http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
That's impressive for the camera that is the size of Canon s100
Also shows that more MP aren't necessarily bad. Better than Nikon 1 with 10 MP and the same sensor size.
Recently I have read many reviews on MFT cameras. I have an impression that factories improve the high iso performance of small size sensors through very intensive noise reduction processing inside the camera, which is applied even to raw files. Some do it good and get great pictures, some do it bad and result much loss of details in their pictures. I don't know if DSLRs also apply noise reduction in camera to their raw files (in a non-turn-off way) and if yes, how intensive the processing is.
Frank
Quite cool to me and much more appealing than the G1X.
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1338968710' post='18697']Quite cool to me and much more appealing than the G1X.[/quote]
Definitely more interesting than the G1X. Too bad the wide end doesn´t start at 24mm though.
yes, but considering the size and upon first inspection of a couple of samples stopped down, the borders aren't terribly impressive at 28mm.
Wish I had that rather than a s95 in colombia :-p
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1338979162' post='18701']
yes, but considering the size and upon first inspection of a couple of samples stopped down, the borders aren't terribly impressive at 28mm.
Wish I had that rather than a s95 in colombia :-p
[/quote]
Wide angle has tons of distortion in RAW, that don't really help with corner resolution.
Neat little camera. Much larger sensor than the S100 and consorts with not much bigger dimensions.
Plus points over the G1 X: More compact size, probably faster AF, higher resolution sensor, 3x2 image format.
Minus points: Badly designed controls, no swivel LCD, lesser IQ at high ISO settings.
Would be a hard choice for me. More compact and 3x2 versus nicer/less problematic to operate and swivel LCD.
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1338979521' post='18703']
Badly designed controls, no swivel LCD, lesser IQ at high ISO settings..
[/quote]
The lens is 1 stop brighter than G1X. G1x would have to perform full stop better (ISO 800 vs ISO 1600) to have equal high ISO
[quote name='Sathe Wild' timestamp='1338983089' post='18704']
The lens is 1 stop brighter than G1X. G1x would have to perform full stop better (ISO 800 vs ISO 1600) to have equal high ISO
[/quote]
It seems to do so (be a stop better at ISO 1600 vs 3200). Hard to determine with only in-camera JPEGs though.
The f-value is stop faster at wide angle, not the long end.
[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1338968600' post='18696']
Recently I have read many reviews on MFT cameras. I have an impression that factories improve the high iso performance of small size sensors through very intensive noise reduction processing inside the camera, which is applied even to raw files. Some do it good and get great pictures, some do it bad and result much loss of details in their pictures. [color="#0000ff"]I don't know if DSLRs also apply noise reduction in camera to their raw files (in a non-turn-off way) [/color]and if yes, how intensive the processing is.
Frank
[/quote]
All do to some degree, as that is unavoidable. Nikon is famous for it (because they do it very well indeed).
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
