Re: Best non-SLR

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:44:44 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:

People can read Rich's complaints for themselves and decide whether
they are fair or not. He made a claim about DSLRs which he has not
backed up with images. I stick by my point that his comments about
non-SLR cameras do not cover the entire gamut of such cameras, and
I have shown the images to prove my point.

Yes, you've literally shown the images to prove your erroneous
point. And not surprisingly, they didn't prove anything. It would
help if you first stated clearly in unambiguous terms what you want
them to demonstrate, but you not only did not do that, but what I
*think* they were supposed to show (almost impossible to know based
on your vague mention of "similar pixel density") didn't in any way
rebut what Rich stated. You do know the difference between high
resolution and overly small, noisy sensors, don't you? Rich
mentioned the latter, and the images you linked to were presented as
an image quality test that had nothing to do with showing the effect
of noise produced by a DSLR's larger sensor vs. the greater amount
expected from a P&S's small sensor. In fact, the only ISO ratings
given for the images were ISO 100, and those for the one produced by
the Canon DSLRs. None of your images mentioned the ISO used. One
of David Dyer-Bennet's images was also shot at ISO 100, but the
image wasn't included, only a link to it.

Some other points to consider. Remarks following some of the
Canon images mention that they were taken under less than ideal
conditions, ie, high wind and atmospheric turbulence. Yet they
still were noticeably sharper than the FZ20's images. The
difference in sensor pixel count shouldn't have been responsible for
the large difference in sharpness. My guess is that the Panasonic
FZ20 could do somewhat better, but might not have had the moon in
perfect focus. But whether that's true or not, the fact remains,
small sensor cameras, whether they're your Panasonics or my Fuji and
Canons, just can't come close to competing at moderate ISOs with
even the worst DSLRs. And it would help if the comparisons were
made with cameras of similar vintage. If you want to make a point
concerning Panasonic cameras, even though you have the older FZ20
and can't speak with as much certainty about an FZ50 that you don't
have, it would be much better to compare a recent camera of one
brand against a recent camera of another brand, unless the
differences are minimal. For instance, if you wanted to compare the
FZ50 with a Nikon D40 that would be ok. You could even compare the
FZ30 against it, as it wouldn't be too old. Or you could compare
the FZ50 with the higher resolution D40x when that model is released
in a couple of weeks. You could also compare the older D50 with
either of these two Panasonics, since the D50's sensor is virtually
identical with the one used by the D40. But the much older FZ20 is
not a good one to base comparisons on because it is hardly
representative of P&S cameras sold this year or last, and it's not a
particularly good model to base comparisons on, even if you're still
using it. It's for that reason that you probably won't see me
compare camera resolutions (or other image attributes) where one
side is represented by my even older Canon Powershots.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Best non-SLR
    ... I can't speak for all such cameras, ... I quoted DPReview stating that they would have judged the FZ50 more ... mentioned DPReview's criticism of what the small sensor did for it. ... excellent images, just the opposite actually. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: The Joy of Pixel Density
    ... You're saying that you could not compare the 350D to the 450D because ... improvements in read noise and microlens efficiencies but you CAN ... many pixels into a sensor smaller than the one used by Fuji's F30. ... the F30 produced clearly legible text in its images where the FZ-50 ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Utterly off-topic: digital cameras
    ... priced cameras with good reputations. ... more gross image distortion (because the lens is smaller) ... fuzzier images (because the lens is worse and more of it ... of the sensor design rather than of the optics. ...
    (uk.religion.christian)
  • Re: Cassini: where are colors and detail?
    ... >cameras by implication of your statements. ... use a color sensor for spectroscopy, but the quality of the data is largely ... independent of the quality of the filters, ... cannot take good images of emission nebulas. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: A newbie request help selecting digital camera
    ... compare and where are the comparison photos? ... which camera is used (including the better p&s cameras). ... It's the same sensor Sigma uses in their DSLR, ...
    (rec.photo.digital)