Reading mode: Light Dark

F31FD replacement? P&S in low light?

Go to last post
Ron777 said:
I agree, except for the F200 having smaller files, a processed EXR image is pretty close to an S90 SOOC jpeg. (S90 shooting raw of course then smokes it all the way around)
Click to expand...
with the S90's amazing f/2.0 lens, it would have to smoke the F200 (or any EXR camera) in low light. Even Hugo would admit that.
 
Who is Hugo? I see you guys saying that name, not sure who that is?
rattymouse said:
Ron777 said:
I agree, except for the F200 having smaller files, a processed EXR image is pretty close to an S90 SOOC jpeg. (S90 shooting raw of course then smokes it all the way around)
Click to expand...
with the S90's amazing f/2.0 lens, it would have to smoke the F200 (or any EXR camera) in low light. Even Hugo would admit that.
Click to expand...
--
Photography shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/invisodude/

Snap shots
http://s618.photobucket.com/albums/tt266/randsphoto/
 
I agree that 100% crops are interesting to look at. It tells you what the camera has actually captured.

However, in actual use, the question is which of the following is most prevalent:

a. People utilize more megapixels to make bigger prints,
b. Print size stays constant but quality varies.

No doubt both happen to some extent, but I think b. is more common. For that reason, I think that scaled images to equalize size are generally a better test.
Ron777 said:
We always look at 100% crops, most think there shouldn't be really high mpx P&S cams as their noisy at 100%. So,... that means we are always concerned with what we get at 100%. So I just showed both cameras taking the same scene with the same FOV, but showed just what is actually there at 100%. If I upscale the F200, it's going to be the same thing as viewing at 200%. If I downsize the Canon, that's unfair as part of it's 'charm' is you get nice images at full resolution.
John Carson said:
I don't agree. In practice, images are sized to a particular purpose, be it screen display or printing of a specific size. Buying the F200 doesn't commit you to always look at smaller pictures.

If a higher megapixel camera really does offer more detail, then it will still show more detail after the lower megapixel camera has been scaled up (it may not be readily visible if the larger megapixel camera is scaled down).

I did do a quick scaling up of the F200 and, to my eyes, it does show less detail. That was the only way I could make a comparison that I thought meaningful.
Ron777 said:
no, that is fair, the f200 is only 6mp so that is what you you get at 100%
Click to expand...
Ron777 said:
John Carson said:
If you want to compare for details, you should have the same field of view. The contents of the F200 image are shown at signficantly smaller size. Thus the tree trunk is narrower, for example. You need to blow it up by about 40% to get the same size.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
john carson
Click to expand...
--
Photography shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/invisodude/

Snap shots
http://s618.photobucket.com/albums/tt266/randsphoto/
Click to expand...
--
john carson
 
rattymouse said:
Ron777 said:
I agree, except for the F200 having smaller files, a processed EXR image is pretty close to an S90 SOOC jpeg. (S90 shooting raw of course then smokes it all the way around)
Click to expand...
with the S90's amazing f/2.0 lens, it would have to smoke the F200 (or any EXR camera) in low light. Even Hugo would admit that.
Click to expand...
At wide angle, it would be 1.5 stops faster (2.5x) in shutter speed. That can be mitigated somewhat by bracing.

At the long end ... wait ... there is no long end.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
 
Kim Letkeman said:
At wide angle, it would be 1.5 stops faster (2.5x) in shutter speed. That can be mitigated somewhat by bracing.
Click to expand...
Well I shot this at 1/3.2s at 36mm without bracing. Like to see you doing the same at 36mm at nearly 1s.

I have shots at 1/2.5s at the wide end which one should get with a S95 too. Like to see some under 1s shots with the F200 even somewhat mitigated by bracing




Kim Letkeman said:
At the long end ... wait ... there is no long end.
Click to expand...
90 to 140mm or 105 to 140mm? If you fell over you make that distance up.

--
Stephen
 
Kim Letkeman said:
rattymouse said:
Ron777 said:
I agree, except for the F200 having smaller files, a processed EXR image is pretty close to an S90 SOOC jpeg. (S90 shooting raw of course then smokes it all the way around)
Click to expand...
with the S90's amazing f/2.0 lens, it would have to smoke the F200 (or any EXR camera) in low light. Even Hugo would admit that.
Click to expand...
At wide angle, it would be 1.5 stops faster (2.5x) in shutter speed. That can be mitigated somewhat by bracing.

At the long end ... wait ... there is no long end.
Click to expand...
The F200EXR, or any EXR cam, can never catch up to the S90. If you can brace the F200, then you can brace the S90, thus giving it even more powerful low light capabilities. No matter what, the S90 will always be 1.5 stops ahead of the F200EXR (at the wide end). It gets a bit worse with the F300 as that lens is even slower, f/3.5. Will the next generation Fuji be at best an f/4.0?
 
Stephen 06 said:
Well I shot this at 1/3.2s at 36mm without bracing. Like to see you doing the same at 36mm at nearly 1s.
Click to expand...
At 250 ISO ... I would simply raise to 800 ISO and be done with it. And at this size, the image would look quite similar.
Stephen 06 said:
I have shots at 1/2.5s at the wide end which one should get with a S95 too. Like to see some under 1s shots with the F200 even somewhat mitigated by bracing
Click to expand...
Again ... the F200 has the larger sensor and at these size 800 ISO will be very similar to what you are showing ... especially after equalizing the noise reduction :-)
Stephen 06 said:
Stephen 06 said:
At the long end ... wait ... there is no long end.
Click to expand...
90 to 140mm or 105 to 140mm? If you fell over you make that distance up.
Click to expand...
Now that's just silly talk ... that's more than 50% in the first case ... and the F300 takes that to 370% ...

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
 
rattymouse said:
The F200EXR, or any EXR cam, can never catch up to the S90.
Click to expand...
Yawn ...
Member said:
If you can brace the F200, then you can brace the S90, thus giving it even more powerful low light capabilities.
Click to expand...
You mean powerful enough to solve world hunger?

You are holding this definition in your head of some level of perfection that is achieved when you can lower ISO ... whereas I am talking about a 1.5 stop difference at full wide that can be mitigated by bracing the camera and raising the ISO ... after all, every example I have seen so far has been of night scenes and indoor church scenes ... nothing moving there.

Hugo has shot many hundred superb night images without the benefit of the S95's f/2 lens ... why do you think that is?

A combination of skill and talent perhaps?
Member said:
No matter what, the S90 will always be 1.5 stops ahead of the F200EXR (at the wide end). It gets a bit worse with the F300 as that lens is even slower, f/3.5. Will the next generation Fuji be at best an f/4.0?
Click to expand...
Will I care?

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
 
for people that print, I agee. Imo since we can't show a print, showing 100% is all we can show on a forum to reveal how a large print might look.
John Carson said:
I agree that 100% crops are interesting to look at. It tells you what the camera has actually captured.

However, in actual use, the question is which of the following is most prevalent:

a. People utilize more megapixels to make bigger prints,
b. Print size stays constant but quality varies.

No doubt both happen to some extent, but I think b. is more common. For that reason, I think that scaled images to equalize size are generally a better test.
Ron777 said:
We always look at 100% crops, most think there shouldn't be really high mpx P&S cams as their noisy at 100%. So,... that means we are always concerned with what we get at 100%. So I just showed both cameras taking the same scene with the same FOV, but showed just what is actually there at 100%. If I upscale the F200, it's going to be the same thing as viewing at 200%. If I downsize the Canon, that's unfair as part of it's 'charm' is you get nice images at full resolution.
John Carson said:
I don't agree. In practice, images are sized to a particular purpose, be it screen display or printing of a specific size. Buying the F200 doesn't commit you to always look at smaller pictures.

If a higher megapixel camera really does offer more detail, then it will still show more detail after the lower megapixel camera has been scaled up (it may not be readily visible if the larger megapixel camera is scaled down).

I did do a quick scaling up of the F200 and, to my eyes, it does show less detail. That was the only way I could make a comparison that I thought meaningful.
Ron777 said:
no, that is fair, the f200 is only 6mp so that is what you you get at 100%
Click to expand...
John Carson said:
John Carson said:
If you want to compare for details, you should have the same field of view. The contents of the F200 image are shown at signficantly smaller size. Thus the tree trunk is narrower, for example. You need to blow it up by about 40% to get the same size.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
john carson
Click to expand...
--
Photography shots

Snap shots
Click to expand...
--
john carson
Click to expand...
--
Photography shots

Snap shots
 
Kim Letkeman said:
Kim Letkeman said:
I suggest to check Sony TX5 - IMHO ultimate party cam, very small (smaller than a phone), rugged, wide 25mm, strong in low light, amazing macro, effective IS, HD movie ...
Click to expand...
Now that's an unusual suggestion ... do you have a link to any party images from the TX5? I'm curious what you mean by ultimate ...
Click to expand...
Kim,

I bought TX5 for my daughter and played with it just briefly, but was really impressed with capabilities. I don't have many images I can post, just some test shots. I uploaded two Exotic Bills shots as You like to the gallery. Both are handheld, Auto, no PP, no bracing, pitch dark room with the light from the LCD monitor only. If You like I can supply more.

To the Stephen's "pocketable" LX5 ... sorry, but those are not jeans - baggy pants made of denim like fabric. Somebody can loose full Wushoff knife set including 6 steak knives there ... In my jeans I can't carry even a dollar bill in my front pockets, but TX5 fits perfectly in to the tiny 5th front pocket.

Ultimate ... obviously, we have different definitions for the party :-) In my mind, Party is something like Vegas Pool gathering where people getting drunk, sweaty, falling in to the pool, dunking cameras into cocktails, tossing them around, etc ... for this kind of environment or "party" TX5 is the ultimate. Also, I'm an avid salt water boater and skier and I really like safely carrying the camera in my board short or jacket sleeve pocket ... my F30 gets rust only by sitting in the case on a stateroom shelf :-(
 
VRiabov said:
I bought TX5 for my daughter and played with it just briefly, but was really impressed with capabilities. I don't have many images I can post, just some test shots. I uploaded two Exotic Bills shots as You like to the gallery. Both are handheld, Auto, no PP, no bracing, pitch dark room with the light from the LCD monitor only. If You like I can supply more.
Click to expand...
Looks very good for 3200 ISO, although one nit is that is quite a lot of light compared with my tests. I did shoot something equivalent and the NR does eat away at the details here and there, as is usual. The Sony is probably better at that sort of image, yet your bill seems rather contrasty.

I am tempted to judge the TX5 very favorably, but find it difficult to draw a useful conclusion from tests done in different light and by different people.
VRiabov said:
To the Stephen's "pocketable" LX5 ... sorry, but those are not jeans - baggy pants made of denim like fabric. Somebody can loose full Wushoff knife set including 6 steak knives there ... In my jeans I can't carry even a dollar bill in my front pockets, but TX5 fits perfectly in to the tiny 5th front pocket.
Click to expand...
Yes, the TX5 is ultra-portable ... no doubt about that. How are the controls? Manual mode etc?
VRiabov said:
Ultimate ... obviously, we have different definitions for the party :-) In my mind, Party is something like Vegas Pool gathering where people getting drunk, sweaty, falling in to the pool, dunking cameras into cocktails, tossing them around, etc ... for this kind of environment or "party" TX5 is the ultimate. Also, I'm an avid salt water boater and skier and I really like safely carrying the camera in my board short or jacket sleeve pocket ... my F30 gets rust only by sitting in the case on a stateroom shelf :-(
Click to expand...
I'm not really sure that I get what you are saying ... is the TX5 waterproofed?

