G1X Image Quality Comparison: FSAIQ vs Acuity for a range of compacts

Started Sep 25, 2012 | Discussions thread
OP FauxMho Forum Member • Posts: 50
Re: G1X Image Quality Comparison: FSAIQ vs Acuity for a range of compacts

This forum has already established on numerous occasions that you can display/view photos in ways which equalize IQ-by-eye (to coin a phrase "eyeQ") - eg small screens and small prints. Similarly, you can listen to music in a crowded room or while driving in a convertible and not discern the subtle (or in the latter, even not so subtle) differences in compression.

This thread is about how to choose and use compact cameras to maximize FSAIQ and acuity (which i often simplify to IQ). In distinct contrast to the existence proof wrapped in a fallicious syllogism presented by walkabout, this analysis involved methodically sorting through the 100000+ shots in my digital photo library (with shots from a dozen compact digital cameras) in support the physics-based modeling results summarized in the figure. Large (4-6ft wide) high quality prints have corroborated these same conclusions.

On the objective scale of FSAIQ and acuity, the best shots with your 60D (with an average kit zoom) can absolutely beat the pants off the best shots you'll get with your ELPH.

Here's a challenge (to all readers but especially walkaround) - take your cameras out for a long weekend of shooting in a "target rich" environment. Better yet, take a loved one with you and each use one of the two cameras - I take my wife and two sons for four cams total - and be sure to take shots of the same scenes at roughly the same time. Shoot both cams on the same (preferably base) ISO. Spend the time afterwards to subjectively sort the shots for sharp looking images (on the computer screen, full screen at fit-to-screen and 100% magnifications). Take the best three shots of each camera and match with the corresponding shot on the other camera, taking care to perhaps change your choices if available same-scene shots on the other camera are flawed (eg bad focus, motion blurred, just plain absent). Hopefully you've then got three pairs of sharp, good/excellent eyeQ shots (and captured memories of a great weekend). Critically compare each pair of shots - again at full screen and both fit-to-screen and at 100%, taking care to look side by side of the same subjects in the photos. Then come back to this forum and thread, post the three pairs and discuss your conclusions on relative eyeQ between the two cameras.

Of course you can shoot beautiful shots on both cameras worthy of framing and hanging on the wall. That is not the point here. Rather, if you print those shots nice and big, or if you're shooting the pair of images in light-challenged conditions, or you are looking at those shots a few years in the future on your full-bleed Retina wall monitor, I contend you will see greater acuity, better eyeQ, and better FSAIQ if you're setup to quantify it, in the 60D shots than the ELPH.

walkaround wrote:

I guess this is another form of "measurebation". I'll leave you to it, but I actually own two of the sensors shown on the opposite ends of your chart: a Canon 60D and an Elph 310... and assuming you know how and where to use these cameras, there is no difference in the "apparent image quality" between them either on my monitor or printed out at typical sizes. The same arguments go on in audio forums: a 192k mp3 is objectively "worse" under test than a lossless version. But when listening to actual music under typical conditions, that is no longer apparent.

 FauxMho's gear list:FauxMho's gear list
Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Canon PowerShot G1 X Rokinon 85mm F1.4 Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +19 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow