This is a question for Richard Butler concerning the XZ-1

1 You have had your hands on the XZ-1, did you use the manual focus?
2 If so, how is it implimented?

3 And if you power down the camera in manual focus mode, does the camera power back up in MF and set to the same focal distance it was set at before power down?

Actually, for the street photographer in me, a simple yes or no to the third question now is more important than elaborating and answer to the second.
Of course if you answer no to the first then 2 and 3 are redundent

walkaboutcamera said:

1 You have had your hands on the XZ-1, did you use the manual focus?
2 If so, how is it implimented?

3 And if you power down the camera in manual focus mode, does the camera power back up in MF and set to the same focal distance it was set at before power down?

Actually, for the street photographer in me, a simple yes or no to the third question now is more important than elaborating and answer to the second.
Of course if you answer no to the first then 2 and 3 are redundent

Click to expand...

I've had a bit of a play in manual focus mode but can't remember the specifics at the moment. I'll make sure those questions are covered in our forthcoming review, though.

Richard - dpreview.com

I'll also like to know how fast the camera is when using the art filters.

I'm really interested in the art filter speed capability

A little OT: i think there's an error in E-PL2 specs as there's only 6 art filters and not 9 that was listed.

--
My Galleries
http://picasaweb.google.com.au/sadwitch

Thank You

sadwitch said:

I'll also like to know how fast the camera is when using the art filters.

I'm really interested in the art filter speed capability

A little OT: i think there's an error in E-PL2 specs as there's only 6 art filters and not 9 that was listed.

Click to expand...

The E-PL2 only has 6 Art Filters, but some of those filters now have additional options.

Richard - dpreview.com

walkaboutcamera said:

1 You have had your hands on the XZ-1, did you use the manual focus?
2 If so, how is it implimented?

Click to expand...

This image may help answer your questions:

Hi Richard,

One of the things I just couldn't handle in the TL500 (used it for 3 days and returned it) was that the digital zoom couldn't be disabled and there wasn't enough of a "stopper" to avoid going into DZ when trying to zoom in. Do you know if the XZ-1 is more manageable on that front? Can the DZ be disabled?

Also, when i compared the Samsung to my dear old Olympus C770, I found I had better IQ and color with the oly, plus a better zoom range. What's your opinion about the XZ1 compared to the old C7** series?

thanks,
Susan
--



http://www.pbase.com/susan_1016

No disrespect meant to anyone posting under this thread, but please try to minimize distractions for the DPR staff and let them complete and post the XZ-1 review; the wait for which has many of us (including me) sitting on the fence juggling camera purchase/return decisions.

In my case, if the DPR review reveals that the IQ (particularly jpeg), low light performance, build quality, LCD and other basic functions either match or exceed those of the S95, my S95 is going back (but my time window is narrowing) ... because, I prefer the slightly larger size and - most compelling - ability to plug in the excellent EVF (not to mention external flash). Time limit on video and lack of AEL are not deal breakers for my needs.

I have been thinking about this for a while: The lens is F1.8 wide open: But there is a built in ND filter...

Won't this give the lens an effective F-stop larger than F1.8 wide open?

Richard, appreciate if this will be covered

Geir Ove
--
My album at: http://www.objective.no/gostemp

Geir Ove said:

I have been thinking about this for a while: The lens is F1.8 wide open: But there is a built in ND filter...

Won't this give the lens an effective F-stop larger than F1.8 wide open?

Richard, appreciate if this will be covered

Geir Ove
--
My album at: http://www.objective.no/gostemp

Click to expand...

It will be covered but it's fairly straight-forward so I'll answer it quickly:

There's an optional 3-stop ND filter that can be engaged so that you can still shoot wide-open in fairly bright light or offer very long exposure times for creative effects such as emphasising flowing water.

As such the effective aperture remains 1.8-2.5 but you can essentially use a lower sensitivity than the sensor offers.

Richard - dpreview.com

Hello Richard,

Thanks a lot for taking time to reply on a busy schedule!

So, the XZ-1 contains a software controlled ND filter: Wonder how that works:
Don't use time to answer it here: Save some goodies for the review:

It is a long time since I have read a complete review, but this one I will read

Geir Ove
--
My album at: http://www.objective.no/gostemp

I am getting the feeling the manual focus is going to be awkward, if the answer to my third question is yes the it will still be ?good? as a street camera.

walkaboutcamera said:

I am getting the feeling the manual focus is going to be awkward, if the answer to my third question is yes the it will still be ?good? as a street camera.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid the lens (and focus) completely resets if you shut the camera down.

Richard - dpreview.com

R Butler said:

walkaboutcamera said:

I am getting the feeling the manual focus is going to be awkward, if the answer to my third question is yes the it will still be ?good? as a street camera.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid the lens (and focus) completely resets if you shut the camera down.

Richard - dpreview.com

Click to expand...

Thanks Richard

On the G9 and I presume on the later Gs and the G7, if the camera was in MF and you set it in custom memory, every time you went back to that custom setting MF would be back on at the focus point it was originally set to, this would also be the case for zoom as well. I expect the s90 and s95 are the same, but needs to be confirmed, I know nothing about the LX-3 or 5. With the G7,G9,G11 and s90 having chdk support, and probably support to come for the 12 and 95, The abpve mentioned Canons takes it as the best P&S street cameras. This is because the CHDK provides you with an Auto exposure that really works.

As an OLY PEN shooter with the VF-2, I had high hopes that the XZ-1 would meet my P&S compact street camera needs. I suspect the xZ-1 will be an excellent camera, but noy for me. My G9 will still find lots of use.

Hi,

I am wondering how to judge the picture quality in low light. If I am correct the standard dpreview comparison test (e.g. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q42010highendcompactgroup/page14.asp ) only determines the low ISO performance of the chip used by the camera. The pictures are taken und the same circumstances. The only change is the ISO setting. In this case we only see the ISO performance of the chip.
In my opinion it doesn't include the performance of the lens.

If I understand the situation right than with a faster lens it should be possible to shoot the same picture with the same exposure time (e.g. 1/125) at lower ISO settings and thus getting a cleaner image because of the lower ISO setting.

This would mean to compare e.g. the zx-1 and the lx5 which have the same chip (as I understand it at the moment) one has to shoot the same scene preferably a night shoot with the same exposure times at different ISO settings. Then one has to compare the different pictures and look for same quality shots. If one camera has a decent picture at a lower ISO setting than this should be the superior low light camera.

Is there any mistake in my idea? If not would it be possible to do such comparison shots for the xz-1 review?

Gucky

I'll second that motion, and would be surprised if DPR did not include this kind of comparison in their test results ... particularly given that the fast lens accross the the entire focal range is the headline feature of the XZ-1 and (don't have to be a rocket scientist to surmise) the leading area where Olympus is banking on blowing their competition out of the water ... or, at least, earning reviews that proclaim the camera to represent a technological advance in low light performance, raising the bar in the high end enthusiast compact P & S market. Given the lens spec, I'd be surprised if it didn't earn those accolades, but the big question is whether the lens performance is matched (and supported) by the quality, performance and integration of the rest of the components. If so, I think we may be looking at a Gold Award winner in the category (I remember reading a post from a member asking about where that Gold Award winning camera was).

If not, then there will be a multitude of dissapointed folks - me included - but none more than Olympus sales and R&D. Come on DPR ... post that review !

That spanish site review mentionned in some other thread said that Olympus did a very good job with the lens, balanced its performance really well across its range.

They only complained about NR, that it could have been less and that it can't be 100% switched off even in RAW (when using the Olympus RAW software).

But the pics look good...I want one, yes let's have this review promptly please!

justharry said:

I'll second that motion, and would be surprised if DPR did not include this kind of comparison in their test results ... particularly given that the fast lens accross the the entire focal range is the headline feature of the XZ-1 and (don't have to be a rocket scientist to surmise) the leading area where Olympus is banking on blowing their competition out of the water ... or, at least, earning reviews that proclaim the camera to represent a technological advance in low light performance, raising the bar in the high end enthusiast compact P & S market. Given the lens spec, I'd be surprised if it didn't earn those accolades, but the big question is whether the lens performance is matched (and supported) by the quality, performance and integration of the rest of the components. If so, I think we may be looking at a Gold Award winner in the category (I remember reading a post from a member asking about where that Gold Award winning camera was).

