Good bye 28mm...

[hans l]

i've shoot plenty of pictures with the S30 - basically the same form factor, it works just fine (well, it has it's problems like all things, but then again..)
just take a CF card and try one out in a store.
hans

 

[omr]

wait few weeks for upcoming GX2 or GR1.

You mean to include the Digital GR1 in that "few weeks" estimate?
I've heard that the Digital GR1 may be unlikely to arrive until
late this year, possibly even later. Have you heard otherwise?

-- omr

 

[Roger Krueger]

Diffraction generally is just about f-stop, absolute aperture does not determine diffraction at the sensor.

But there are a couple of complicating factors.

First, at wide angles, the aperture is effectively elliptical towards the corners of the image--thus smaller. This means that while your center is at f16 your corners might be closer to f22. Retrofocus designs lessen this problem, but it doesn't go away entirely.

Second, at the very tiny absolute apertures seen in digicam, the depth of the aperture can end up being a significant fraction of the diameter, which worsens diffraction. The "theoretical" diffraction limits are with an infinitely thin aperture. This is why pinhole folks are so nuts about getting the thinnest possible stock to punch holes in, and why you get spikes around light sources--that's extra diffraction from where the aperture leaves meet, and the aperture is thus twice as thick. A thick-relative-to-diameter aperture also makes the ellipticalization of the aperture discussed in the previous point even more problematic.

 

[wrz]

wait few weeks for upcoming GX2 or GR1.

You mean to include the Digital GR1 in that "few weeks" estimate?
I've heard that the Digital GR1 may be unlikely to arrive until
late this year, possibly even later. Have you heard otherwise?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1001&message=12226521

1. wrz#

 

[Jay Turberville]

Yes, but that isn't what is seen. If you look at the V3 shots done
at f8 and 7mm (wide angle), there is softness noticible but it you
look at V3 shots done at f8 and 34mm (maximum zoom)..there is no
softness. You can see that in the sample shots here...specifically
pictures 12 and 13. Shot 13 was done at f8 and should show some
effects. We know our samples shots are untouched so we can be
reasonably certain that there was no additional sharpening to fix
up softness.

I'm assuming that you are refering to the sample images here at Dpreview.

If so, I don't see support for your conclusion. There are no wide angle shots at f/8. So it is difficult to say if there is any significant softening due to stopping the lens down and also to see if it is worse than any softening at f/8 on the longer focal lengths. Increased softness could very well be due to poorer optical correction at the wider angle.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Jay Turberville]

First, at wide angles, the aperture is effectively elliptical
towards the corners of the image--thus smaller. This means that
while your center is at f16 your corners might be closer to f22.
Retrofocus designs lessen this problem, but it doesn't go away
entirely.

Second, at the very tiny absolute apertures seen in digicam, the
depth of the aperture can end up being a significant fraction of
the diameter, which worsens diffraction. The "theoretical"
diffraction limits are with an infinitely thin aperture. This is
why pinhole folks are so nuts about getting the thinnest possible
stock to punch holes in, and why you get spikes around light
sources--that's extra diffraction from where the aperture leaves
meet, and the aperture is thus twice as thick

Good points I hadn't considered. A third could be the shape of the aperture and how accurately it holds its shape as it is stopped down.

But frankly, I'd like to see some objective tests of resolution charts at different focal lengths and apertures before I'm convinced that f/8 is creating more problems at at wide angle than at telephoto. It would be interesting if the two issues you mentioned really do have a noticable effect though.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[William R Sterling]

Actually one of the strengths is the lens. ;-)

Tests are fine - the 'proof is in the pudding' as they say. The difference between 1650 lp/ih and 1700 or 1800 are not visable to me in a normal print or scaled down web image. If you like looking at your images at 100% scale on a monitor then the extra few line pairs are nice - but I'm not a pixel-peeper. ;-)

Actually the corner to corner performance of the A2 glass is excellent, but most testers only look at the center. Probably don't want to step on too many 'corporate toes' ;-) I think KM opted for a more aggressive anti-alising filter than other mfgs, I've never had to remove moire from any of my images taken with the A2.

I'm looking to purchase a DSLR this spring. Have to see what shows up at PMA. ;-) I'm leaning towards the 20D or its successor, or the 7D

Regarding the Koren test ... I'd have to do my own --- i don't have much much faith in looking at other's results ... some people have too many axes to grind. ;-)

cheers,
Rick

Yes, that's a nice range. the weak point here seems to be lens.
i saw an interesting comparison based on koren test. the cameras
checked were 6 MP dslrs and 8 MP digicams. they measured resolution
as compared to the 'theoretical' lpm.
the winner was D70 with a kit lens -70%, the loser KM A2 - 30%

don't mean to spoil you humour though

--

cheers,
Rick Sterling
http://www.rickster.org/gallery/albums.php

 

[Meryl Arbing]

It should be a testable hypothesis. Can we agree upon an approach that can provide people with some definitive answers?

I'm assuming that you are refering to the sample images here at
Dpreview.

If so, I don't see support for your conclusion. There are no wide
angle shots at f/8. So it is difficult to say if there is any
significant softening due to stopping the lens down and also to see
if it is worse than any softening at f/8 on the longer focal
lengths. Increased softness could very well be due to poorer
optical correction at the wider angle.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[michalc]

One thing is to deliver statistics, another analyze them.

What you did is you digged out probably all wide angle cameras that came out in the last few years and based on that you assumed that the number of wide angle cameras had increased in the last few years..

there is one thing missing here... it's logic

To summary some of the options available from this thread and
elsewhere:

• Nikon 5400, 8400 (starts at 24mm)
• Olympus 7070, 5060
• Canon S70, S60, Pro-1
• Minolta A200, A2, and older
• Sony F828
• Fuji E500, E510, some F-series are close to 28mm but not there
• a lot of Ricohs

And that's before using any wide converter lenses - but some people
don't like to use those...

New Nikon cameras start at 38 mm - are we entering an era of toy
cameras?

The OLY C-7000 range is 38-190 mm. 38 is not wide enough 190 is far
from a telephoto. who needs 38-190?

Canon G6 and Sony V3 start at 34/35 mm that is mainly why I
excluded both cameras from my shortlist (Sony also due to aperture
problems at long zoom end).

OLY C7070 - 27mm - great! however the samples on the net are not
very encouraging. Pictures are flat, poor dynamic range (burned
highlights). So maybe 5060?

Canon S70 - almost ideal combination 28-100 mm, portable. but I
can't imagine making photos with something like a gripless
powder-box.

The best deal on the market now is probably Nikon 5400 - 5MP(fairly
enough), 28-116mm, size and ergonomics perfect. Better than 8400 -
who needs 8 MP that can be used up to ISO 100 only due to dreadful
noise...

--
mc

--
mc

 

[michalc]

Yeah, hard to disagree...

I have not chosen the A2 mainly because the shots I took in a store seemed out of focus despite the camera has confirmed focus, AS turned on.. but maybe it was a bug of that camera

good luck with your choices - the new Canon 350D seems a very interesting offer

cheers
mike

Tests are fine - the 'proof is in the pudding' as they say. The
difference between 1650 lp/ih and 1700 or 1800 are not visable to
me in a normal print or scaled down web image. If you like looking
at your images at 100% scale on a monitor then the extra few line
pairs are nice - but I'm not a pixel-peeper. ;-)

Actually the corner to corner performance of the A2 glass is
excellent, but most testers only look at the center. Probably don't
want to step on too many 'corporate toes' ;-) I think KM opted for
a more aggressive anti-alising filter than other mfgs, I've never
had to remove moire from any of my images taken with the A2.

