New S95 and G12 in Aug, are you guys excited or not?

Started Jun 7, 2011 | Discussions thread
sven rose Regular Member • Posts: 173
Re: CMOS may have better low light but a lot worse IQ in good lighitng

B1ackhat wrote:

Jefftan wrote:

for small sensor CMOS 1/2.3 inch type

A while ago I post in open talk forum about this and get attack. I even got a warning from the forum for bad behavior! Can you believe it? No freedom of speech in a forum! just ridiculous.

Anyway, I believe it is almost a consensus that small CMOS has worse (sometimes much worse) IQ in good lighting. The best proof is the current more expensive Panasonic ZS10 CMOS has much worse daylight IQ compare to the cheaper ZS8)

CMOS may work fine in APS-C size sensor but not small type in GOOD LIGHTING. I emphasize. I never argue with anyone that they may have better low light IQ

But that is unimportant to me, I mostly do base ISO nature and landscape pictures.

I completely agree. I keep seeing these posts from SX230 owners talking about how sharp the images are and they are not at all sharp compared to equivalent CCD-based models. I shot with the SX230 for about 10 days and it's certainly a decent camera, but I was a bit disappointed overall. While the high ISO performance is great for a camera with a 1/2.3" sensor, the softness of the images throughout the ISO range (even at base ISO) is something I don't really find to be acceptable. I was overjoyed when my S95 came back from its warranty repair.

I didn't pay much attention on CCD or CMOS question and bought a Ixus 310 HS (CMOS). The pictures seems a bit soft and overexposure of bright details was obvious in first time. But this ist now corrected in reducing the exposure, min. -0.67 EV. Then the IQ seems better (needs eventual PP to lighten dark area). Overall now I'm pleased with the IQ. See my comparison test:


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow