Reading mode: Light Dark

GF2 vs X10 vs S100

Go to last post
If you do the same jpg comparison on this site the GF2 clearly has more detail, i'm not sure what happened in your test? On top of that the GF2 has notoriously bad jpg, RAW is at least 1 stop better at higher ISO's in my experience.

I agree with you that a much better m43 sensor would be nice though. Even the gx1 sensor isn't that great when you compare the sensor size/performance to cameras like the V1.
 
That´s what it comes down to at the moment. Even the newest Pana sensor just is not up to par.

That is one major reason why i´m currently not interested in the GX1. Would take it for 300 Euros though :D
fras23 said:
I agree with you that a much better m43 sensor would be nice though. Even the gx1 sensor isn't that great when you compare the sensor size/performance to cameras like the V1.
Click to expand...
--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '
 
Looks like the S100 has the least amount of noise then? You're comparing a recently released camera with one from a year ago though (The GF2 sensor is even older). So I guess it goes to show how quickly sensor technology is improving. It would be interesting to show the GX1 in the comparison too.

--
Anthony.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/thewanderlust
 
Alan OB said:
So, compared Fujifilm X10, Canon S100 and Panasonic GF2 at ISO 3200. It hurts, really hurts ... if Panasonic and Olympus won't make any progress with sensor, they will go down ...
Click to expand...
Panasonic have made progress with their sensor, see GH2, G3 and GX1.
 
Alan OB said:
So, compared Fujifilm X10, Canon S100 and Panasonic GF2 at ISO 3200. It hurts, really hurts ... if Panasonic and Olympus won't make any progress with sensor, they will go down ...
Click to expand...
Great, now do a series with a RAW converter that doesn't apply anything editing to the pictures and use a custom white balance for each image in identical lighting... If you're going to do a comparison you may as well do it properly.

In the last image the lighting is clearly very different. The GF2 is at f7.1 compared to the S100 at f4 but the exposure time is only 1/320 compared to 1/400. That is no where near even a stop difference. So either the light changed or the ISO numbers claimed by the manufacturers is hideously inaccurate (with ISO at 3200 on the GF2 capturing much more light than the ISO 3200 on the S100). Infact by the looks of it you just exposed them differently in favour of the S100.

Also looking at the first image I would have said overall the GF2 did the best job. It is the only image I can clearly make out the numbers on the bin with and the only one that manage to capture acceptable detail in the background.

As pointed out the GF2 is an old model. If you want to compare one released at the same time at least go for the G3.
 
NuFonaut said:
That´s what it comes down to at the moment. Even the newest Pana sensor just is not up to par.
Click to expand...
Not up to par with what exactly?
 
Seeing as DPReview so kindly provides us with a comparison tool why not just use that. Unfortunally the RAW doesn't seem to be loading for all 4 cameras selected so the JPG will have to do.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocompare.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=panasonic_dmcg3&masterSample=p1000085&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=panasonic_dmcg3&slot0Sample=p1000085&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=canon_s100&slot1Sample=img_0104&slot2Camera=fujifilm_x10&slot2Sample=dscf1199&slot3Camera=canon_eos600d&slot3Sample=img_6882&x=-0.870319199618866&y=-0.16558686966850228

A comparison between the G3, S100, X10 and Canon 600D clearly reveals that the 600D and G3 are about equal. The G3 has the egde in some detail areas but the canon deals with flat colour better (I guess due to possibly more agressive NR) whereas the S100 and X10 reduce everything to a blur. The hatching on the B&W face is reduced to just a flat grey.

if you discount the X10 and look at the RAW the G3 is still clearly much better than the S100 and about equal with the 600D
 
The competition.

Yes the sensor is a bit better than the old one but the pictures and comments show that it is not that much better that most GF1 users would like to upgrade soon.

The NEX 5N and NEX 7 are clearly ahead sensor wise. More than they need to be due to the different sensor sizes.

Edit: Ok, due to the missing tilt screen i don´t even see the GX1 as direct competition to the 5N (the 7 aims higher anyway).

