XZ-1 as a companion to a DSLR is it overkill - was thinking of S95

I've been waffling on what to possibly get to replace a Panasonic DMC-TZ5

I currently own a D70s DSLR which admittedly is getting long in the tooth, but I have some good lenses and it performs for me. I'm going to Disney with the family in a few weeks. What I did not want to do is bring the D70s as its too big and bulky.

My initial thought was to bring the TZ5 but I started thinking of "upgrading" it. I like to shoot in RAW so the lack of that functionality as always bothered me. Long story short, I was nearly settled on a S95 given the reviews and posts in the canon forum Except one or two posters had mentioned the XZ-1 as a potential alternative albeit expensive one to the S95.

I got to play with both the XZ-1 and S95 at my local camera shop. I can say that S95 is small - tiny even. Yeah its pocketable, but is it too small? I dunno.

The lens of the XZ-1 has me tempted, the long reach, much brighter then its counterparts. I'm spoiled in that regard as I have a constant f2.8 28-70mm lens for my D70

The noise (which is offset by fast lens somewhat) has me worried a bit.

Given that my intended usage for this class of camera will be for Disney (mostly outside) family gatherings at holidays etc. how does the XZ-1 handle over the S95

How does the flash work vs the S95s? I know with the Oly I can use the hot shoe for a flash but I want to compare apples to apples.

How bad is the noise in low light situations? Can I clean it up within Aperture or Lightroom or is it so bad that I cannot?

I'm spoiled by the fact in my DSLR, I set the ISO, is there ANY way of setting the ISO in the camera?

Given this lens, do people who own DSLRs find them reaching for this camera rather then lugging the DSLR more often?

Some reviewers complained about the LCD, not being sharp enough, in actual use is that a valid criticism

The price has me a little bit concerned. I can get the S95 for 358 at adorama if I snag it now with a mail in rebate. I think the XZ-1 may be more useful all around so just maybe its worth the 500 (yeah I know worth is subjective)

I'm trying to be specific with my questions as opposed is the XZ-1 better then the S95. To be honest the size has me impressed and spooked at the same time.

The XZ-1 fits perfectly between a smartphone (that you always carry with you), and the fully capable DSLR, (which mostly sits in your garage). It's an excellent tool as a complement to the other two. Learn to use it, well you already have DSLR experience, so that shouldn't be a problem. All the awards it constantly gets, must indicate something about its performance.
--

Ludwig Wittgenstein; British philosopher born in Austria; a major influence on logic and logical positivism (1889-1951):

“What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent”

The biggest disappointment with the advanced compact cameras occurs not on its LCD but on your monitor back home. This comes from a present owner and past of the following compacts: S90, G11, G12, LX5, EX-1/TL500, P7000. I ask myself why I continue to try them and am too considering the XZ-1 at the moment. Many of my reasons are similar to yours.

Sadly, for anyone concerned with noise, detail and dynamic range needs to get past the attractive 'user experience' of an advanced compact and look elsewhere, like m43. A EP-1 w/17mm and viewfinder can be had for $499...same price as xz-1...and, while it too is getting long in the tooth, it is far ahead of anything the XZ-1 or S95 can do.
--
"Contrary to some thinking, the best camera is the next one you want"

Joe
a nonphotography photographer

Hello,

As I do not have an S95 I will only address some questions.

maflynn said:

I've been waffling on what to possibly get to replace a Panasonic DMC-TZ5

I currently own a D70s DSLR which admittedly is getting long in the tooth, but I have some good lenses and it performs for me. I'm going to Disney with the family in a few weeks. What I did not want to do is bring the D70s as its too big and bulky.

My initial thought was to bring the TZ5 but I started thinking of "upgrading" it. I like to shoot in RAW so the lack of that functionality as always bothered me. Long story short, I was nearly settled on a S95 given the reviews and posts in the canon forum Except one or two posters had mentioned the XZ-1 as a potential alternative albeit expensive one to the S95.

I got to play with both the XZ-1 and S95 at my local camera shop. I can say that S95 is small - tiny even. Yeah its pocketable, but is it too small? I dunno.

Click to expand...

The XZ-1 is bulky for a compact, less than the Canon G series but still bulky and NOT pocketable, except for coat or jacket pockets. Go handle it and try. I think the handling is more secure with two hands, the right one for the back controls and shutter, left one for the lens ring. In any case, this is the proper way of handling a camera. Size and handling do not bother me. Controls are good but some miss an AEL button.

maflynn said:

The lens of the XZ-1 has me tempted, the long reach, much brighter then its counterparts. I'm spoiled in that regard as I have a constant f2.8 28-70mm lens for my D70

Click to expand...

The lens is superb. It also allows you to take shallow DOF portraits. See comparisons with its peers at
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/XZ1/XZ1A.HTM

maflynn said:

The noise (which is offset by fast lens somewhat) has me worried a bit.

Click to expand...

All compacts are noisy. This one is not an exception. I had an Oly e-520 and it was less noisy, but not by much. The DSRL was sharper, though. I would advise you to check samples on the internet. For me, noise levels are acceptable, in particular if you manage to keep it at ISO 200 in low light, which is not very difficult with the fast lens of the XZ-1.

maflynn said:

Given that my intended usage for this class of camera will be for Disney (mostly outside) family gatherings at holidays etc. how does the XZ-1 handle over the S95

How does the flash work vs the S95s? I know with the Oly I can use the hot shoe for a flash but I want to compare apples to apples.

How bad is the noise in low light situations? Can I clean it up within Aperture or Lightroom or is it so bad that I cannot?

I'm spoiled by the fact in my DSLR, I set the ISO, is there ANY way of setting the ISO in the camera?

Click to expand...

Yes, there are several ways of setting the ISO. Normally you access the ISO setting through the display quick menu. In S mode you set the ISO through the lens ring.

maflynn said:

Given this lens, do people who own DSLRs find them reaching for this camera rather then lugging the DSLR more often?

Click to expand...

I sold my e-520 due to bulk. I prefer the XZ-1 for the pics I take. I do not need ultimate low light image quality.

maflynn said:

Some reviewers complained about the LCD, not being sharp enough, in actual use is that a valid criticism

Click to expand...

The LCD is very good, very bright and sharp, AFAIC.

maflynn said:

The price has me a little bit concerned. I can get the S95 for 358 at adorama if I snag it now with a mail in rebate. I think the XZ-1 may be more useful all around so just maybe its worth the 500 (yeah I know worth is subjective)

Click to expand...

I got it second hand for more or less $425 from a guy who bought it in mars and took only 200 pics. I would pay the full price now that I know the very satisfactory results I am getting from the camera. But that is just me.

maflynn said:

I'm trying to be specific with my questions as opposed is the XZ-1 better then the S95. To be honest the size has me impressed and spooked at the same time.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that, in your case, it mostly comes down to size. S95 seems more pocketable, yet more limited than the Oly due to the slower lens at telephoto.

Hope it helps,

--
-J

Hi J,

It seems as if I am destined to answer as your counterpart because I have the S95 but not the XZ-1. All I can say about the XZ-1 is what I have picked up by studying this forum over the last few months because of my interest for the XZ-1.

I think what you have written in your post about the XZ-1 seems absolutely correct. I also agree that the small size of the S95 can cause doubts about the handling ease and quality. However, I have come to respect the S95 as being easy to handle, even for a ham-fisted 6 foot 4 and 95 kg guy like me.

What appeals to me most about the XZ-1 is the wide tele aperture that lets you isolate subjects from the background at any focal length. What I am not so keen on is the Jpeg quality above ISO 200. I know you can use RAW, but the S95 Jpeg engine seems so good that I have never manged to achieve significantly better results in RAW (Forgive me, I profess to being ignorant at RAW). Honestly, the S95 Jpegs at ISO 800 seem to me not worse than the XZ-1's at ISO 200. That squares the aperture advantage at tele, but still leaves the XZ-1's better subject isolation.

What I do not agree about, is that an earlier poster said that the images from both compacts were clearly worse than from any DSLR on the computer monitor, meaning for me at normal full screen viewing. I have been at photography an awful long time, but I could not pick an image from a good compact from an average dslr image without blowing up close to 1:1. Stay at ISO 200 or below and you normally can't even do it on 12x16 prints. On the contrary, these little lenses on premium compacts mostly give you superior corner definition to DSLR kit lenses when both are used wide open. Stop the kit lens down to f/8 and you are equal again. But then you need the ISO 1600 a DSLR can give you to compete with the compact at ISO 200.

No, the race is not so clearly in favour of the DSLR. And the XZ-1 and S95 are both awesome compacts with different strengths (see above).

Ralph

• -Better a small camera in the pocket than a big one on the shelf --

If you found a site where the EP-1 + VF-2 is $499, please post it. Last time I looked, the best EP-1 price I found was $369 w/kit lens, add in the VF-2 at $279 (Amazon) and $499 looks like a hell of a deal!

BTW, I'd go with the XZ-1 over the S95, better, brighter lens and better IQ, in my view.
--
Kirk

maflynn said:

The noise (which is offset by fast lens somewhat) has me worried a bit

Click to expand...

maflynn said:

How bad is the noise in low light situations? Can I clean it up within Aperture or Lightroom or is it so bad that I cannot?

Click to expand...

Here's one of my low-light samples taken by spot metering off the player. He was in an exceptionally dark part of the stage.

maflynn said:

I'm spoiled by the fact in my DSLR, I set the ISO, is there ANY way of setting the ISO in the camera?

Click to expand...

Yes, you can specify an ISO. You just can't specify an ISO range in AUTO mode

maflynn said:

Given this lens, do people who own DSLRs find them reaching for this camera rather then lugging the DSLR more often?

Click to expand...

After I received the camera I lent my E-510 to my best friend as I felt that I could do most of my day to day shooting with this instead of that and he wanted to learn.

maflynn said:

Some reviewers complained about the LCD, not being sharp enough, in actual use is that a valid criticism

Click to expand...

The problem reviewers have with the screen OLED, not LCD isn't that it isn't sharp enough, it's that the resulting picture looks better on the camera than what you get on your monitor... it seems to "enhance" the look of the picture to the point of you thinking you got a better exposure than you really did.

maflynn said:

The price has me a little bit concerned. I can get the S95 for 358 at adorama if I snag it now with a mail in rebate. I think the XZ-1 may be more useful all around so just maybe its worth the 500 (yeah I know worth is subjective)

Click to expand...

The S95 is a capable camera in its own right. You can't make a bad decision choosing between the 2 cams.

maflynn said:

I'm trying to be specific with my questions as opposed is the XZ-1 better then the S95. To be honest the size has me impressed and spooked at the same time.

Click to expand...

it isn't that big. I fit the camera in my front jeans pocket and in my cargo shorts (admittedly those pockets are rather large) but I wear them often so what's it to me?

--
Travis
XZ-1, E-510, iPhone 4 (these days it takes as many shots as the "real" cameras)

http://flickr.com/photos/tcheramie/

"The journey to being a great photographer is long... because there are a lot of "stops" along the way."

Yes. I have a Canon DSLR and an XZ-1.

It's real simple.

Want something easier to carry, will take plenty of day shots and the occasional evening shot, get an S95. Lens is a little slower yes, but a great camera.

Okay with a little bigger, really want to push the evening/campfire/candlelight photos you love taking photos in bars and at the music venue where you need max zoom and low light, get a XZ-1.

S95 = easier to carry
XZ-1 = faster lens

Pick your poison, both are great cameras.

I still don't know if made the right choice keeping XZ-1 but it's what I have to go w/ DSLR. I'm sure I will always wonder if I would have been happier with the easier to carry S95, and if I kept the S95, would always wonder if I would have been happier with the faster XZ-1

Add to that, the price difference between the two.

I guess is the faster lens worth the 10 buck increase in price (along with the hotshoe etc).

I don't know, in handling the S95 at my local camera shop, the S95 almost felt too small where as the XZ-1 felt better. I'll be heading back today to obsess more about it.

stickynugget said:

Pick your poison, both are great cameras.

I still don't know if made the right choice keeping XZ-1 but it's what I have to go w/ DSLR. I'm sure I will always wonder if I would have been happier with the easier to carry S95, and if I kept the S95, would always wonder if I would have been happier with the faster XZ-1

Click to expand...

Hi

I have an ageing D50 ( still great ) , recently picked up the XZ-1 and have tried some tests in jpegs and Raw using lightroom 3.

My conclusion is that the XZ-1 jpegs are hard to beat up to 400 iso, 800 iso and beyond the NR is to heavy and becomes quite apparant, raw and lr3 def gave me useable 800 iso.

Compared to the D70 you have a lens that is 1 stop faster roughly right through to 92mm ( 35mm equivelent) compared to your f2.8 zoom lens you mentioned,you then have 2 stops of IS over the D70 for low light non moving stuff, my D50 seems about 2-2.5 stops better in noise then the xz-1 in Raw comparision , which i think is to be expected.

The xz-1 lens is incredibly sharp even wide open , so jpegs and raw files don;t require that much sharpening , which then reduces the chances of noise from having to sharpen when a lens is softer.
The S95 felt to small for me and the lens is slow and soft compared to the xz-1.

Ralph46 said:

Hi J,

It seems as if I am destined to answer as your counterpart because I have the S95 but not the XZ-1. All I can say about the XZ-1 is what I have picked up by studying this forum over the last few months because of my interest for the XZ-1.

I think what you have written in your post about the XZ-1 seems absolutely correct. I also agree that the small size of the S95 can cause doubts about the handling ease and quality. However, I have come to respect the S95 as being easy to handle, even for a ham-fisted 6 foot 4 and 95 kg guy like me.

What appeals to me most about the XZ-1 is the wide tele aperture that lets you isolate subjects from the background at any focal length. What I am not so keen on is the Jpeg quality above ISO 200. I know you can use RAW, but the S95 Jpeg engine seems so good that I have never manged to achieve significantly better results in RAW (Forgive me, I profess to being ignorant at RAW). Honestly, the S95 Jpegs at ISO 800 seem to me not worse than the XZ-1's at ISO 200. That squares the aperture advantage at tele, but still leaves the XZ-1's better subject isolation.

Click to expand...

The S95 jpegs are good . but the S95 is def not 2 stops better, to the OP i used the Canon G12 for about a month and the sensor is the same as the S95, for me the Canon does def have the best sensor, maybe about 1 stop better performance in noise control.

Also the XZ-1 fits in my jeans pocket no problem, can't see why anyone thinks it's to big ? but then i managed to fit my E-pl1+17mm lens in my pocket as well !

Ralph46 said:

What I do not agree about, is that an earlier poster said that the images from both compacts were clearly worse than from any DSLR on the computer monitor, meaning for me at normal full screen viewing. I have been at photography an awful long time, but I could not pick an image from a good compact from an average dslr image without blowing up close to 1:1. Stay at ISO 200 or below and you normally can't even do it on 12x16 prints. On the contrary, these little lenses on premium compacts mostly give you superior corner definition to DSLR kit lenses when both are used wide open. Stop the kit lens down to f/8 and you are equal again. But then you need the ISO 1600 a DSLR can give you to compete with the compact at ISO 200.

No, the race is not so clearly in favour of the DSLR. And the XZ-1 and S95 are both awesome compacts with different strengths (see above).

Ralph

• -Better a small camera in the pocket than a big one on the shelf --

Click to expand...

Well, the XZ-1's noise is pretty bad at ISO 3200, but with this camera you get about 1-2 stops more light than with the S95 or other comparable cameras, so in the same light the photos come out better.

That being said, this is still a compact camera. It won't compare to the D70 (which I used to own and was a stellar performer).

Mostly due to the fast lens throughout the range. I mostly don't use the onboard flash, prefering either to forgo flash, or to trigger a unit I hold in my left hand while I shoot with my right (a setup I'd love to use indoors with my DSLR, but it's too heavy). I can't compare it to the Canon, but all things considered I'm pretty please, and for the first time in about 9 years, I went on vacation and left the DSLR at home.
Some photos (touched up JPEGs):
On board flash used for fill:



No flash- photo taken in shade:



B&W filter (I love playing with the filters, they're so much fun):



No flash:



Off camera flash triggered:



On board flash:



The camera isn't a miracle worker, but it's a good tool. Ideally I would add an EPL2 + 20mm f/1.7 to my travel setup, but I wasn't interested in spending that type of money, and all in all I'm pretty happy.
--
Cheers, Leah
http://www.flickr.com/photos/62324865@N00/
BFF!



http://www.homestudio.biz

I'm in the same shoes as you, I'm tending more to the XZ1 to buy over the S95. Reason fast lens, filters (bit of fun with not much time spend on the puter), the ability to attach the EV 2.

For sure the S95 is the best pocketable camera on the market with very good IQ but I have grown to just that little bigger cameras.

Now their is one other gem out there the X100 which has the bells and whistle but premium price tag. S95 you get cheaper now than the XZ1

in the end you can't go wrong with ether one just have to see what suits you more Seize wise.

DigitalRev did a review video of the XZ-1 and has several comparison images to the S95. You can watch the video in 1080p as well which helps distinguish the image quality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVZItn3y9SE&feature=relmfu

I still have concerns about how noisy the images may be with this camera. The reviews regarding this and posts here have not decreased that concern. With that said, however the fast lens all but makes up for that short coming. Perhaps a firmware update could resolve this as well.

I've all but decided to go for the XZ-1, I hope to pick one up later today so I can have it for Easter and snap a few family shots during Easter and play with the settings.

While less $$ and generally not a bad camera, the S95 falls a bit short as compared to the XZ-1 in a couple of areas, nothing major.

Thanks for the advice.

Two thoughts, with a f/1.8 lens, why would you ever need to shot at ISO 3,200?And, the XZ-1 isn't designed toor intended to compete with a DSLR but it is a terrific compliment to a DSLR.

--
Kirk

nonphotography said:

Sadly, for anyone concerned with noise, detail and dynamic range needs to get past the attractive 'user experience' of an advanced compact and look elsewhere, like m43. A EP-1 w/17mm and viewfinder can be had for $499...same price as xz-1...and, while it too is getting long in the tooth, it is far ahead of anything the XZ-1 or S95 can do.

Click to expand...

Joe, I had the EP1 and now use the EP2 and have an EPL1 converted for IR. And while the Pen cameras are versatile than the XZ-1, to say that the "long in the tooth EP1" is far ahead of what the XZ-1 can do is a real exageration IMHO. The XZ-1 handles noise as well (if not better) than the EP1 does. It AF better in low/dim light than ANY of the Pen cameras. It has a pop-up flash that is there when you need it and can operate the remote Olympus flashes also. It has a brighter/faster lens - that also zooms - than the 17mm lens and is still faster at it's long end than the pancake (and yes I had one of those). And the size/weight of the XZ-1 is considerably smaller/lighter than the Pen even with only the 17mm on it.
Steve

gulffish said:

Two thoughts, with a f/1.8 lens, why would you ever need to shot at ISO 3,200?And, the XZ-1 isn't designed toor intended to compete with a DSLR but it is a terrific compliment to a DSLR.

Click to expand...

Even with the fastest lens in the world, you will find situations where there's just not enough light. Good high ISO performance is always welcome.

Also, I never said the XZ-1 was meant to compete with a DSLR. I have one (to complement my Nikon D90) and it is a fantastic camera. I was just setting the proper expectations.

nonphotography said:

The biggest disappointment with the advanced compact cameras occurs not on its LCD but on your monitor back home. This comes from a present owner and past of the following compacts: S90, G11, G12, LX5, EX-1/TL500, P7000. I ask myself why I continue to try them and am too considering the XZ-1 at the moment. Many of my reasons are similar to yours.

Sadly, for anyone concerned with noise, detail and dynamic range needs to get past the attractive 'user experience' of an advanced compact and look elsewhere, like m43. A EP-1 w/17mm and viewfinder can be had for $499...same price as xz-1...and, while it too is getting long in the tooth, it is far ahead of anything the XZ-1 or S95 can do.

Click to expand...

I was reluctant to get the XZ-1 because of my past experience with compact cameras (admittedly, none of them were high-end). However, I have been very pleasantly surprised by the output from the XZ-1. At ISO 400 or below it holds its own against cameras with m4/3 and APS-C sensors.