If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
Terrible, terrible. You see where ultrazooms have taken formerly
acceptable flagship P&Ss? Old 3-5x zoomed P&S's with 2/3" sensors were 10x better than this horror. Imagine if they had stuck with them, and kept improving the processing? http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pana...Z18/page14.asp |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
Rich wrote:
Terrible, terrible. You see where ultrazooms have taken formerly acceptable flagship P&Ss? Old 3-5x zoomed P&S's with 2/3" sensors were 10x better than this horror. Imagine if they had stuck with them, and kept improving the processing? http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pana...Z18/page14.asp I keep my Panasonic at ISO 100 where the quality is best. On the other hand, my DSLR will produce excellent quality results at ISO 1600. Different cameras for different needs. Cheers, David |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
As far as image quality and noise go I think your right. They aren't going
to be able to keep cramming more resolution on the current tiny sensors. However, what we might see is improvements to the other parts of the camera. Higher quality lenses, better metering, better and faster focusing and things like that. We might see some of the non-sensor technologies used in dSLR's show up on point and shoots. This is until they come up with a new sensor technology that will allow them to increase the resolution on small sensors. Personally, I think they just need to forget about making things small, smaller, smallest and start putting dSLR sized sensors and build point and shoot cameras around them even with them being bigger. There will always be the tiny crappy point and shoots for those that care more about camera size than picture quality, but I think there is a large market for those that want dSLR image quality without the dSLR (meaning interchangable lenses). I would love a Panasonic FZ30 with a dSLR sensor even if the camera doubled in size to do it. I hate interchangable lenses and would drop my Pentax K10D in a heart beat for such a camera. The Spider |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
"The Spider" wrote in message ... As far as image quality and noise go I think your right. They aren't going to be able to keep cramming more resolution on the current tiny sensors. However, what we might see is improvements to the other parts of the camera. Higher quality lenses, better metering, better and faster focusing and things like that. We might see some of the non-sensor technologies used in dSLR's show up on point and shoots. This is until they come up with a new sensor technology that will allow them to increase the resolution on small sensors. Personally, I think they just need to forget about making things small, smaller, smallest and start putting dSLR sized sensors and build point and shoot cameras around them even with them being bigger. There will always be the tiny crappy point and shoots for those that care more about camera size than picture quality, but I think there is a large market for those that want dSLR image quality without the dSLR (meaning interchangable lenses). I would love a Panasonic FZ30 with a dSLR sensor even if the camera doubled in size to do it. I hate interchangable lenses and would drop my Pentax K10D in a heart beat for such a camera. The Spider I think a P&S is a P&S, hence I feel it's OK to use a smaller sensor. But as they are I do think the sensors are too small. I use the Fujifilm s6000fd (as the world knows by now) in which the sensor is a measly 1/1.7... good grief. TG it is only 6.3 MPs and does produce great quality images, and genuine low noise at high ISO settings. However I would be much happier if the sensor were at least 4/3 in size, with larger pixels which accept more color (and the same 6.3 MPs), famous and desireable in older D-SLRs from canon and Nikon. The 4/3 chip is a size that is midway between P&S sizes and APS-C sizes which can be seen on dpreview.com, it's the best idea. But if the camera is a D-SLR, the sizes should be APS-C and up. Sigma will be dawning a new P&S with an APS-C Foveon chip sometime soon, but it will have a single focal length lens which equates 28mm. -- Giant_Alex not my site: http://www.e-sword.net/ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
"Rich" wrote in message ps.com... Terrible, terrible. You see where ultrazooms have taken formerly acceptable flagship P&Ss? Old 3-5x zoomed P&S's with 2/3" sensors were 10x better than this horror. Imagine if they had stuck with them, and kept improving the processing? http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pana...Z18/page14.asp It's impossible not to agree with you - those images are simply awful. I used to have an E20, which compared to those was a Leica. I still can't understand why cameras like the Olympus 8080 (which was supposed to have excellent image quality) were dropped in favour of these new cams..How can it be 'consumer demand'? - those who are knowledgeable would urge against small sensors crammed with more pixels, and those who don't know/don't care are hardly likely to have expressed any sort of preference one way or the other. So the decision to market these things must be squarely down to the camera companies themselves - one can perhaps understand why gadget makers like Casio would produce 'feature packed' (but ultimately useless) novelty cameras, but why did the 'real' camera manufacturing companies join in this foolishness? How can optical specialists like Olympus and Pentax churn these things out and not be ashamed? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
Rich wrote:
Terrible, terrible. You see where ultrazooms have taken formerly acceptable flagship P&Ss? Old 3-5x zoomed P&S's with 2/3" sensors were 10x better than this horror. Imagine if they had stuck with them, and kept improving the processing? http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pana...Z18/page14.asp Yikes! The sad thing is, that isn't a shirt-pocket camera either, but a rather bulky, dare I say dSLR-inspired, "compact" camera. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
Rich wrote:
Terrible, terrible. You see where ultrazooms have taken formerly acceptable flagship P&Ss? Old 3-5x zoomed P&S's with 2/3" sensors were 10x better than this horror. Imagine if they had stuck with them, and kept improving the processing? http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pana...Z18/page14.asp P&S cameras have improved greatly, even though sensor sizes remain small. I don't think we are near the limit for what technology can do with the small sensors, even when they continue to make each element smaller. Yes, a larger sensor, at whatever technology level, would make a better image, but would increase cost. I am sure a lot of thought goes into the decision-making at the camera manufacturer's design facility. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
On Nov 6, 1:16 pm, Scott W wrote:
Rich wrote: Terrible, terrible. You see where ultrazooms have taken formerly acceptable flagship P&Ss? Old 3-5x zoomed P&S's with 2/3" sensors were 10x better than this horror. Imagine if they had stuck with them, and kept improving the processing? http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pana...Z18/page14.asp Most of what you post if crap, but in this case I have to mostly agree. If they can sell a DSLR with a sensor that has a 28mm diagonal sensor for just over $500 the cost of using a sensor with a 14mm diagonal should be be high at all. But the norm seems to be about half that with most current P&S camera using a sensor with a diagonal just over 7mm. I would think there would be a market for a P&S camera with a sensor size in the range of 10-15mm, clearly the camera makers don't believe that this would be a very large market. Scott Marketing whores killed the quality P&S. They convinced people there was some value in superlong zooms and idiotic megapixel counts which cannot be made to support decent sized sensors without high cost. For instance, a 2/3" sensor camera with integrated 10x zoom would likely cost $1000 today, even if cheaply made, while a Nikon D40 and 18-200mm zoom can be had for about $800.00... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
On Nov 5, 11:12 pm, "Henry" wrote:
... I still can't understand why cameras like the Olympus 8080 (which was supposed to have excellent image quality) were dropped in favour of these new cams..How can it be 'consumer demand'? - those who are knowledgeable would urge against small sensors crammed with more pixels, and those who don't know/don't care are hardly likely to have expressed any sort of preference one way or the other. So the decision to market these things must be squarely down to the camera companies themselves ... I would guess that the average consumer only knows a few quantitative measures about cameras: Number of megapixels Size of zoom range Size of the LCD display on the back Price. Those are what the camera companies seem to have to compete on. So my guess is that the companies grit their teeth, hold their noses, and come out with cameras that compromise quality to get big numbers on the first three for a small number on the fourth. Alan |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL
On Nov 6, 1:16 pm, Scott W wrote:
... I would think there would be a market for a P&S camera with a sensor size in the range of 10-15mm, clearly the camera makers don't believe that this would be a very large market. Remember, as the sensor size increases, so must the lens size and cost to get the same f/stop and zoom range. If you're trying to make a small and low priced camera, it's a problem. Alan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How long will photos stay on a sd card before going bad? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 23 | May 22nd 07 09:08 AM |
is Nikon's JFET an improvement over CCD vs. CMOS sensors? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 4 | January 15th 07 01:53 PM |
Fastest point and shoots?? | chas | Digital Point & Shoot Cameras | 3 | June 9th 05 04:41 AM |
Top 5 Point and Shoots under $500 | measekite | Digital Photography | 12 | March 1st 05 05:15 AM |
Top 5 Point and Shoots under $500 | measekite | Digital Photography | 0 | February 27th 05 08:48 AM |