snapshot09
Veteran Member
It has more telephoto than the LX5 because it starts at 28mm instead of 24mm.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Olympus XZ-1 vs. Canon S95/S100
- Thread starter mrdc76
- Start date
Uh, no, the XZ-1 has more telephoto because it ends at 112mm and the LX-5 ends at 90mm (all 35mm equiv). It has nothing to do where they start.
I prefer 28-112 over 24-90, but that is entirely personal.
I prefer 28-112 over 24-90, but that is entirely personal.
John McCormack
Veteran Member
Only if you can live with the muddy colors of LX5, though it's better than the LX3 colors.
If you want 24mm I'd hold off for the S100.
If you want 24mm I'd hold off for the S100.
snapshot09
Veteran Member
You aren't concerned with the slower lens on the S100?
See my post at http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=39578061
My XZ1 had too much detail smearing, noise and artifacts. Look at the sensor rating for the XZ1 on the DXO site...it is one of the lowest they have tested. Much better off with the Canon S90/S95...and I suspect the S100.
My XZ1 had too much detail smearing, noise and artifacts. Look at the sensor rating for the XZ1 on the DXO site...it is one of the lowest they have tested. Much better off with the Canon S90/S95...and I suspect the S100.
John McCormack
Veteran Member
You must have gotten a dud. My XZ-1 returns excellent image quality. Here are a few samples: http://smu.gs/o5OgEc
Even alpacas pose for it:
Even alpacas pose for it:
snapshot09
Veteran Member
But give the lens differences, especially with the S100 going to f/5.9, does that alone put the XZ-1 a step above?
Hmmm....looking at the top lock of hair, looks a bit smeared to me. I don't see the detail of the individual hairs.
You must have gotten a dud. My XZ-1 returns excellent image quality. Here are a few samples: http://smu.gs/o5OgEc
Even alpacas pose for it:
ijustloveshooting
Veteran Member
ijustloveshooting
Veteran Member
i thought the same,,, i think you've a lemon one....
Yes, if you look at my earlier post above, I commented on how good your results were. So perhaps there is a quality control issue involved here.
Curious, when did you buy your? Which firmware do you have? Thanks,
jon404
Senior Member
I love my XZ-1... it fits in my shirt pocket, is perfect for low-light street photography, and has an adjustable-power flash that works like a charm with my inexpensive Yongnuo-460 optical slave flash.
I don't own a DSLR; I don't like large bulky cameras. The other day, bought an Olympus SZ-10 to go along with the XZ-1... and am getting used to having a 500mm telephoto in my other shirt pocket, it's even smaller than the XZ-1!
I don't own a DSLR; I don't like large bulky cameras. The other day, bought an Olympus SZ-10 to go along with the XZ-1... and am getting used to having a 500mm telephoto in my other shirt pocket, it's even smaller than the XZ-1!
jon404
Senior Member
I'm on the other side of the 24mm concern. Had a Kodak V570 a few years ago... it was just a little too wide for me. Found that I like 28mm better; you don't have to worry as much about distortion and converging verticals. Actually, this is sort of important, isn't it... because whatever these cameras do at startup is what we use for most of our pictures. And I noticed that Fuji put a 35mm lens on their X-100... I've read that it's closest to what our eyes actually take in. Cameras! So many great choices... so little money!
John McCormack
Veteran Member
The top hair may be a bit smeary due partly from the the fact that this was a RAW image developed without noise reduction turned off (My error at the time) and partly due to the short DOF (focus was on the nose.)
I think you are splitting hairs (pun intended).
After 50+ years of professional photography I think I know when a tool is consistently producing sharp images, user errors not withstanding.
I think you are splitting hairs (pun intended).
After 50+ years of professional photography I think I know when a tool is consistently producing sharp images, user errors not withstanding.The 24mm lens is the only reason I'm waiting for the S100. If the XZ-1 had this feature I would have bought one already.
Jim
Michael_13
Forum Enthusiast
The JPG engine is flawed: When shooting grass or other fine structures in lower light and using auto gradation, pictures can turn out terribly.
I recently tried the continuous mode on deer in high grass. Totally useless, erased all pics.
Still, I like my XZ-1 a lot. Its lens is better than anything else on the market. Canons S-Series is very good, but not bright enough.
Ways to minimize smearing in JPGs:
Regards,
Michael
I recently tried the continuous mode on deer in high grass. Totally useless, erased all pics.
Still, I like my XZ-1 a lot. Its lens is better than anything else on the market. Canons S-Series is very good, but not bright enough.
Ways to minimize smearing in JPGs:
- keep ISO low
- expose +1/3 of a stop
Regards,
Michael
I am actually bothered by the bokeh in these shots. The bokeh distracts me, it gives me the feeling as if I am looking at the picture cross-eyed. So instead of only focusing on the subject when looking at the picture, I am distracted by the bokeh. Does anyone feel the same?
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum