Reading mode: Light Dark

A clean 8mp 1 1/8 sensor is possible...

Go to last post
Kirwin

Kirwin

Veteran Member
Messages
7,436
Reaction score
339
Location
FL, US
Both the FZ30 & the Canon s80 both use an 8mp 1 1/8" sensor. The difference is that the Canon's sensor is able to provide a clean image without the loss of detail all the way to ISO400. Hopefully Panasonic will be able to improve on their sensors.

--



Regards,
Kirwin
http://timebandit.smugmug.com
 
Is it just my lively imagination, or isn't there more
low contrast detail in the LX1's ISO 80 than the
S80's ISO 50? Look at the side of the neck of the
bottle, the watermark of a woman's face in a grey ring?

And the LX1 has the disadvantage of vertical framing.

I also wonder about LX1 RAW ISO 400 + Neat image
versus S80 JPG ISO 400. Which is cleanest, with most
detail?

And let's not forget (as Simon did) that the S80 lacks IS.

Just my two öre
Erik from Sweden
F Z 5, now with up to 16x zoom ;-)

 
Agree that Simon didn't mention IS on the LX1.

I was completely surprised that any manufacturer could produce an 8mp sensor that would perform so well!

--



Regards,
Kirwin
http://timebandit.smugmug.com
 
Hum.....

When some one got the first of the 80 they took some ISO400 photos of a desk and laptop. If they posted those here it would be a firestorm about look at that HORRIDE noize. Its bad. Its horrible! Etc...

Saw a shot over in the Fuji forum of noize at high ISO from the S5200/S5600 and would get the same scream fest treatment.
 
Panasonic and Canon have two different philosophies regarding in-camera processing. That's what explains the difference in noise between cameras from each manufacturer, not the sensor.

Canon choose to do extensive NR, which yield clean images, but also washes away fine detail and sometimes give the image an "artificial" look. Look at the picture of the blue watch and you'll see what I mean.

Panasonic do less in-camera NR, which leads to more noise but also more fine detail and a more natural looking image. Notice that in the image comparison between the S80 and the LX1, the latter seems to show as much detail as the former, even though the images are sligthly smaller.

Simon mentions that the S80 seems to retain more detail than its predecessors, and I agree with him. However, I must respectfully disagree when he says that the images don't look overprocessed. To me, they still clearly show the classic "overprocessed" look of a typical Canon image.
 
I don't argue with those who say the S80's ISO 50 is more
pleasing to the eye than the LZ1's ISO 80. Noise in black
and blue patches is ugly.

But if you download those pictures at 100 %, and look at the
"coins" at the bottom of the Martini bottle, especially seen in
the 3rd, 5th, 6th and 7th from the left, the S80 has SMUDGED
the low contrast patterns while the LZ1's are more intact. Even
though the LX1 is at a framing disadvantage.

This is evidence that the S80 uses noise reduction even at ISO 50!

I can see this is what people want, but please Simon and others,
please don't attribute ALL of the difference to sensor quality,
because it is simply not true.

Just my two öre
Erik from Sweden
F Z 5, now with up to 16x zoom ;-)

 
Nope... not just the LX1. The Panny FZ30 has the same size sensor as the S80. The LX1's sensor size is actually different from the s80.
lharris said:
I suppose this is now the obvious discussion--S80 or LX1.

Sure wish the S80 were lighter and slimmer..

But will be curious to see the discussion..

Linda
Click to expand...
--



Regards,
Kirwin
http://timebandit.smugmug.com
 
DUnno in many ways the canon s80 is good, pannie messed up, also the optical vf is welcomed on the s80...

Still too expensive though!

Maybe a nice price drop would be welcomed
 
Not sure at its widest point, that is the lens. And of course, for it to fit in something that is really what is to be considered.

Overall tho- the LX1 is lighter in less 'chunky'.

They seem the two cameras to compare--but features and other things come into play.

Linda
 
Lacol said:
Canon choose to do extensive NR, which yield clean images, but also
washes away fine detail and sometimes give the image an
"artificial" look. Look at the picture of the blue watch and you'll
see what I mean.
Click to expand...
Are we looking at the same pictures? I see the extra noise you are talking about in the LX1 pic, but certainly not extra detail. There's actually more detail in the Canon shot... there are minute marks that are oblliterated by noise that are still there in the Canon picture. People keep saying "yeah but Panasonic is processing the image less and preserving more detail". I just don't see it. I DO see more in-camera sharpening, which may be making the noise worse. And I also see blotchy colors from too MUCH noise reduction, giving some shots a water color look. The Canon shots are the ones that look more natural to me, AND it has less noise and more resolution to boot.

If only canon hadn't dropped RAW, and would implement OIS. Give me the LX1's form factor and features, with Canon's image quality, and I'd buy in a heartbeat. It doesn't even have to be 16x9. I could crop the Canon images down to 16x9, and still have better images. As long as I wasn't trying to take low speed hand held shots. Or wanting to preserve as much of the image as possible with RAW.

Is getting everything in one camera too much to ask?
 
Erik37 said:
But if you download those pictures at 100 %, and look at the
"coins" at the bottom of the Martini bottle, especially seen in
the 3rd, 5th, 6th and 7th from the left, the S80 has SMUDGED
the low contrast patterns while the LZ1's are more intact. Even
though the LX1 is at a framing disadvantage.
Click to expand...
You must have better eyes for that kind of thing than I do, because I just can't see any advantage Panasonic has in the coins. I've downloaded both images, and flipped back and forth, and all I see is a little more noise in the coins, despite this being at ISO80. But what I DID notice in the full sized shot, I mean really jumped out, was the difference in the black part of the camera body. The Canon shot has perfectly reproduced the textured surface of the black part of the camera body, while the Panasonic is just a mush of black with noise speks of color. If the difference isn't immediately apparent, and large, then turn up the brightness a little to see how much detail in the blacks the Canon is maintaining.

If you want to make a REALLY interesting comparison, after studying those two full size pics, compare the LX1's ISO80 shot to Canon's ISO400 shot (which apparently is actually MORE sensitive than Panasonic's ISO400, based on the sutter speeds). Looking at the black body of the camera now, we see that Panny's ISO80 is actually closer in quality to Canon's ISO400 than it is to their ISO50. At least to my eyes. I will say, though, that Panny's color seems a little more realistic... it's closer to what I'd assume those objects are than the Canon shot represents them to be. But it sure is a lot easier to color correct in PP than it is to get back shadow detail and other data that is lost to too much noise and other over-processing issues.

I just don't understand why everyone try's so hard to make excuses for Panasonic. With the exception of the noise issue, the LX1 is a VERY compelling camera. Panasonic has done an excellent job in every other area. They need to be pushed to correct it, not coddled into thinking it's OK, and that we believe that their image is actually more accurate. If they would just address this one issue, I think they'd have the best cameras on the market. We shouldn't let them settle for getting close.
 
Suppose I post on the Canon board that "see, a 12X IS lens is possible, the FZ30 does it so why can't we have it?" : )

Sure, it's possible, but then why doesn't everyone have a 12X IS, razor sharp zoom? Point being, some companies are better at one thing, others at others. Most companies aren't good at everything - otherwise there would be no competition, it would just get blown away.

Imagine you get to pick a car with the best features of all the models you are looking at . . .

So, yes, you are right. But at the end of the day you can't buy wishes, you still have to make your choice and put your dollar down.
 
Well said, tko. It is this way that we should all think. We should set our priorities in each purchase. For example, if we are looking for superzoom, 8MP camera, then we can't buy the S80, can we? Z30 is the best choice for now.

Alternatively, looking for a semi-pro and compact digital camera, then perhaps S80 would be one of the better choices.

Still, it is understandable to be biased towards the side of the camera that we own. Not cheap, these gadgets!
 
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