 12MP's before the crops were made to match the F100fd. Upsizing the F100fd to 13.6MP's and the W300 looks just as bad. Just a 'side note' the F50, F30 and even the G9 do much better than the W300 - look for yourself at the site, crop them and go 'pixel peep' happy!... Matt
jimr said:
BTW, I'd love to see the same in a Panny FZ18, Panny TZ5, Nikon P80,
Sony H50 and Oly SP570 comparison!
Click to expand...
 
Photofreak7 said:
Folks these tell a different story...
Click to expand...
After the review jimr posted I already knew that the W300 provides blurry shots compared to the F40. I even compared some F50 shots with the W300 and all W300 shots are tremendously blurry! Especially shots above ISO 400.

So much about excitement. Too much MP are no good.

--
Fuji F40
 
jimr said:
jimr said:
BTW, I'd love to see the same in a Panny FZ18, Panny TZ5, Nikon P80,
jimr said:
Sony H50 and Oly SP570 comparison!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I've seen opposing conclusions. What's new about that:}
Click to expand...
I'm sorry conclusions to what? (the F100/W300 is easy to evaluate) BTW I don't think it would be fair to compare the FZ18, TZ5 to the W300. The Nikon P80, SP570 or H50 I could care less about how they compare to be honest - but just go to that site and check them out, crop them and go pixel peep happy! ... Matt
 
azumimm said:
Photofreak7 said:
Folks these tell a different story...
Click to expand...
After the review jimr posted I already knew that the W300 provides
blurry shots compared to the F40. I even compared some F50 shots with
the W300 and all W300 shots are tremendously blurry! Especially shots
above ISO 400.
Click to expand...
Which review - I'm curious because I also have the F40fd and find it a superb camera for the price tag... Matt
azumimm said:
So much about excitement. Too much MP are no good.
Click to expand...
Actually it looks like processing hurts the W300 more than anything else IMO. The Fuji sensor is slightly larger but also better designed than most current CCD's - that plus clever image/noise processing = better IQ at higher ISO's. Also keep in mind that the F40/50/100 are tops in the compact world for resolution... Matt
azumimm said:
--
Fuji F40
Click to expand...
 
a) Take the review of luminous-landscape with a pinch of salt. They are too emotional to present an unbiased picture.

b) As the images from independent review sites show, W300 has no better lens than rest of W series (high distortion, corner softness).

c) Its only USP is highest MPs on a compact, which in a way is bad as that also amplifies lens faults and NR artfacts.
Photofreak7 said:
azumimm said:
So much about excitement. Too much MP are no good.
Click to expand...
Actually it looks like processing hurts the W300 more than anything
else IMO. The Fuji sensor is slightly larger but also better designed
than most current CCD's - that plus clever image/noise processing =
better IQ at higher ISO's. Also keep in mind that the F40/50/100 are
tops in the compact world for resolution... Matt
Click to expand...
--
Best Wishes, Ajay
http://picasaweb.google.com/ajay0612
Thanks for your time.
 
Despite all the arguments here, not ONE 100fd owner has posted their own 100% ISO 3200 images to show that the 100fd is capable of. That is telling.

There is so much twoddle spoken about the Fuji cameras. All the positive comments about the 100fd are coming from people that DONT OWN a 100fd and NEVER WILL because of the pink band. All the current users are screaming about the problems.

"The Fuji sensor is slightly larger but also better designed than most current CCD's - that plus clever image/noise processing = better IQ at higher ISO's."

I can only assume that the Fuji 100fd IQ thinks all its owners are girls and are giving pink bands to make them happy! Yeah! Is that the better IQ you are talking about? Is that the better design? Look at yourself - even you have admitted that the 100fd has a pink band design flaw.

"Also keep in mind that the F40/50/100 are tops in the compact world for resolution... Matt"

Erm.. resolution of 100fd is 12M.. 300W is 13.6M..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top