I was wondering about the Sony F717 and F828 which have 2/3" sensors. Are there other P&S cameras that have these larger sensors, or that get closer to DSLR image quality? I note that someone compared (very casually) the G7 to one of the Canon DSLRs and the pix didn't look that far off. What other cameras?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Which P&S comes closest to DSLR in image quality?
- Thread starter fbx
- Start date
marianco
Senior Member
P&S Cameras when used at ISO 50-100 are virtually the same in quality as a DSLR. The Minolta A2, for example, was such an example.
Only when one goes to higher ISO do the P&S Cameras fall off. The smaller sensors get too much noise as the light sensitivity increases.
Some cameras, however, such as the Panasonic cameras, unfortunately use inherently noisy sensors and software - no matter what the ISO.
Only when one goes to higher ISO do the P&S Cameras fall off. The smaller sensors get too much noise as the light sensitivity increases.
Some cameras, however, such as the Panasonic cameras, unfortunately use inherently noisy sensors and software - no matter what the ISO.
Shoot RAW with those noisy Panasonic cameras and they smoke every Canon without RAW.
Here's a 100% crop, FZ50, ISO 400, about 100mm, f4, 1/8:
Landscape ISO 100:
A crop:
--
Regards,
Robert
Auriga
Leading Member
Even in lower ISO sensitivities, I've noticed that a dSLR will deliver noticeably better quality images than your typical P&S when shooting longer exposures i.e 3-4 second shutter speeds or slower.
--
---------
Terence
http://www.pbase.com/auriga_m38
--
---------
Terence
http://www.pbase.com/auriga_m38
Armand Hirt
Leading Member
DSLR image quality is not about resolution: there are plenty of compact digicams that outresolve, say, a Canon EOS 300D. What makes a DSLR special is their high dynamic range and low levels of noise. While some digicams actually do not produce much noise at low ISO (while I am aware of none that behaves as well as a Canon DSLR - this is obvious when comparing RAW files) all lag to some extent in dynamic range.
Another advantage of DSLRs is that they tend to provide an access to lens systems that have no qualitative equivalent in digicams, especially but not only long primes. This leads to better image quality.
One could say that the Fuji F30 has close to DSLR image quality, but that would be ignoring wide violet fringes, and a tendency to burn highlights. Same for the Sony F-828, actually.
- Armand
thermal1
Leading Member
I believe the Sony R1 produces good images.
The Fuju F30 takes exceptional high-iso shots (for a P&S).
The Fuju F30 takes exceptional high-iso shots (for a P&S).
Ben Herrmann
Forum Pro
All three are superb digicams. The Olympus C8080 and C7000 are out of circulation so you'd have to find used or refurbished models - both are built like a tank (magnesium or aluminum bodies) and have RAW capabilities that approach DSLR-like quality. The Sony R1 can now be had for below $700 and get one while you can because it's being phased out also (seems all the really good, advanced digicams are falling by the wayside). Here are some examples from each...
C-8080 shots 8 MP camera) - RAW:
C7000 shots (7.1 MP camera) - RAW:
Sony R1 (10 MP camera) - RAW:
--
Have a great day!
C-8080 shots 8 MP camera) - RAW:
C7000 shots (7.1 MP camera) - RAW:
Sony R1 (10 MP camera) - RAW:
--
Have a great day!
mamallama
Forum Pro
The "prosumers" that were introduced along with the Sony F828 all had 2/3" sensors: Canon Pro1, Olympus C-8080, Minolta Konica A2 and A200. According to legend and experience, these prosumers give better IQ than the ones with 1/1.8" sensors.
That's part of the moaning and groaning for a real Pro2, updated to take advantage of faster processors. Looks like it ain't gonna happen.
--mamallama
What do you mean by image quality? If youre just taking snap shots and at low ISO's - dont get a dSLR you would be wasting your money. Are you talking about DOF, ISO noise, Dynamic Range, Fstop speed? IQ is a very broad term which means nothing really. If you want things such as those mentioned above - then the answer is easy - none. The sensors are all too small (inlcuding the Fuji F30) and the glass non-versatile to be able to give you the creativity you need. If youre just talking about sharpness at LOW ISO noise - then get any P&S - they are all comparable to DSLR's for basic photography - of course a DSLR is as good as the lens on it, I wouldnt be surprised say if the Panasonic FZ cams made sharper images than the 400D with the kit lens, with an L lens, youre in a different league.