Edit: I just remembered the knock against the two Sonys ... they are terrible in bright light. Very mushy images.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
 
Kim Letkeman said:
I'm not really sure that I get what you are saying ... is the TX5 waterproofed?

Edit: I just remembered the knock against the two Sonys ... they are terrible in bright light. Very mushy images.
Click to expand...
Yes, TX5 is waterproof (tested extensively on trips to Bahamas, Hawaii and California offshore islands), shock and freeze proof.

Controls are limited, but touch screen GUI is surprisingly good and it has several very useful modes like Hand-held Twilight, Backlight Correction HDR, Anti-Motion Blur, Twilight Portrait etc. Not much, but enough for the "party" :-)

Light - that was the least amount of light I was able to get. Bill is contrasty, but watermark has enough gradation to judge DR.

Terrible in bright light ... not really, all island's images are not bad at all, but I have to check iMode vs HDR and -EV. And I don't see mushiness You are mentioning. I was bothered BIG TIME with HS10 mushiness, but TX5 is at least acceptable. I'd say it suffers from corner softness wide open, but not terribly.
 
OK, let me find...

man must have been in a reply rather then a thread I started, I think it would be faster to just redo, I did find this just with the S90,

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=36191642
Kim Letkeman said:
Ron777 said:
I did a couple months ago, I shot and showed comps with the s90 in raw to my f200
Kim Letkeman said:
Ron777 said:
I agree, except for the F200 having smaller files, a processed EXR image is pretty close to an S90 SOOC jpeg. (S90 shooting raw of course then smokes it all the way around)
Click to expand...
Prove that ...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Link?

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
Click to expand...
--
Photography shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/invisodude/

Snap shots
http://s618.photobucket.com/albums/tt266/randsphoto/
 
VRiabov said:
Yes, TX5 is waterproof (tested extensively on trips to Bahamas, Hawaii and California offshore islands), shock and freeze proof.
Click to expand...
Cool ...
VRiabov said:
Controls are limited, but touch screen GUI is surprisingly good and it has several very useful modes like Hand-held Twilight, Backlight Correction HDR, Anti-Motion Blur, Twilight Portrait etc. Not much, but enough for the "party" :-)
Click to expand...
I suppose for an ultra portable, one might make a concession for controls ... but of course I am all about reach (concerts) ...
VRiabov said:
Light - that was the least amount of light I was able to get. Bill is contrasty, but watermark has enough gradation to judge DR.
Click to expand...
I was more concerned with NR smearing ... too much light increases contrast enough to eliminate most of that ... even the F300 saved a lot of detail at that light level ... but not as much as the TX5
VRiabov said:
Terrible in bright light ... not really, all island's images are not bad at all, but I have to check iMode vs HDR and -EV. And I don't see mushiness You are mentioning. I was bothered BIG TIME with HS10 mushiness, but TX5 is at least acceptable. I'd say it suffers from corner softness wide open, but not terribly.
Click to expand...
Interesting ... I would like to see that sensor with both excellent daytime and excellent night time imagery ... but there is still the issue of DR ... I'm pretty used to Fuji's DR, which is very high for a pocketable ...

As for corner softness, that lens is folded I believe and would be expected to have distortions ...

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
http://letkeman.net/Photos
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Out of my mind? - Back to X-S1 again ...
Replies
8
Views
1K
RodHarrison
R
D
Z6III - Worse Low Light AF Than Z6?
2
Replies
36
Views
19K
sirhawkeye64
S
F
Replacement Fujifilm NP-T125 battery
Replies
8
Views
549
Stan Disbrow
Stan Disbrow
winhto
Nikon Z30
Replies
6
Views
4K
Randy_A
Randy_A
JacquesC
Anybody here moved from Oly M43 to X-T50 ?
Replies
3
Views
799
ElliotV
E

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