s90, lx3, or wait for lx5?

[jimr]

Thank you for making me laugh.....

Great line: "I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?"

So one incident with the F200EXR is your basis for all reviews meaning nothing? Thats weak, especially since your the only one making a stink right now about the S90 to LX3 comparison, where is the "howl of protest"? And I have yet to see your proof of any comparison under controlled studio conditions that beats the LX3. Plus as I and others keep telling you, there are million parameters that could be changed in a test, who is going to agree on what those parameters are? You? The IR comparison test are valid tests, done under a controlled environment, not some Optimized settings test that only you seem to have all the parameters for. There is no way that you are going to get everyone to agree on test parameters for the best OOC Jpegs for each camera, never going to happen. I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?

After reading this I think you will understand my IR sample issues better.

As is always the case, IR posts images on their Comparometer ALL taken at default settings only. That can cause misleading conclusions about what cameras that have many in camera parameter setting choices that can often be used to improve OOC images. Some of these default settings are purposely set to produce OOC that are meant for those who PP....especially the higher end p&s cameras in the LZ3, S90, G11 range. Had they been tailored for OOC primarily the resulting default images posted might very well be better.

SPECIFIC CASE IN POINT FOLLOWS:

Now IR did the same with the Fuji F200EXR using the HR setting as their default and posting the resulting samples on their Comparometer as the set to be used for OOC comparisons to other cameras. A howl of protest was raised in the Fuji forum.....with Fuji owners knowing from personal experience that the F200EXR (and the F70EXR) can produce much better OOC images when the DR mode is used. IR PARTIALLY rectified the issue...not by replacing the HR images in the Comparometer, but rather by amending and adding a full DR set of sample images in their full test of the F200EXR. The Comparometer images remain the same in the poorer OOC produced by the HR images and those who merely bring up the Comparometer images and compare to other comparometer images have no clue how much better the images from the same F200EXR can be merely by using the DR setting unless they go to the full F200EXR test on the same IR website and see those samples. Now those DR samples are not available at all on the Comparometer!

A lesson to be learned when relying on the Comparomter (and its default only iimages) to compare images OOC to arrive at an accurate honest determination of relative IQ CAPABILITY of various cameras.

LL will be reviewing the S90 shortly and you can be sure they'll compare it to the LX3.

--

• David

 

[LordGriNz]

Thats good, let me know when you have proof of the S90 beating the LX3 in any controlled studio test.

Great line: "I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?"

So one incident with the F200EXR is your basis for all reviews meaning nothing? Thats weak, especially since your the only one making a stink right now about the S90 to LX3 comparison, where is the "howl of protest"? And I have yet to see your proof of any comparison under controlled studio conditions that beats the LX3. Plus as I and others keep telling you, there are million parameters that could be changed in a test, who is going to agree on what those parameters are? You? The IR comparison test are valid tests, done under a controlled environment, not some Optimized settings test that only you seem to have all the parameters for. There is no way that you are going to get everyone to agree on test parameters for the best OOC Jpegs for each camera, never going to happen. I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?

After reading this I think you will understand my IR sample issues better.

As is always the case, IR posts images on their Comparometer ALL taken at default settings only. That can cause misleading conclusions about what cameras that have many in camera parameter setting choices that can often be used to improve OOC images. Some of these default settings are purposely set to produce OOC that are meant for those who PP....especially the higher end p&s cameras in the LZ3, S90, G11 range. Had they been tailored for OOC primarily the resulting default images posted might very well be better.

SPECIFIC CASE IN POINT FOLLOWS:

Now IR did the same with the Fuji F200EXR using the HR setting as their default and posting the resulting samples on their Comparometer as the set to be used for OOC comparisons to other cameras. A howl of protest was raised in the Fuji forum.....with Fuji owners knowing from personal experience that the F200EXR (and the F70EXR) can produce much better OOC images when the DR mode is used. IR PARTIALLY rectified the issue...not by replacing the HR images in the Comparometer, but rather by amending and adding a full DR set of sample images in their full test of the F200EXR. The Comparometer images remain the same in the poorer OOC produced by the HR images and those who merely bring up the Comparometer images and compare to other comparometer images have no clue how much better the images from the same F200EXR can be merely by using the DR setting unless they go to the full F200EXR test on the same IR website and see those samples. Now those DR samples are not available at all on the Comparometer!

