ZR1 image quality?

[HMXrdb]

I'm wondering if anyone can comment on the image quality of the ZR1.

I'm considering getting one, but I'm a bit flummoxed by the different descriptions of the image quality I've read in several different reviews. Some call it best in class, but others call it middling. I know different reviewers will have different preferences, but the spread of opinions on the ZR1 seems a bit wider than normal.

Many thanks.

 

[MarcelLuettmann]

I'm amazed by the NR of this little cam. We used it a lot indoors, and there will be a lot of 4" x 6" prints. I won't start working on the noise of those prints up to ISO 500, maybe even ISO 800. On the other hand, with f/5.9 on the long end and the not-too-powerful flash, it has to rely on these high ISOs.

WB indoors w/ flash is quite good, maybe a bit too yellow.

My wife loves her ZR1.

Marcel

 

[rolleiman]

As yet I haven't seen a review from imaging resource or DPR and you can't really get too concerned about a either a good or bad review from any of the others unless they're all negative. As yet I haven't seen any complaints from actual owners, pretty much the opposite.

My take is that the IQ is great up to 400 ISO. After that all small 1/2.3 sensors will be a forest of tradeoffs like clean smudge versus grainy clarity. Image quality at over 400 is sort of an oxymoron, and image rescue would be a better term. A 1/1.6 sensor gives you 800, maybe, and DSLRs 1600.

That said, the new processor seems a lot less blotchy than the IV and retains color pretty well at 1600 so you can at least make a perfectly good small print from it. All you can expect. I'd think the Panny approach would make a better B&W at high ISO than Canon's so it's a matter of what you can live and work with.

 

[AndyHWC]

I am curious about this too. Hopefully IR will have samples for this camera soon.

It seems to have similar spec and design as ZS3 but lens can make a big difference in final result.

I'm wondering if anyone can comment on the image quality of the ZR1.

I'm considering getting one, but I'm a bit flummoxed by the different descriptions of the image quality I've read in several different reviews. Some call it best in class, but others call it middling. I know different reviewers will have different preferences, but the spread of opinions on the ZR1 seems a bit wider than normal.

Many thanks.

 

[rolleiman]

I am curious about this too. Hopefully IR will have samples for this camera soon.

It seems to have similar spec and design as ZS3 but lens can make a big difference in final result.

I've just been printing some samples up for the local camera store as they are curious too. The lens is pretty hard to fault. I'd say, just guessing,that compared to the ZS3 it may have a bit more CA because the ZS lens has two ED elements but given the shorter range and the four asphericals, two double, in the ZR you'd need to be an optical engineer to answer that.

I thought the lens on my Fuji F100 was pretty sharp but this is easily its equal; the corners are all sharper at WA, imperceptible distortion - hooray, and a lot less of the magenta green type CA and about the same or better on the blue type - lateral longitudinal I always get mixed up on.

I have a 14-42 Olympus kit lens that gets great reviews but has more distortion and doesn't seem sharper. Sure, with a sensor however many multiples bigger it is a different world of pixel quality and noise and the sensor may resolve somewhat better at a pixel level, but the whole ZR weighs less than the ultralight kit lens and fits way better in a pocket. Same price!

I'll be curious when the official pixel peepers render their verdict, but I'm not going to worry about whether they approve or not. I was not expecting this level of lens performance when I bought it although I could see it would be good.

 

[HMXrdb]

Thanks for the information (yours and everyone else's) -- it's a big help.

I think it's unlikely that I'd ever print larger than 8x10, so it sounds like the ZR1 will be a nice tool that would give me good quality at that size.

 

[OnTheWeb]

I've had the ZS3, ZS1, and ZR1. The ZR1 is an excellent camera with better than average optical zoom for its size. You choose it over the others only if you need the ultra-compact size.

The ZS models are considerably bigger, but not too bad. The ZS3 has a pinch better photo and a bit better video quality. Only side by side would you notice.

Put another way, the ZS3 has excellent photo and video quality. The ZR1 has very good photo and video quality.

ZR1 shots: The first two are dynamic shots, the 3rd photo is standard macro:

 

[Dave Beaman]

Bought my ZR1 the day it was available. I wanted a good compact with a good range. I am happy with it. I take it with me when ever I leave the house it is that easy to carry. If you don't have it with you, you can't take a picture and the images are just fine.

If I want to get serious about my images I get my Nikon D200

dave

 

[AndyHWC]

I checked a few 720p movies from Vimeo. It seems there is no focus hunting issue and brightness stepping has been improved too compared to ZS3. Can someone confirm?

I think Canon SX20 still has an edge in 720p quality though.