Reading mode: Light Dark

Best per-pixel sharpness in a pocket size?

Go to last post
D

Discoveryellow

Member
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Am I falling in for an old man syndrome: when everything was better in the good old day? Or the modern P&S cameras marching toward greater MPx count loose it?

I am looking for a new Point and Shoot camera to replace my Canon PowerShot SD880IS. As a couple candidates I considered Sony WX10 and Fuji F550EXR, but after reviewing (as what I could find) the 100% images from those two, I feel like it will be a disappointment. My old SD880 could do rather better at it's 10Mpx.

What I am really after is best per-pixel-sharpness among P&S cameras. I am even considering trying to find older models (e.g. thought of F200EXR)

Any advice is highly appreciated. I haven't shopped for a new camera since 2008.
 
Do you mean sensor pixel of bayer combined colour pixel, and how can one pixel be sharp anyway.

Surely there would be other criteria that would far outweigh per pxel sharpness when deciding on a new camera.

Brian
 
Discoveryellow said:
Am I falling in for an old man syndrome: when everything was better in the good old day? Or the modern P&S cameras marching toward greater MPx count loose it?

I am looking for a new Point and Shoot camera to replace my Canon PowerShot SD880IS. As a couple candidates I considered Sony WX10 and Fuji F550EXR, but after reviewing (as what I could find) the 100% images from those two, I feel like it will be a disappointment. My old SD880 could do rather better at it's 10Mpx.

What I am really after is best per-pixel-sharpness among P&S cameras. I am even considering trying to find older models (e.g. thought of F200EXR)

Any advice is highly appreciated. I haven't shopped for a new camera since 2008.
Click to expand...
Any version of the Sigma DP1 or DP2 camera has the sharpest images for a compact.

This is a 100 percent crop from a DP2. In and of itself, it's a stand alone image.



Dave
 
Thanks! I appreciate it, exactly what I was looking for in terms of quality benchmark.

Is there something with a zoom lens and possibly smaller that comes close to the Sigma DP?

(I already have a dSLR that's working great for me, but often sits at home in my daily life. I am looking for a pocket companion to take with me at all times.)
 
Discoveryellow said:
Thanks! I appreciate it, exactly what I was looking for in terms of quality benchmark.

Is there something with a zoom lens and possibly smaller that comes close to the Sigma DP?
Click to expand...
The Sigma has an APS sized sensor. It's pretty compact. The only compitition is the Leica X and the new Fuji X100, both a lot more money.

None of these machines have a zoom. Life sucks... :(
Discoveryellow said:
(I already have a dSLR that's working great for me, but often sits at home in my daily life. I am looking for a pocket companion to take with me at all times.)
Click to expand...
I carry this little sucker with me wherever I go. Even when shooting wildlife I carry this camera to shoot the scene to give context,

It has limitations. Lousy low light AF - I shoot it in manual mode.

4.7 Megs, roughly the equivalent of an 8meg Bayer.

But you can't beat the IQ...









Dave
 
Nothing else will look as sharp at 1:1 as the Sigmas because of the sensor technology they use, however they only capture a 4.6mp sized image, and taking an image from a high resolution DSLR and downsizing to that size will result in similar 1:1 pixel sharpness.

You're better off downloading the studio tests from various reviews (say the Sigma DP1/2, Ricoh GXR, Fuji X100, Panasonic LX5, Olympus ZX-1) and downsizing them all to the size you're likely to be using and comparing the results to see which you like the best.
 
Pocketable cameras with zooms all have smaller sensors than Sigma DP1/DP2's Foveon sensor.

The best of the zoom-equipped compacts are the Canon S95 & G12, Panasonic LX5, Nikon P7000, Olympus XZ1, Samsung TL500/EX1. Of these, the only one that's actually pocketable is the S95, but it gives up a hotshoe and EVF capability to do it and to allow the lens to fully retract into the body it is slightly slower and not quite as wide (28mm eq.) as some of the competition.

Better imaging performance than these requires larger sensors like DSLR-class 4/3 or APS-C but lenses (especially zooms) that cover these sensors are considerably larger and make the cameras unpocketable.
 
Andy Crowe said:
Nothing else will look as sharp at 1:1 as the Sigmas because of the sensor technology they use, however they only capture a 4.6mp sized image, and taking an image from a high resolution DSLR and downsizing to that size will result in similar 1:1 pixel sharpness.
Click to expand...
It will improve the image, but it still wont compare to a 100 percent crop from one of the Sigmas. And in fact, there's more room in a SIgma to interpolate up then a Bayer sensor.
Andy Crowe said:
You're better off downloading the studio tests from various reviews (say the Sigma DP1/2, Ricoh GXR, Fuji X100, Panasonic LX5, Olympus ZX-1) and downsizing them all to the size you're likely to be using and comparing the results to see which you like the best.
Click to expand...
If the OP needs a zoom then a Sigma compact is not for him.

Here's an example of interpolating up

FF thumb



100 Percent Crop



At 200 percentt



Now in good conscience, I can't recomend a Sigma SLR, since specific tasks require more than a Bayer "equivalent." So I shoot wildlife with a Nikon.

On the other hand if the new SD1 was even remotely affordable, I would recomend that camera.

Dave
 
I hear you guys! The sensor size makes the key difference (hence I love my Nikon dSLR), but also some compacts are better than the other. My Canon SD880IS was best in its tier at the time. And still seems to have better sharpness at 10Mpx than samples I found from newer P&S cameras at 14Mpx. (I was considering Sony WX10 or WX9 or WX5, as well as Fuji F550 or other F-series. But sample images were disappointing.)

I will look at all the models you have suggested in more detail.

So far Canon S95 looks good by price and size, and.. surprise-surprise the sample images are very much like my SD880IS.

Let me know if you think of anything else! Thanks
 
AndrewG NY said:
Pocketable cameras with zooms all have smaller sensors than Sigma DP1/DP2's Foveon sensor.

The best of the zoom-equipped compacts are the Canon S95 & G12, Panasonic LX5, Nikon P7000, Olympus XZ1, Samsung TL500/EX1. Of these, the only one that's actually pocketable is the S95, but it gives up a hotshoe and EVF capability to do it and to allow the lens to fully retract into the body it is slightly slower and not quite as wide (28mm eq.) as some of the competition.

Better imaging performance than these requires larger sensors like DSLR-class 4/3 or APS-C but lenses (especially zooms) that cover these sensors are considerably larger and make the cameras unpocketable.
Click to expand...
Really glad you brought up the Oly XZ1 to my attention. While indeed not as pocket friendly as I wished, it seems what I was looking for. And a quick look at the review here, reminds me of my long gone Olympus C4000 (even the lens flare look alike). I will read all about the XZ1 later and hopefully will find a place to see it in person.
 
Discoveryellow said:
Am I falling in for an old man syndrome: when everything was better in the good old day? Or the modern P&S cameras marching toward greater MPx count loose it?

I am looking for a new Point and Shoot camera to replace my Canon PowerShot SD880IS. As a couple candidates I considered Sony WX10 and Fuji F550EXR, but after reviewing (as what I could find) the 100% images from those two, I feel like it will be a disappointment. My old SD880 could do rather better at it's 10Mpx.

What I am really after is best per-pixel-sharpness among P&S cameras. I am even considering trying to find older models (e.g. thought of F200EXR)

Any advice is highly appreciated. I haven't shopped for a new camera since 2008.
Click to expand...
Why are you looking for the "best per-pixel-sharpness" rather than the "most detailed photo"? That is why would you prefer a 6 MP compact over a 12 MP compact, simply because the 6 MP compact had "better per-pixel sharpness" even though the final photo was less detailed?
 
Canon S-95 is the title holder for best pocket cam... The Panasonic LX-3 is the contender hampered only because it doesn't fit as well in a pocket.

The S-95 is a serious camera with full controls and great pics mostly due to a bigger sensor other virtually all pocket cams except the LX-3.

Read the reviews here and on imaging resource and they will validate my enthusiasm for the S-95.

I can't wait till a camera knocks this one off off the block!
 
I'm really happy with my Canon S90 and S95 (I have both), but in comparing the image galleries on dpreview, with the Oly XZ-1, the Oly seems sharper to me. I'm always on the "hunt" for a compact and very sharp "portable" camera.

That said, I don't think the images in the dpreview gallery from the S95 are all that "good" or sharp. I think most of my personal shots straight out of camera are much sharper than what I'm seeing in the gallery? I'd be happy to send you any number to pixel peep if you like. weiserman (the little at sign) and then gmail (a dot) com.

I'll have to research this further. I'm probaby a bit like you. I have Canon SD400's and feel sometimes those 5mp cameras take a better daylight shot than most of today's much higher megapixel cameras. Forget low light photography.

My buddy picked up a high mp count point and shoot camera about a year ago from Costco without asking me first, took it home and started taking photos. They were so awful (noisy and pixelated) that I started sending him photos from my 5 year old, 5mp SD400's and he literally boxed up the camera and returned it within minutes. He ended up with the Canon S90 which he had to wait another week for (it wasn't out yet), and absolutely loves it. He's an engineer and really wants sharp photos. I too am happy with my Canons.

I'm not a commercial for Canon's cameras (I'll buy any brand that stands out), but one thing that is really great about it is the size and "form factor". With a screen protector on it, and in a little microfiber bag, you can just throw it in your pants pocket, and I do. I even keep it in the back jeans pocket when I'm not about to sit down. I have my S95 in the left bottom pocket of my cargo shorts right now in fact, in a hoodie neoprene case (water resistant) which will easily fit in this larger pocket. The S90/S95 has built in lenscap. The Olympus does not! I think that is one thing that might bother me a small amount and makes it impossible really to pocket. One of the reviewers said that if the camera powers on the lenscap flies off.

For many reasons the S90/S95 and Olympus XZ-1 aren't in the same category of camera, though for me the fast lens makes both attractive.

I'm very interested if you buy the Oly XZ-1 or any other camera you decide on. I really like having full HD video on me so I also own the Sony DSC-HX5v and will probably get the DSC-HX9v here shortly and both take 1920 x 1080 video. As for sharpness I've not pixel peeped the Sony but will. I wouldn't advocate it off the top of my head though for absolute sharpness....as the G lens is 10x in the DSC-HX5 and 16x in the DSC-HX9. I don't know the exact element count or groupings but the more glass they pack in there the less sharp I'm sure the final product!

I'll keep watching this thread!

David
 
JKP said:
Noise control seems throw away lots of fine details in almost every new p&s cameras. Canons are quite good, if you find a model that can take CHDK hack for raw images. Raws don't suffer from the loss of fine details.

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK

-JKP-
Click to expand...
Thanks! Grrr, I wished I came aross this before I gave my Canon to my mother... It would be fun to play around with the CHDK on it.
 
I might be wrong, but it seems like test shots from the dpreview do not do favor to the S95 and it looks sub-par to the XZ1 and even some other similar models. True/false?
 
Great Bustard said:
Why are you looking for the "best per-pixel-sharpness" rather than the "most detailed photo"? That is why would you prefer a 6 MP compact over a 12 MP compact, simply because the 6 MP compact had "better per-pixel sharpness" even though the final photo was less detailed?
Click to expand...
Because a 12Mpx washed out image is sub-par to a crisp 6Mpx photo and amount of details perceived by the eye will depend on the contrast, which is related to pixed sharpness. I rather enjoy crisp photo, than HDD clogging megapixels. :)
 
So here is a question:

I really like the XZ-1 test shots on here, but price/size/lens-cap are less pleasurable.

Am I being tricked to think that Nikon P300 is a good option in size and price? (Well, at least with Sony HX5/9/10 or Canon Powershot line).
 
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