A lesson to be learned when relying on the Comparomter (and its default only iimages) to compare images OOC to arrive at an accurate honest determination of relative IQ CAPABILITY of various cameras.

LL will be reviewing the S90 shortly and you can be sure they'll compare it to the LX3.

--

• David

--

• David

 

[jimr]

Please show me where I ever claimed that to be the case....
Please enjoy misquoting me...This is really funny....
You enjoy telling me what I have never said nor claimed.....
Do you misquote people all the time? Nice hobby....

Thats good, let me know when you have proof of the S90 beating the LX3 in any controlled studio test.

Great line: "I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?"

So one incident with the F200EXR is your basis for all reviews meaning nothing? Thats weak, especially since your the only one making a stink right now about the S90 to LX3 comparison, where is the "howl of protest"? And I have yet to see your proof of any comparison under controlled studio conditions that beats the LX3. Plus as I and others keep telling you, there are million parameters that could be changed in a test, who is going to agree on what those parameters are? You? The IR comparison test are valid tests, done under a controlled environment, not some Optimized settings test that only you seem to have all the parameters for. There is no way that you are going to get everyone to agree on test parameters for the best OOC Jpegs for each camera, never going to happen. I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?

After reading this I think you will understand my IR sample issues better.

As is always the case, IR posts images on their Comparometer ALL taken at default settings only. That can cause misleading conclusions about what cameras that have many in camera parameter setting choices that can often be used to improve OOC images. Some of these default settings are purposely set to produce OOC that are meant for those who PP....especially the higher end p&s cameras in the LZ3, S90, G11 range. Had they been tailored for OOC primarily the resulting default images posted might very well be better.

SPECIFIC CASE IN POINT FOLLOWS:

Now IR did the same with the Fuji F200EXR using the HR setting as their default and posting the resulting samples on their Comparometer as the set to be used for OOC comparisons to other cameras. A howl of protest was raised in the Fuji forum.....with Fuji owners knowing from personal experience that the F200EXR (and the F70EXR) can produce much better OOC images when the DR mode is used. IR PARTIALLY rectified the issue...not by replacing the HR images in the Comparometer, but rather by amending and adding a full DR set of sample images in their full test of the F200EXR. The Comparometer images remain the same in the poorer OOC produced by the HR images and those who merely bring up the Comparometer images and compare to other comparometer images have no clue how much better the images from the same F200EXR can be merely by using the DR setting unless they go to the full F200EXR test on the same IR website and see those samples. Now those DR samples are not available at all on the Comparometer!

A lesson to be learned when relying on the Comparomter (and its default only iimages) to compare images OOC to arrive at an accurate honest determination of relative IQ CAPABILITY of various cameras.

LL will be reviewing the S90 shortly and you can be sure they'll compare it to the LX3.

--

• David

--

• David

 

[LordGriNz]

Well you are defending against a legitimate studio comparison, saying it is "useless". Yet you show no evidence that the S90 can beat the LX3, even though the legitimate comparison from a well recognized site says otherwise. Why? Because you are probably a troll, and its obvious any speak of the S90 losing against the LX3 angers you into attack mode. Do you even own an LX3? Do you like bashing well recognized camera comparison sites? I think the "useless" information comes from trolls like yourself who should probably keep their mouths shut if they aren't running their own well regulated studio comparisons. Its this "useless" trolling that makes it hard for new people to figure out what is fact or fiction.

Thats good, let me know when you have proof of the S90 beating the LX3 in any controlled studio test.

Great line: "I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?"

So one incident with the F200EXR is your basis for all reviews meaning nothing? Thats weak, especially since your the only one making a stink right now about the S90 to LX3 comparison, where is the "howl of protest"? And I have yet to see your proof of any comparison under controlled studio conditions that beats the LX3. Plus as I and others keep telling you, there are million parameters that could be changed in a test, who is going to agree on what those parameters are? You? The IR comparison test are valid tests, done under a controlled environment, not some Optimized settings test that only you seem to have all the parameters for. There is no way that you are going to get everyone to agree on test parameters for the best OOC Jpegs for each camera, never going to happen. I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?

