Good cameras that slipped through the cracks.

Sorry, but afraid this isn't in the same class as the Stylus 1.  Quite good for it's age maybe, but it's a few generations prior to the Stylus with considerably fewer features and image quality.

He was replying to the person asking about the SP-310, and the SP-350 is indeed superior to that. Compared to the Stylus 1, the CCD sensor and f/2.8-4.9 lens in the SP-350 definitely doesn't compare to the BSI CMOS sensor and longer, constant f/2.8 lens.

That's what I told him.

Stephen Strangways wrote:

Ken Croft wrote:

Terribly sorry but I just do not believe this. I have both those lenses and also 16 and 20 mpixel Olympus cameras, and no camera with a small imager like the Olympus xz or stylus series produces comparable images. I wonder if you have the gear that you mention. But if you do, I am very happy for you.

I did have the gear that I mentioned - I sold the 14-150 and all four copies of the 40-150 R that I've owned, after doing some comparison tests. Still have the Stylus 1, two XZ-1, and an XZ-2.

I can probably dig the images up and post them here if you don't want to perform your own tests. In the meantime, someone else did a comparison here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4523382

I compared the actual practical usage of the lenses - the Stylus 1 at f/2.8 and the 40-150 at f/4 or f/5.6, therefore the mft body at one or two stops higher ISO to give the same shutter speed. A larger imager with potentially less noise doesn't have much of an advantage when the lens is quite a bit slower.

That was my post above, saves me having to dig back for it!

Yes, I stick with my views, the Stylus images in the centre are no worse than those from my 14-150/EM1ii (provided I keep below the printing size limits imposed by 12 Mp) and much better in the corners.  I print at A4 after a good deal of cropping (usually down to 2500 on the long side) and get great results.

I do find that using f2.8 gives poor results, and except for really dark situations I keep to f3.2.  I shoot RAW and certainly the images can do with a bit of clarity and other tweeks.  The OOC JPEGs seem very good, though, I don't know what they do to them!

I like the handling of the S1 very much, its obviously been designed by a photographer.  The only downsides that I have is that the lens ring gets moved very easily so if I do a quick shot, without checking, I may have a silly exposure, and that the AF gets confused pretty easily with, say, a bird in a bush with twigs around it.

I do have my two most used settings on C1 and C2 and that works a treat.

Snce using DXO Deep prime I feel very comfortable using iso 800

If only it was water resistant!

I would be in the queue in a flash for an updated version as well

tom

Neoredpill wrote:

Bob A L wrote:

I have always been impressed how well it handles higher iso and low light. Did you see the 800 iso shot I posted above? I think it is impressive noise wise for straight from the camera 800 iso.

Yes, I have checked your concert pictures and even SOOC the images look clean. I think that it is in this kind of event where it shines the most. Because big dslr or even other normal sized mirrorless are forbidden, you can get telephoto due to good iso perf and good stab.

It is also the benefit of having a back side illuminated sensor and a leaf shutter.

Man, I will pay good money if Olympus decide to create a Stylus 2 with improved fonctionnalities (High res mode, pro capture etc..) and an improved sensor perf, but I doubt that they will do it.

This camera is one of its kind, and I cannot find another model with this specs, I mean compact, with good controls, evf and telephoto reach.

The Nikon P7800 has a 28-200mm equiv F2-F4 lens, which is very sharp, it has plenty of external buttons and controls, brilliant IBIS and a slightly better sensor than the Stylus 1 according to DXOmark, though it's very close. The downsides are that it is quite slow to operate (buffer write times are slow,) and the evf is not great, but usable, and obviously the range is less. It's capable of excellent results, like the Stylus 1. These are quite rare now and also sought after, rarer than the Olympus in my experience. It can also take 40.5mm screw on filters, so there's an added bonus there, macro capability is also impressive. If you like these kinds of cameras and spot one at a decent price, grab it, you won't be disappointed.

Also with improved software, this kind of old gems get a second life, for instance, you can cranck up the iso and cleanup the image with Dxo or Topaz to get quality close to bigger sensors.

Because of what DxO can now extract from the raw files of small sensor cameras, it's a very compelling reason to shoot raw, and unfortunately that's where the P7800 falls apart completely. I had better buffer/write performance from cameras released in the year 2000.

Stephen Strangways wrote:

Because of what DxO can now extract from the raw files of small sensor cameras, it's a very compelling reason to shoot raw, and unfortunately that's where the P7800 falls apart completely. I had better buffer/write performance from cameras released in the year 2000.

We're only talking a few seconds here, though it could be better, I'm not sure why that's such an issue? I use Sigma foveon cameras, you haven't experienced slow write times until you've shot those.

It's fine if you're doing landscapes, but the camera locking up for 3 seconds after a single raw photo, or 10+ seconds after a burst, makes taking photos of moving subjects extraordinarily frustrating, but it's even frustrating if you want to change settings or review a photo of something that isn't moving. It wouldn't be as bad if the camera didn't lock you out of doing other things while it was writing to the card.

Stephen Strangways wrote:

It's fine if you're doing landscapes, but the camera locking up for 3 seconds after a single raw photo, or 10+ seconds after a burst, makes taking photos of moving subjects extraordinarily frustrating, but it's even frustrating if you want to change settings or review a photo of something that isn't moving. It wouldn't be as bad if the camera didn't lock you out of doing other things while it was writing to the card.

I shoot conservatively, I take my time and shoot with it like you would using film, I never shoot in bursts, so for me, it's not a problem, but I can see that if you want something a bit lively, then yes, it could be an issue. The pluses outweigh the minuses with this camera for me, at ISO 80 and in the right conditions it can embarrass cameras with much larger sensors, it's image quality still surprises me at times.