So ok, compared to Samsung and Nikon the GX1 can more or less hold its own ( the NX 200 got much better though and the Nikon has a much smaller sensor).
Dawindyk said:
NuFonaut said:
That´s what it comes down to at the moment. Even the newest Pana sensor just is not up to par.
Click to expand...
Not up to par with what exactly?
Click to expand...
--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '
 
I honestly think even a D3s can be made to look very bad if someone messes up the exposure enough. At the end of the day it shouldn't be surprising if a much newer sensor, albeit a smaller one, is getting very close to larger older ones. Its just how technology works.

--
Dev

Rehab is for quitters.
 
NuFonaut said:
The competition.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of competition - be more specific
NuFonaut said:
Yes the sensor is a bit better than the old one but the pictures and comments show that it is not that much better that most GF1 users would like to upgrade soon.
Click to expand...
There are comments that FF are not much better than m43 - everything depends on expectation. You can find comment's that GH2/G3/GX'1 are 1,5 f stop ahead of GF1 - if that's not a different than it seems that NEX sensor is worse than the one in GH2/G3/GX'1 as even being bigger it's not better more thatn 1,5 stop
NuFonaut said:
The NEX 5N and NEX 7 are clearly ahead sensor wise. More than they need to be due to the different sensor sizes.
Click to expand...
Can You elaborate more? Based on DXO it shows 1 f stop advantage over GH2/G3/GX'1 - I'd say it's at the same level keeping in mind it's significantly bigger. NEX7 BTW is worse than 5N
NuFonaut said:
Edit: Ok, due to the missing tilt screen i don´t even see the GX1 as direct competition to the 5N (the 7 aims higher anyway).
Click to expand...
5N is missing hot shoe and built in flash so it's not even in the same league as EPL1
NuFonaut said:
So ok, compared to Samsung and Nikon the GX1 can more or less hold its own ( the NX 200 got much better though and the Nikon has a much smaller sensor).
Click to expand...
Nikon has cooked raw starting from ISO 800 so You can't compare it to anything else.
NuFonaut said:
Dawindyk said:
NuFonaut said:
That´s what it comes down to at the moment. Even the newest Pana sensor just is not up to par.
Click to expand...
Not up to par with what exactly?
Click to expand...
--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '
Click to expand...
 
Not to mention that even the GF2's performance seems better in keeping fine details except the picture of the girl on the right side of the sample.

Anyway, I'm getting tired of comparing the high ISO capabilities all the time. From one side, I understand that it matters somewhat , but it seems now very overemphasized, it slowly become a religion. The soul of a picture matters thousand times more than the less clear MACRO DETAILS, or the overall color response which can be easily corrected especially when one shots in RAW.
Dheorl said:
Seeing as DPReview so kindly provides us with a comparison tool why not just use that. Unfortunally the RAW doesn't seem to be loading for all 4 cameras selected so the JPG will have to do.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocompare.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=panasonic_dmcg3&masterSample=p1000085&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=panasonic_dmcg3&slot0Sample=p1000085&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=canon_s100&slot1Sample=img_0104&slot2Camera=fujifilm_x10&slot2Sample=dscf1199&slot3Camera=canon_eos600d&slot3Sample=img_6882&x=-0.870319199618866&y=-0.16558686966850228

A comparison between the G3, S100, X10 and Canon 600D clearly reveals that the 600D and G3 are about equal. The G3 has the egde in some detail areas but the canon deals with flat colour better (I guess due to possibly more agressive NR) whereas the S100 and X10 reduce everything to a blur. The hatching on the B&W face is reduced to just a flat grey.

if you discount the X10 and look at the RAW the G3 is still clearly much better than the S100 and about equal with the 600D
Click to expand...
 
It's important to remember that it's not so much about sensor size as it is about sensor technology used.
--
E-PM1, E-PL2; 7mm f3.5, 14mm f2.5, 20mm f1.7, 45mm f1.8, 40-150mm f4-5.6
 
The GF2 being out of date. Now try a more modern one and use DPR's tool and you get quite different results.

None of which tell you anything anyway.

The conclusions:

1) Sensors get better every year. Keep hopping from camera to camera and system to system every five seconds if your main criteria is low light performance. In the meantime, in reasonable light, they will more or less outperform the lenses and all have enough DR to allow penalty free pushing and pulling in RAW. So, unless you want to shot with a milk bottle lens in lousy light, they are all fine now.

2) The bigger the sensor, the less the noise, the bigger the lenses. Choose your sweet spot.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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