After reading this I think you will understand my IR sample issues better.

As is always the case, IR posts images on their Comparometer ALL taken at default settings only. That can cause misleading conclusions about what cameras that have many in camera parameter setting choices that can often be used to improve OOC images. Some of these default settings are purposely set to produce OOC that are meant for those who PP....especially the higher end p&s cameras in the LZ3, S90, G11 range. Had they been tailored for OOC primarily the resulting default images posted might very well be better.

SPECIFIC CASE IN POINT FOLLOWS:

Now IR did the same with the Fuji F200EXR using the HR setting as their default and posting the resulting samples on their Comparometer as the set to be used for OOC comparisons to other cameras. A howl of protest was raised in the Fuji forum.....with Fuji owners knowing from personal experience that the F200EXR (and the F70EXR) can produce much better OOC images when the DR mode is used. IR PARTIALLY rectified the issue...not by replacing the HR images in the Comparometer, but rather by amending and adding a full DR set of sample images in their full test of the F200EXR. The Comparometer images remain the same in the poorer OOC produced by the HR images and those who merely bring up the Comparometer images and compare to other comparometer images have no clue how much better the images from the same F200EXR can be merely by using the DR setting unless they go to the full F200EXR test on the same IR website and see those samples. Now those DR samples are not available at all on the Comparometer!

A lesson to be learned when relying on the Comparomter (and its default only iimages) to compare images OOC to arrive at an accurate honest determination of relative IQ CAPABILITY of various cameras.

LL will be reviewing the S90 shortly and you can be sure they'll compare it to the LX3.

--

• David

--

• David

--

• David

 

[jimr]

Oh yes....It is a legitimate comparison because you say so.....It is written so it is true. It is true because it is a controlled comparison...even if the way the comparison is carried out is faulty by my reasoning.... (you are entiltled to your opinion about the IR methodology.....and so am I) I have clearly stated why I find the IR methodology faulty. You have yet to show me why my objections are incorrect. Nobody's reasoning is correct except yours....Yes supreme authority on controlled comparisons. So it is easier to label someone a troll than to actually deal with questionablle testing methods.

You love to create statements that I have not made and then attack what I never said. Since you seem to desperatlely need to know that the LX3 stands as the ONLY great choice in this group (yes the LX3 is a great camera as I have said repeatedly) enjoy your unquestioned definitive conclusion since it brings joy to you. Yes...the LX 3 has no competition. It is perfect. No other camera can come close nor should any other camera be considered by anyone looiking for a great point and shoot. Feel better? Please...now quote that. Happy???
Conspiracy theories. Next nonsense.
I have wasted enough time dealing with your postings. Good bye....

Well you are defending against a legitimate studio comparison, saying it is "useless". Yet you show no evidence that the S90 can beat the LX3, even though the legitimate comparison from a well recognized site says otherwise. Why? Because you are probably a troll, and its obvious any speak of the S90 losing against the LX3 angers you into attack mode. Do you even own an LX3? Do you like bashing well recognized camera comparison sites? I think the "useless" information comes from trolls like yourself who should probably keep their mouths shut if they aren't running their own well regulated studio comparisons. Its this "useless" trolling that makes it hard for new people to figure out what is fact or fiction.

Thats good, let me know when you have proof of the S90 beating the LX3 in any controlled studio test.

Great line: "I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?"

So one incident with the F200EXR is your basis for all reviews meaning nothing? Thats weak, especially since your the only one making a stink right now about the S90 to LX3 comparison, where is the "howl of protest"? And I have yet to see your proof of any comparison under controlled studio conditions that beats the LX3. Plus as I and others keep telling you, there are million parameters that could be changed in a test, who is going to agree on what those parameters are? You? The IR comparison test are valid tests, done under a controlled environment, not some Optimized settings test that only you seem to have all the parameters for. There is no way that you are going to get everyone to agree on test parameters for the best OOC Jpegs for each camera, never going to happen. I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?

After reading this I think you will understand my IR sample issues better.

As is always the case, IR posts images on their Comparometer ALL taken at default settings only. That can cause misleading conclusions about what cameras that have many in camera parameter setting choices that can often be used to improve OOC images. Some of these default settings are purposely set to produce OOC that are meant for those who PP....especially the higher end p&s cameras in the LZ3, S90, G11 range. Had they been tailored for OOC primarily the resulting default images posted might very well be better.

SPECIFIC CASE IN POINT FOLLOWS:

Now IR did the same with the Fuji F200EXR using the HR setting as their default and posting the resulting samples on their Comparometer as the set to be used for OOC comparisons to other cameras. A howl of protest was raised in the Fuji forum.....with Fuji owners knowing from personal experience that the F200EXR (and the F70EXR) can produce much better OOC images when the DR mode is used. IR PARTIALLY rectified the issue...not by replacing the HR images in the Comparometer, but rather by amending and adding a full DR set of sample images in their full test of the F200EXR. The Comparometer images remain the same in the poorer OOC produced by the HR images and those who merely bring up the Comparometer images and compare to other comparometer images have no clue how much better the images from the same F200EXR can be merely by using the DR setting unless they go to the full F200EXR test on the same IR website and see those samples. Now those DR samples are not available at all on the Comparometer!

A lesson to be learned when relying on the Comparomter (and its default only iimages) to compare images OOC to arrive at an accurate honest determination of relative IQ CAPABILITY of various cameras.

LL will be reviewing the S90 shortly and you can be sure they'll compare it to the LX3.

--

• David

--

• David

--

• David

 

[LordGriNz]

Go troll somewhere else buddy, you've been exposed for what you are! Not to mention defaming a legitimate test by a well recognized comparison site. That seems to elude you for some reason, mainly because you feel you are so superior as to criticize them and do so in a forum where you don't even own the camera you speak about. Thats actually the textbook example of a troll, you know that right? You are pretty pathetic, maybe you should keep your "opinions", whoops, I mean bashing/attacks to yourself. Please go away troll, we've had enough of you...Thanks!

Oh yes....It is a legitimate comparison because you say so.....It is written so it is true. It is true because it is a controlled comparison...even if the way the comparison is carried out is faulty by my reasoning.... (you are entiltled to your opinion about the IR methodology.....and so am I) I have clearly stated why I find the IR methodology faulty. You have yet to show me why my objections are incorrect. Nobody's reasoning is correct except yours....Yes supreme authority on controlled comparisons. So it is easier to label someone a troll than to actually deal with questionablle testing methods.

You love to create statements that I have not made and then attack what I never said. Since you seem to desperatlely need to know that the LX3 stands as the ONLY great choice in this group (yes the LX3 is a great camera as I have said repeatedly) enjoy your unquestioned definitive conclusion since it brings joy to you. Yes...the LX 3 has no competition. It is perfect. No other camera can come close nor should any other camera be considered by anyone looiking for a great point and shoot. Feel better? Please...now quote that. Happy???
Conspiracy theories. Next nonsense.
I have wasted enough time dealing with your postings. Good bye....

Well you are defending against a legitimate studio comparison, saying it is "useless". Yet you show no evidence that the S90 can beat the LX3, even though the legitimate comparison from a well recognized site says otherwise. Why? Because you are probably a troll, and its obvious any speak of the S90 losing against the LX3 angers you into attack mode. Do you even own an LX3? Do you like bashing well recognized camera comparison sites? I think the "useless" information comes from trolls like yourself who should probably keep their mouths shut if they aren't running their own well regulated studio comparisons. Its this "useless" trolling that makes it hard for new people to figure out what is fact or fiction.

Thats good, let me know when you have proof of the S90 beating the LX3 in any controlled studio test.

Thank you for making me laugh.....

Great line: "I don't understand why you can't get this thru your head, do just thrive on conspiracy theories?"

LordGriNz wrote: