SP-100ee another selection of samples ( 9 images)

KEV1N wrote:

Been asked for some more shots from this camera, so for any body interested here are some images taken yesterday in good light, SOOC . I've tried to show a varied selection. Did quite a good job and was pleasantly surprised overall but the last two images show the cameras weakest area for mushy detail.

Kev

Close ups and focused areas seem to be fine, but I see what you mean with the last two photographs especially when you put it 1 to 1 with the mush in the distance part of the shots. I suppose there has to be some limits to superzooms. One new superzoom that seems to do well in distance shots is the Nikon p600 from what I've seen, the canon sx50 seems to do well too.

I have bought a 30x zoom a Nikon L820 for my Mum and it can be a bit mushy too.

Cheers

Steve.

Pictures look good to me, how do you like your camera? I am looking for a super zoom.

KEV1N wrote:

adr44 wrote:

Pictures look good to me, how do you like your camera? I am looking for a super zoom.

For the purpose (birding and close ups) it has been great. Overall quick performance and ok image quality. I have lots of photo's I'm happy with.

Here's another

Kev

Nice photo, clean and sharp. It sounds like you are happy with the camera. You say image quality is okay, what do you mean? Are you comparing it with something else or just in certain conditions its only okay?

Cheers

Steve.

That is a really good photo, love to see more and here your assessment. Is AF quick to lock on.

The last photo is intriguing. It seems that the camera's noise suppression is panicking and trying to repair the out of focus trees at infinity and creating a problem where none existed. My Sony TV does this if the broadcast quality is less than good. Possibly the water colour would be a blur anyhow and viewing at normal sizes there is not really a problem.

Possibly by smearing like this it could make the normal image better. Just because it looks bad at 100% does not mean it is making the normal image worst, but it could actually improve the colour intensity in the image. Just a thought.

Edit: I mean the last photo on your original set.

KEV1N wrote:

Henry Falkner wrote:

'By ok I mean pictures look good but I don't like the way this camera renders the fine detail.'

The same complaint arises with the SH-50 -

The picture was taken in the same month that I bought the SH-50. Usually I find that over the first six months focussing improves, as does the handling of noise in consequence. But as stated in another thread - if landscape is your thing, these Olympus small BSI CMOS sensor compacts and bridge cameras are not, uhm, ideal for landscapes. Night shots I have taken with my SH-50 do suggest that the firmware is already the optimum for the sensors employed in the SH-50, as it appears to be the case for the SP-100EE.

Yes that does not look to good either. This is not a camera I would want to use for a day out general shooting, I would use my X-S1

Just one afterthought - you do have the compression set to FINE, on the first MENU page? The default was NORMAL on my SH-50.

Thanks for the thought but I have tried both fine and normal the smearing effect is the same.

Kev

Henry

KEV1N wrote:

Henry Falkner wrote:

'By ok I mean pictures look good but I don't like the way this camera renders the fine detail.'

The same complaint arises with the SH-50 -

Yes that does not look to good either. This is not a camera I would want to use for a day out general shooting, I would use my X-S1

Just one afterthought - you do have the compression set to FINE, on the first MENU page? The default was NORMAL on my SH-50.

Thanks for the thought but I have tried both fine and normal the smearing effect is the same.

Kev

Henry

There is not a problem with the cameras; it is with your expectations. There has never been any camera with a 1/2.3" sensor that could render very fine detail, especially in superzooms. Until or unless you are willing to buy a camera with a much larger sensor and lens, this is as good as it gets for now. The Sony RX-10 is good as it gets right now if you want to render much more fine detail. The E-M10 with a 14-140mm would also be a great choice and be a very versitile choise being able to put other lenses one it when needed. But, having the much larger sensors and lenses will cost you much more money, weight, and size. It's all about compromises and what your priorities are, and budget of course.

Wonderfull Bird Shots.

Have you shot any samples with both the SP-100 and X-S1 side by side to see how they actually compare?  It would be interesting to see how big a difference there is when taking 'real' pictures.

It is too bad the camera doesn't allow for saving raw images, at least some of the landscape distortion would appear to be related to the compression algorithm they are using.

The 12mp 1/2.3" sensors are much better as can be seen with the Canon SX280 when you look at Cameralabs comparisons with cameras like the TZ40. There is definitely a problem with the cameras in that they have far too many pixels for the sensor size. Greater than 12mp more pixels means less resolution and it is all a bit of a marketing con really.

A 16mp 1/2.3" sensor is definitely not as good as it gets for the sensor size. 12mp or probably lower would be.

Do you know for a fact that the 200mm maximum equivalent for an RX10 would crop down to the detail available with the 1200mm equivalent SP100 lens given that with the RX10 we are only talking about a 1" intermediate sized sensor? My 55-210mm lens on a Sony A3000 can probably better my 26x Pentax X5 but the former is aps-c so I doubt the RX10 can outresolve the SP100 at full zoom. Notwithstanding the RX10 costs shed loads of money.

tron555 wrote:

KEV1N wrote:

Henry Falkner wrote:

'By ok I mean pictures look good but I don't like the way this camera renders the fine detail.'

The same complaint arises with the SH-50 -

Yes that does not look to good either. This is not a camera I would want to use for a day out general shooting, I would use my X-S1

Just one afterthought - you do have the compression set to FINE, on the first MENU page? The default was NORMAL on my SH-50.

Thanks for the thought but I have tried both fine and normal the smearing effect is the same.

Kev

Henry

There is not a problem with the cameras; it is with your expectations. There has never been any camera with a 1/2.3" sensor that could render very fine detail, especially in superzooms. Until or unless you are willing to buy a camera with a much larger sensor and lens, this is as good as it gets for now. The Sony RX-10 is good as it gets right now if you want to render much more fine detail. The E-M10 with a 14-140mm would also be a great choice and be a very versitile choise being able to put other lenses one it when needed. But, having the much larger sensors and lenses will cost you much more money, weight, and size. It's all about compromises and what your priorities are, and budget of course.

Excellent shot Kevin

Greynerd wrote:

The 12mp 1/2.3" sensors are much better as can be seen with the Canon SX280 when you look at Cameralabs comparisons with cameras like the TZ40. There is definitely a problem with the cameras in that they have far too many pixels for the sensor size. Greater than 12mp more pixels means less resolution and it is all a bit of a marketing con really.

I completely agree with all you said. I just upgraded my G12 for the XZ-2 , but even though I went from 10-12 MP, the XZ-2 still seems to give me much better (sharper) images. Anymore than 12 MP on even a 1/1.7" sensor degrades IQ and sharpness IMO. It does not have quite the reach I would like, but I went for better IQ instead.

A 16mp 1/2.3" sensor is definitely not as good as it gets for the sensor size. 12mp or probably lower would be.

I had an old Sony DSC-5H  with only 7.2 MP on a 1/2.5" CCD sensor that seemed like it had very good fine detail, with a 12x zoom. I really liked that camera and took some great pictures with it, IMHO.

Do you know for a fact that the 200mm maximum equivalent for an RX10 would crop down to the detail available with the 1200mm equivalent SP100 lens given that with the RX10 we are only talking about a 1" intermediate sized sensor?

I do not know the answer to that question, but, from all images I've seen so far from the RX10, they look very impressive to me. I am really looking forward to seeing many other companies realizing the 1" sensors would be the best size for shorter range zoom fixed lens cameras in the very near future. I think 20 MP is way too many for the 1" sensor, 14-16 MP should be the max, again IMHO. It will be interesting if the two rumored cameras (P8000/G17) will ever appear or it they were April fools jokes. I think the P8000 with it's more realistic specs might be possible but would not bet on it.