Sinan
--
Sinan
Parn190423
Senior Member
only true for a handful top-end P/S and only for landscape shots(Sony R1 is an exception). However a dslr at ISO100/200 still produces slightly cleaner images than any p/s at ISO50.
--
Kind regards from a DP beginner(30D + Pro1).
http://www.pbase.com/knight_parn
Is the Sony R1.
The rest have tiny sensors that can not compare.
--
http://www.whalenphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen
The rest have tiny sensors that can not compare.
--
http://www.whalenphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen
David_Foster
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 348
- Reaction score
- 0
Robert
Looking at dcresource comparison picturess of the G7 and Fz50 I don't see much difference until you zoom in all the way, I see that Panasonic solved the noise problem as far as blue skies go. When fully zoomed in you see that the G7 produces a clearer images but with the Panasonic FZ50 you are able to shoot in raw. Won't the Canon S3 and the Sony H5 replacements, which should be announced this February, have raw to complete with the FZ50? Actually the S3 and the H5 compete with the FZ7.
Dave
http://www.ourphotostore.com
While there are plenty of P&S cams these days that take great images, the R1 is the only current model that uses an APS-C sized sensor. It is a CMOS sensor much similar to that in the Canon 30D/400D models. Soon to be available is the Sigma DP-1(I believe this is the model). It will have the aps Foveon sensor, same as in the new SD-14 dslr. I will be interested to see it's capabilities.
Dave, in my humble opinion noise is not the problem, but noise reduction. I hate it. And that's why RAW is so important for me. I want full control. To be honest, I think the FZ50 JPEGs look horrible and I agree with you, the G7 images are superior.
PS: The S4 won't have RAW.
--
Regards,
Robert
I'll always put my Pro1 pictures like this up against anything, anytime:
--
Tom Hoots
My PBase galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/thoots
--
Tom Hoots
My PBase galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/thoots
Robert Deutsch
Forum Pro
Maybe...just maybe...the reason that Canon has not made the G7 to be as good as it had the potential to be is because they're planning a Pro2 as their real top-of-the-line "bridge" camera.
Or maybe not...I definitely would not bet on it, but it's possible. More likely, though, they've decided that a cheap(-ish) low end dSLR will do more to meet that needs of the marketplace--and gives Canon an opportunity to sell lots of lenses.
Bob
The July 2006 issue of Consumer Reports (pgs 30 & 31) states that the image quality of the best advanced compact cameras equaled that of the tested DSLR's (Rebel XT, Maxxum 7D, Canon EOS 20D). The top 4 advanced compacts were G6 (first for three years in a row I think), N Coolpix 8400, Canon S70, Kodak P880.
As an aside, there's been some needless acrimonious, even hostile, debate between the G6 and Pro-1 owners in the past. I always get a kick to see CR rate the Pro-1 5th or 6th after the G6 year after year.
If the G7 has the same image quality as the G6, that might be the one to get. Based on my experience with the G6, the G7 doesn't look all that bad to me feature-wise. I use most of the G6 features, but never bother with raw as the processed images are so high quality. I'm sticking with my G6 and will probably get a compact DSLR to compliment the G6 in the future.
Al
ChrisDM
Senior Member
Yes, the R1 is the only fixed-lens camera on the market that offers DLSR-like performance. Remember, DSLR image quality is primarily a result of the larger sensor. There's no other way around this, at the moment. So, to get the best iamge quality, you can buy a DLSR, or buy the Sony R1, which has a DSLR sensor inside. Also, the R1's lens is a dream. It starts at 24mm wide! That being said, I do not like the R1's ergonomics or feel. Plus it is slooooow to write RAW files. I would much rather shoot with my 5D if I'm going to carry a large camera around.
--
Chris
http://www.imagineimagery.com
Bwahahahahahahah
Consumer Reports is better used to wipe your backside than as an informative reading device.
--
http://www.whalenphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen
Robert Deutsch
Forum Pro
Consumers Reports does have some findings that make me question their methodology. For example, they rate the S2IS ahead of the S3IS on picture (print) quality. This contradicts every review in the specialist magazines. (The S3 may not have significantly better image quality than the S2, but it's not worse .) I must admit that although I like the idea of Consumers Reports, in the areas that I know something about (audio and photography) they have little credibility.
Bob
Bob
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum