10MP compacts. I am not impressed

Good for you. Just so you know they aren't impressed with you either. They
didn't like the cold clammy hands.

R


"JohnR66" <nospam.TakeThisOut@att.net> wrote in message
news:U5IQg.87774$QM6.11749@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> While not all 10MP cameras were reviewed, I have to say, so far, I am not
> impressed with what I'm seeing. For one thing, Noise reducing algorithms
> are taking their toll at even at lowest ISO settings. There are two main
> problem areas I'm concerned with. One is the noise hash around the sharp
> edges of objects where the noise reducing algorithm detects a high
> contrast boundary and lowers the smoothing to retain the sharpness. It
> leaves a stubble around objects. While not a 10mp camera the Olympus
> FE-130 is a good example (see samples on stevesdigicams.com).
>
> The second and often bigger issue is the smearing out of low contrast
> detail. My A330 does this when light is dim and/or ISO is higher. For
> instance, if I shoot a photo of a house and with foliage. The fine detail
> in the leaves and grass are sometimes taken as noise and is smeared into a
> smooth mush of color not unlike what high JPEG compression can do.
>
> Thank God for DSLRs!
>
> John
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

JohnR66 wrote:
> While not all 10MP cameras were reviewed, I have to say, so far, I am
> not impressed with what I'm seeing.

For my own use, 5MP seems to be enough, and I remain very pleased with my
Panasonic FZ5, and have not seen the need to upgrade to a higher
resolution model. My main use is viewing on the screen (1280 x 1024 so
1.3MP) although I occasionally print up to A4 size. Looking at the
individual pixels at 1:1 zoom is not necessarily representative of the
final image appearance.

In any camera, you may need to move away from the default image settings
to achieve the best quality capture of the sensor detail into the final
image file.

David
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

>>You could get the same results taking a
>>5mp camera and upsampling to 10mp.

Not if you are a marketing man. They all know that the more Mp you can
claim, then the more cameras you will sell, because the extra mps allow your
purchasers to get one up on their neighbours. Who cares whether the extra
resolution is actually of any practical use?

Keith
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

Some of the tiny pocket cameras are capable of amazing quality (e.g the
Casios). However because of other restrictions I would agree that an imaging
sensory greater than 5mps is nothing but a marketing tool. Because these
cameras cannot take advantage of the greater megapixel density of the
sensors the larger files sizes generated for each image is actually a
disadvantage.
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

JohnR66 wrote:
> While not all 10MP cameras were reviewed, I have to say, so far, I am not
> impressed with what I'm seeing. For one thing, Noise reducing algorithms are
> taking their toll at even at lowest ISO settings. There are two main problem
> areas I'm concerned with. One is the noise hash around the sharp edges of
> objects where the noise reducing algorithm detects a high contrast boundary
> and lowers the smoothing to retain the sharpness. It leaves a stubble around
> objects. While not a 10mp camera the Olympus FE-130 is a good example (see
> samples on stevesdigicams.com).
>
> The second and often bigger issue is the smearing out of low contrast
> detail. My A330 does this when light is dim and/or ISO is higher. For
> instance, if I shoot a photo of a house and with foliage. The fine detail in
> the leaves and grass are sometimes taken as noise and is smeared into a
> smooth mush of color not unlike what high JPEG compression can do.
>
> Thank God for DSLRs!
>
> John
>
>
Hi,

This is a series of one (or two),but I find that my 7.1 MP Canon SD550
not only makes sharper pictures than the 5 MP S500, but also gives less
noise at ISO 200 and 400. I suspect that improved electronics and
software play a role as well as the chip itself. I can now get sharp 8
1/2 x 11" blowups from a cropped image with very nice results.

Morton
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor.RemoveThis@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk>
wrote in message news:ZVLQg.22831$r61.224@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> JohnR66 wrote:
>> While not all 10MP cameras were reviewed, I have to say, so far, I am
>> not impressed with what I'm seeing.
>
> For my own use, 5MP seems to be enough, and I remain very pleased with my
> Panasonic FZ5, and have not seen the need to upgrade to a higher
> resolution model. My main use is viewing on the screen (1280 x 1024 so
> 1.3MP) although I occasionally print up to A4 size. Looking at the
> individual pixels at 1:1 zoom is not necessarily representative of the
> final image appearance.
>
> In any camera, you may need to move away from the default image settings
> to achieve the best quality capture of the sensor detail into the final
> image file.
>
> David
>
I noticed Fuji released a new A700 series camera with a 7.3MP 1/1.6" super
HR sensor ($200). This bucks the trend of putting in yet smaller sensors in
low end cameras. Seems there is an improvement with noise on the latest crop
of sensors, Imagine this improvement plus a larger sensor. Have to wait for
the reviews!
John
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

"JohnR66" <nospam RemoveThis @att.net> writes:
> I noticed Fuji released a new A700 series camera with a 7.3MP 1/1.6" super
> HR sensor ($200). This bucks the trend of putting in yet smaller sensors in
> low end cameras.

But then they again jack up the pixel count so the pixels are just as
small as before. In fact they are smaller than the pixels in a 4MP
camera with a 1/2" sensor.
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 02:44:04 GMT, "JohnR66" <nospam.DeleteThis@att.net> wrote:


I bought an 8 mp Olympus SP350 two weeks ago. It has an excellent lens
with virtually no chromatic aberations at the telephoto end (no purple
fringes) and superb detain in its super macro mode (cropped 12 by18
blowsup that could easily go bigger].

As far as low light proformence, I've printed up a 11 by 14 portrait
with excellent S/N, where the light sources were a computer monitor
and a 10 watt flourescent desk lamp. This RAW mode image was taken at
ISO 400 and software "push processed" up to ISO 1600.

The claim that you can't take a decent image unless you have a a
couple grand's worhjt of camera hanging around you neck is a myth

jpc












>While not all 10MP cameras were reviewed, I have to say, so far, I am not
>impressed with what I'm seeing. For one thing, Noise reducing algorithms are
>taking their toll at even at lowest ISO settings. There are two main problem
>areas I'm concerned with. One is the noise hash around the sharp edges of
>objects where the noise reducing algorithm detects a high contrast boundary
>and lowers the smoothing to retain the sharpness. It leaves a stubble around
>objects. While not a 10mp camera the Olympus FE-130 is a good example (see
>samples on stevesdigicams.com).
>
>The second and often bigger issue is the smearing out of low contrast
>detail. My A330 does this when light is dim and/or ISO is higher. For
>instance, if I shoot a photo of a house and with foliage. The fine detail in
>the leaves and grass are sometimes taken as noise and is smeared into a
>smooth mush of color not unlike what high JPEG compression can do.
>
>Thank God for DSLRs!
>
>John
>
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 10:08:53 -0500, jpc <jpc> wrote:


>On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 02:44:04 GMT, "JohnR66" <nospam RemoveThis @att.net> wrote:


>I bought an 8 mp Olympus SP350 two weeks ago. It has an excellent lens
>with virtually no chromatic aberations at the telephoto end (no purple
>fringes) and superb detain in its super macro mode (cropped 12 by18
>blowsup that could easily go bigger].

>As far as low light proformence, I've printed up a 11 by 14 portrait
>with excellent S/N, where the light sources were a computer monitor
>and a 10 watt flourescent desk lamp. This RAW mode image was taken at
>ISO 400 and software "push processed" up to ISO 1600.

>The claim that you can't take a decent image unless you have a a
>couple grand's worhjt of camera hanging around you neck is a myth

However, the claim that you can't get a decent 10mp image out of a 0.25"
sensor isn't a myth.
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 19:56:48 GMT, AZ Nomad wrote:

>> The claim that you can't take a decent image unless you have a a
>> couple grand's worhjt of camera hanging around you neck is a myth
>
> However, the claim that you can't get a decent 10mp image out of a 0.25"
> sensor isn't a myth.

Sure you can. Many owners of those cameras won't ever print
larger than 4"x6", and for prints that small, or for filling a
monitor's screen, they can produce very nice images. It's true that
those 10mp images wouldn't be as good as 10mp images produced by
larger sensors used in DSLRs, and they wouldn't need a sensor with
all of those 10mp in their P&S, but what else is new? They were
necessary to make the sale.
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 17:01:27 -0400, ASAAR <caught DeleteThis @22.com> wrote:


>On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 19:56:48 GMT, AZ Nomad wrote:

>>> The claim that you can't take a decent image unless you have a a
>>> couple grand's worhjt of camera hanging around you neck is a myth
>>
>> However, the claim that you can't get a decent 10mp image out of a 0.25"
>> sensor isn't a myth.

> Sure you can. Many owners of those cameras won't ever print
>larger than 4"x6", and for prints that small, or for filling a
A 2mp is enough for a 4x6. Paying extra for a 10MP compact that produces
pictures equal to a quality 4MP is a waste of money.

Tell ya what: take all your pictures and rescale them to make them into
100mp files. You'll have all the quality of a 100mp compact without having
to wait for them to become available and without having to pay extra.
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 21:29:07 GMT, AZ Nomad wrote:

>> Sure you can. Many owners of those cameras won't ever print
>>larger than 4"x6", and for prints that small, or for filling a
>
> A 2mp is enough for a 4x6. Paying extra for a 10MP compact that produces
> pictures equal to a quality 4MP is a waste of money.
>
> Tell ya what: take all your pictures and rescale them to make them into
> 100mp files. You'll have all the quality of a 100mp compact without having
> to wait for them to become available and without having to pay extra.

Why should I want to waste my time doing that? If you read and
understood the next two of my sentences that you chose not to quote,
you'd have seen that we're in agreement. In fact, when I bought my
current camera nearly 2 years ago there were other P&S models having
7 and 8mp sensors, but after comparing full resolution test images
on several camera review websites, I determined that even with only
a 4mp sensor, the Fuji S5100 was more than capable of meeting my
resolution needs. It can also produce very nice 8"x10" prints, but
if I ever have a need to make any larger prints, I'll experiment
either with panoramas or get a better camera, probably a DSLR. The
new Nikon D80 or the new Olympus that isn't being released in the
USA are tempting. I'll consider newer Pentaxes too, since any 8mp
or 10mp DSLR would probably be good enough, and among the features
that I rate highest, small size and weight is near the top.
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed 

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 19:56:48 GMT, AZ Nomad <aznomad.TakeThisOut@PmunOgeBOX.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 10:08:53 -0500, jpc <jpc> wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 02:44:04 GMT, "JohnR66" <nospam.TakeThisOut@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I bought an 8 mp Olympus SP350 two weeks ago. It has an excellent lens
>>with virtually no chromatic aberations at the telephoto end (no purple
>>fringes) and superb detain in its super macro mode (cropped 12 by18
>>blowsup that could easily go bigger].
>
>>As far as low light proformence, I've printed up a 11 by 14 portrait
>>with excellent S/N, where the light sources were a computer monitor
>>and a 10 watt flourescent desk lamp. This RAW mode image was taken at
>>ISO 400 and software "push processed" up to ISO 1600.
>
>>The claim that you can't take a decent image unless you have a a
>>couple grand's worhjt of camera hanging around you neck is a myth
>
>However, the claim that you can't get a decent 10mp image out of a 0.25"
>sensor isn't a myth.

To get a liittle technical, my 8 mp SP350 has a 1/1.8 chip and a pixel
size size of 5 square microns. Dispite their small size its pixels can
capture a suprising 10,000 photoelectrons--I was expecting about half
as many .In comparison an EOS-5 D has a sensor about 35 microns
sq--about 1/2 its pixel geometry is transistors-- and it can capture
about 65000 photoelectrons before it saturates.

My SP350 has a camerra noise floor of about 10 pe- while that of a
typicall EOS-5D is about 5- 7 pe-.

Net result- the SP350 is photon noise limited over 96% of its dynamic
range while a typical EOS-5D is photo noise limited over 99% of its
dynamic range.

Will a full frame 5D pull more detail out of the dark shadows?--of
course it will--but the measured difference in S/N between my camera
and a 5D is only a factor of 2.5 -- exactly what theory says it should
be.

And the SP350 fits it my pants pocket, costs a 1/20th of what a 5D
body and lens would set me back, and has almost all the features I'd
find on far more expensive cameras.

Will all small sensor camera work this well? Of course not; many are
pretty bad. And will all SP350s work this well? Judging by the
research I did before I bought the camera I lucked out and ended up
with a camera with better trhan average S/N.

But to sum it up, if you don't mind the size, weight and expense there
are excellent DSLRs out there, but that doesn't mean there aren't
excellent miniture camera out there too.

jpc

jpc
 >> Stay informed about: 10MP compacts. I am not impressed