Contextualize it by the mere half-stop difference that is apparent between the two sensor types, as surely we're only interested in how things translate into the real world, rather than finding ways to make the difference sound bigger on paper?1/1.7 has 50% greater area than 1/2.3 so hardly "slightly bigger"
--
Pete
Yes, I think that is almost certainly the case.
Contextualize it by the mere half-stop difference that is apparent between the two sensor types, as surely we're only interested in how things translate into the real world, rather than finding ways to make the difference sound bigger on paper?1/1.7 has 50% greater area than 1/2.3 so hardly "slightly bigger"
--
Pete
I posted an image. You posted a number. Imaging-resource has the samples.
So it's OK to claim that a 1/1.7" type sensor can be competitive with a 1" type sensor, but heads have got to roll if anyone dares to claim that a 1/2.3" type sensor can be competitive with a 1/1.7" type sensor?
Of course it's a compromise. Every camera is, including your LX7.
How does the LX7 perform at a 600mm+ EFL?
I think such travelzooms are impressive simply by virtue of the amount of reach they have in a tiny package. That, in and of itself, is their killer feature. That's where they excel. That's a big part of the reason why the people who like them, like them. Other cameras have to either compromise on reach or size to offer better IQ.
Again, how do LX7 images look when cropped or digitally zoomed to match 600mm+ EFLs?
And here's the answer. Thanks
Actually you posted the numbers in your image.Contextualize it by the mere half-stop difference that is apparent between the two sensor types, as surely we're only interested in how things translate into the real world, rather than finding ways to make the difference sound bigger on paper?1/1.7 has 50% greater area than 1/2.3 so hardly "slightly bigger"
--
Pete
I posted an image. You posted a number. Imaging-resource has the samples.
Again, it's about context. I reacted to a characterization of a 1/2.3" sensor as being "pinhole" size. Such characterizations have been popularized by DSLR users seeking to ridicule small-sensor compacts. And it's usually with reference to the size of a full-frame sensor:
Let's look at a quick case study: a superzoom with a 1000mm+ EFL. How does one approach the question of IQ? I do it by asking "what can other cameras or camera/lens combos produce at the same EFL?". I couldn't care less about how much a 1/2.3" sensor gets trounced by a larger sensor because if you can't actually get that sensor behind a lens that provides equivalent reach in a reasonably sized package the comparison is pointless. As such, cameras like the HS50, SX50, FZ70, HX300 or even the FZ200 + TC, if you are indeed using them for all their reach, produce IQ that is clearly superior to a dizzying array of camera/lens combos utilizing much larger sensors. Carrying around the sort of gear that constitutes an exception would almost completely destroy the fun of photography for me.
I like the Stylus 1. But it falls just a tad short on reach for me. You can whack a TC on it though for a 510mm EFL @ f/2.8. B-300's can be had for 50 bucks and should work well. Still, it would be a bit backwards for me.
The LX7 is a bit special because of its multi-aspect ratio sensor. Its crop factor is 5.1x (comparing actual FL vs equivalent FL), meaning that the LX7's active sensor area when shooting 4:3 images only is app 21% larger (less than 1/3 stop) than it is on cameras with a 1/2.3" sensor (5.6x crop).
P.S. - From DxO - Low Light ISO score :
Even own or use a zs?
Sure, they're pandering to the ignorant masses who still think that megapixels are the be all and end all of IQ. I don't know who started all this nonsense, but unfortunately everyone has to play the game now otherwise sales can suffer. Why? Because I'm not sure if the bulk of potential travelzoom buyers are as educated as, say, the bulk of potential LX7 buyers are/were. In fact I'd say that that is a near certainty. So the LX7 market get a more honest sensor, and the ZS40 market gets marketing nonsense instead to help it sell.