I'm looking to purchase a DSLR this spring. Have to see what shows
up at PMA. ;-) I'm leaning towards the 20D or its successor, or the
7D

Regarding the Koren test ... I'd have to do my own --- i don't have
much much faith in looking at other's results ... some people have
too many axes to grind. ;-)

cheers,
Rick

Yes, that's a nice range. the weak point here seems to be lens.
i saw an interesting comparison based on koren test. the cameras
checked were 6 MP dslrs and 8 MP digicams. they measured resolution
as compared to the 'theoretical' lpm.
the winner was D70 with a kit lens -70%, the loser KM A2 - 30%

don't mean to spoil you humour though

--

cheers,
Rick Sterling
http://www.rickster.org/gallery/albums.php

--
mc

 

[michalc]

Not bad, especially after the firmware update.. it is a shame though that the Sony chip used in all 8 MP cameras is so noisy, ISO 400 shots I did with Pro 1 looked like an impressionist's painting

probably the reason why Canon never released a second 8 MP digicam (NIkon has three 8700,8400,8800 - all pretty noisy)

Pro 1 has tremendous resolution due to its L lens, however other 8 Mps like Nkon 8800 are no better in this respect than 7 MPs like Canon G6.

time for an improvement on the market - soon the dslrs will smash advanced digicams out of the market

New Nikon cameras start at 38 mm - are we entering an era of toy
cameras?

The OLY C-7000 range is 38-190 mm. 38 is not wide enough 190 is far
from a telephoto. who needs 38-190?

Canon G6 and Sony V3 start at 34/35 mm that is mainly why I
excluded both cameras from my shortlist (Sony also due to aperture
problems at long zoom end).

OLY C7070 - 27mm - great! however the samples on the net are not
very encouraging. Pictures are flat, poor dynamic range (burned
highlights). So maybe 5060?

Canon S70 - almost ideal combination 28-100 mm, portable. but I
can't imagine making photos with something like a gripless
powder-box.

The best deal on the market now is probably Nikon 5400 - 5MP(fairly
enough), 28-116mm, size and ergonomics perfect. Better than 8400 -
who needs 8 MP that can be used up to ISO 100 only due to dreadful
noise...

--
mc

--
mc

 

[AMomcil]

What you did is you digged out probably all wide angle cameras that
came out in the last few years and based on that you assumed that
the number of wide angle cameras had increased in the last few
years..

No, those are cameras with

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

 

[Jay Turberville]

It should be a testable hypothesis. Can we agree upon an approach
that can provide people with some definitive answers?

Sure. Shoot the same subject at full wide and full tele at both full wide and at f/8. You might even want to add an intermediate aperture like f/5.6.

Now compare the photos to see if loss in sharpness is correlated to focal length as well as f-ratio and if there is a greater loss in sharpness at the wider angle than at the narrower angle.

You can download resolution charts for free from http://www.normankoren.com

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[michalc]

That is wrong logically again - if you add the cameras that were available a few years ago to those that are out now it is obvious there are more now as the number of available cameras is increasing.

if you want to say something smart be more specific - what does it mean a few years ago? what was the proportion of

I think the answer is easy ... it is not NUMBERS what count it is the TREND.

cheers

What you did is you digged out probably all wide angle cameras that
came out in the last few years and based on that you assumed that
the number of wide angle cameras had increased in the last few
years..

No, those are cameras with
Analyze the market just a few years ago and you'll realise that
poster was right - the number of Wide angle cameras increased! A
lot.

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

--
mc

 

[AMomcil]

if you want to say something smart be more specific - what does it
mean a few years ago? what was the proportion of
all cameras a few years ago? what is the current proportion of
launched

I was trying to be "right" and "constructive", but I can try to be "smart"..

Few years ago it was very hard to buy a digicam with wide angle. I bough my Kodak DC5000 because of it (it had 30-60mm lens). I rember that Kodak DC4800 had 28-84mm lens, Canon Pro 70 gad 28-70mm lens, there was 28mm wide angle version of Minolta EX 1500. Maybe some more, but I remember those. When Olympus C3030 came out, it was considered as unusually wide, with 32mm.

Today, it's easy to buy a digicam which starts from at least 28mm. Actually, most of 8MP prosumers start from 28mm. Exception was Nikon, who therefore introduced a 24mm one.

Talking about trends.. Few decades ago zoom lenses were rare. After that, 35-70mm was considered as a "standard" zoom range. Recently (just a decade ago) that expanded to 28-80mm. So, 28mm is a NEW trend. A good one, I like wide angle a lot, but it is comming slowlly.

I hope this was "smart" enough. I did my best . No flame wanted.

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

 

[Meryl Arbing]

It's the car show this weekend but I'll see if I can get the shots done.

It should be a testable hypothesis. Can we agree upon an approach
that can provide people with some definitive answers?

Sure. Shoot the same subject at full wide and full tele at both
full wide and at f/8. You might even want to add an intermediate
aperture like f/5.6.

Now compare the photos to see if loss in sharpness is correlated to
focal length as well as f-ratio and if there is a greater loss in
sharpness at the wider angle than at the narrower angle.

You can download resolution charts for free from http://www.normankoren.com

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Jay Turberville]

It's the car show this weekend but I'll see if I can get the shots
done.

Its not a burning issue for me. I'm using Coolpixes. So test it because you are curious and/or for other users of the same camera.

Lens testing is worthwhile IMO, but its boring and tedious if you do it well. Remember to take multiple exposures at each setting to ensure that results don't vary for other reasons such as poor focus, camera shake etc.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[michalc]

My conclusion is that wide angle digicams are becoming extinct in favor of those starting at 35-38 mm and the fact that a few WA cameras were produced in the last few years does not prove this conclusion is wrong.

Well I don't know think your explanation of zooms being rare a few decades ago has anything to do with the subject...

You tried to be smart but the trend I was talking about does not go back to the camera obscura

if you want to say something smart be more specific - what does it
mean a few years ago? what was the proportion of
all cameras a few years ago? what is the current proportion of
launched

I was trying to be "right" and "constructive", but I can try to be
"smart"..
Few years ago it was very hard to buy a digicam with wide angle. I
bough my Kodak DC5000 because of it (it had 30-60mm lens). I rember
that Kodak DC4800 had 28-84mm lens, Canon Pro 70 gad 28-70mm lens,
there was 28mm wide angle version of Minolta EX 1500. Maybe some
more, but I remember those. When Olympus C3030 came out, it was
considered as unusually wide, with 32mm.
Today, it's easy to buy a digicam which starts from at least 28mm.
Actually, most of 8MP prosumers start from 28mm. Exception was
Nikon, who therefore introduced a 24mm one.

Talking about trends.. Few decades ago zoom lenses were rare. After
that, 35-70mm was considered as a "standard" zoom range. Recently
(just a decade ago) that expanded to 28-80mm. So, 28mm is a NEW
trend. A good one, I like wide angle a lot, but it is comming
slowlly.

I hope this was "smart" enough. I did my best . No flame wanted.

--
Greetings, Aleksandar

--
mc

 

[KS Chew]

The reality is, there are more cameras with wide-angle lens and more cameras with ultra zoom.

Not so long ago, there weren't any compact digicam with 24mm. Then Nikon released CP8400. Canon S50 starts from 35mm, but both S60 and S70 starts from 28mm.

In the H2 of 2004, many companies released cameras with wide-angle lens. Now it's turn telephoto fans get excited. (Or disappointed, in the case of those waiting for Canon S2 IS.) Later this year, Nikon probably will replace CP8400, and Canon may announce S80 and S90. Don't be surprised if both Canon G7 and Sony V5 come with new lenses.

 

[michalc]

yes there are a few wide angled cameras out there
yes there will be successors to G6 and V3 ...
so what? will the have more wide angle?
I doubt it
you wanna bet?

The reality is, there are more cameras with wide-angle lens and
more cameras with ultra zoom.

Not so long ago, there weren't any compact digicam with 24mm. Then
Nikon released CP8400. Canon S50 starts from 35mm, but both S60 and
S70 starts from 28mm.

In the H2 of 2004, many companies released cameras with wide-angle
lens. Now it's turn telephoto fans get excited. (Or disappointed,
in the case of those waiting for Canon S2 IS.) Later this year,
Nikon probably will replace CP8400, and Canon may announce S80 and
S90. Don't be surprised if both Canon G7 and Sony V5 come with new
lenses.

--
mc