If not, then there will be a multitude of dissapointed folks - me included - but none more than Olympus sales and R&D. Come on DPR ... post that review !

Click to expand...

There is never any in camera NR on RAW file data, in any camera, if there was it would no longer be RAW. NR, dynamic range changes, lens dist correction, gradations, etc,etc,etc and etc when applied to a RAW file are always in every case post processed out of camera.

By all means please reply and tell me I am wrong. These kind of replys will help me expand the number of people I put on ignour so I don't have to waste my time with them.

As for the post I am replying to here I will assume it was just a slip of the typed tongue.

I'm not sure I understood your "ignore" talk, but anyway I'm replying

Yes it was sloppy writing, apologies. Of course RAW is RAW. What they said was :

"Si nos fijamos en los resultados obtenidos desde los RAW, conversión a JPG a través de Olympus Viewer 2.0, los efectos del filtraje son menores, aunque debido al paso imperativo del revelador de la marca, intuimos que de momento inevitables y todavía presentes aunque desactivamos todos los ajustes pertinentes."

Which according to my imperfect spanish translates to: " Talking about the results obtained from RAW, converted to jpeg via Olympus Viewer 2.0, the NR effects are less, although due to the necessary use of the proprietory converter, we think that at the moment they are (the NR effects) inevitable and still present even though we deactivated all the relevant adjustments"

Any native speaker please correct me if I'm wrong!

walkaboutcamera said:

There is never any in camera NR on RAW file data, in any camera, if there was it would no longer be RAW. NR, dynamic range changes, lens dist correction, gradations, etc,etc,etc and etc when applied to a RAW file are always in every case post processed out of camera.

By all means please reply and tell me I am wrong. These kind of replys will help me expand the number of people I put on ignour so I don't have to waste my time with them.

As for the post I am replying to here I will assume it was just a slip of the typed tongue.

Click to expand...

Hello,

As a matter of fact, I had though to ask DPReview to do a separate article / blog that handles these facts and the effects of them:

a) I have a Canon 50D, many lenses are at their best around F5.6 - 8, thus I tend to use that Aperature for most shooting.

b) The XZ-1 seems to handle F2 just beatifully.

c) Since F2 is 4 stops faster than F8 (2 -> 2.8 -> 4 -> 5.6 -> 8. Sqrt(2) relationship), the XZ-1 can use 4 stops lower ISO setting and achieve the same shutter speed.

Thus, if I shoot F8, at 1/125 sec at ISO 1600 with the 50D, I can shoot F2 at 1/125 sec at ISO 100 with the XZ-1 (1600 -> 800 -> 400 -> 200 -> 100)

c) We know that Noise increases with longer shutter speeds: What I do not know at the moment, is what the relationship is (linear, and there are different kinds of noise: Shot Noise, Read Noise etc)

d) The are of a APS C sized sensor is 22.3 x 14.9 mm = 332 mm2.
The area of the XZ-1 sensor is approx 110 mm2 (if I am not wrong).

Thus, there is only 3 times more light (approx again) for each pixel. Compare this to the fact, that the APC camera under the conditions given above has to use 4 stops higher ISO setting.

Some may of course argue that I could use a smaller aperture for the Canon 50D. However, consider these facts:

Glass is expensive: DSLR manuf. tends to put as cheap glass as possible in their lenses. Fact is, that much of the available lenses does not keep up with the high res of todays DSLR sensors.

It is much cheaper to put better glass in a compact due to the much smaller size.

Remains to be seen how good the glass in the XZ-1 is, and if we really can benefit from shooting at F1.8 -> F2.5 to reap the benefits of using slower ISO settings.

Richard Butler: It would be very interesting if DPReview could do an article on this very interesting topic: Maybe coming high end compacts with fast lenses and low noise sensors can start to close the gap go their DSLR big brothers ?

Geir Ove
--
My album at: http://www.objective.no/gostemp