Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL

On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 13:59:08 -1000, Scott W <biphoto RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote
in <4730ffd3$0$25135$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>:

>Alan Meyer wrote:
>> On Nov 6, 1:16 pm, Scott W <biph... RemoveThis @hotmail.com> 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.
>
>But the pixels are getting so small that if you try to shoot even at f/8
>you get a soft image from diffraction. trying to get really go
>resolution from such small sensors is not easy, in many ways it is
>easier to get it from a larger lens.

In fact larger lenses can't deliver the performance of smaller lenses
even at much higher cost, size and weight.

In terms of resolution, the Leica super-zoom 36-432 mm (35 mm equiv)
f/2.8-3.1 on the Panasonic DMC-FZ8 actually surpasses the fixed prime
Canon EF 50 mm f/1.4 on the EOS D60, 10D, and 300D, as well as the fixed
prime Nikkor 50 mm f/1.4 on the Nikon D100, and fixed prime Nikkor 50 mm
f/1.8 on the Nikon D50, D70s, and D40:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz8/page16.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS10D/page22.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD100/page20.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page25.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page24.asp

The closest Canon 35 mm lens to the Leica super-zoom is the EF 28-300mm
f/3.5-5.6L IS USM Autofocus lens, which, even at about 10x the cost of
the Leica super-zoom, is well below that level of performance, including
slower speed and shorter zoom range, along with massive size and weight.

>I am not saying that every point and shoot camera should have a sensor
>in the 10-15mm range, but it sure would be nice if a few of them did.
>What the world really does not need right now is yet another 1/2.5 inch
>based camera.

The world actually gets what it needs (wants) -- that's how a free
market works. If the world really needed (wanted) a larger sensor
camera given the larger overall size and weight, and reduced
performance, and if it could be produced at acceptable cost, then the
market would provide it.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

Rich wrote:

> I had a look at the output (at 80 ISO) of a Fuji 9000 super zoom. It
> looked like it had been filtered through textured glass, so inferior
> to a decent DSLR output it wasn't funny.
> I'm only guessing, but I would wager that if some company (whatever
> happened to the Sigma??) put out a fixed lens, or 2-3x zoom P&S with a
> relatively compact body and at least a 4/3rds sensor, for $800 it
> would sell to the DSLR crowd anyway. Olympus produced a 35mm macro
> lens with an f3.5 focal length. If that lens weren't in a macro body,
> it would only occupy about 1/2" x 1/2" of space and would allow for a
> body that would be easily pocketable.

Then people would complain, "if only they had made the lens detachable
and made other lenses available for wide-angle and telephoto," and
demand for add-on lenses and adapters would boom again.

Look what happened with the booming after-market for lenses and adapters
for the high-end point and shoot cameras. When I wanted a wide-angle for
my Canon G series, I had to sort through several choices of tubes and
lenses, as the after-market rushed in to improve on Canon's own
accessory lenses and adapters because demand was so high. When I found
the best combination (Lensmate tube and Olympus A-28 wide angle
converter), I thought I was done, but apparently everyone else had come
to the same conclusion, and the lens was very hard to get as Olympus
never thought that their lens would be used on anything but Olympus
cameras, and it took them a while to ramp up production. Fry's and
Microcenter were both carrying Canon's own lenses and adapters, as at
the time the G series was a huge seller and demand was high. With a
D-SLR there is no need for these funky solutions.

At least Lensmate ("http://www.lensmateonline.com/") would like a
resurgence of high-end point and shoots.
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

John Navas wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:00:00 -0800, Rich <rander3127 DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote
> in <1194393600.521630.263450 DeleteThis @d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:
>
>> On Nov 6, 11:22 pm, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> In article <4730af73$0$19582$4c368...@roadrunner.com>, Scott W
>>> says...
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Aren't DSLRs subsidised by lens sales? Or at least the margins on
>>> body + kit lens should be quite narrow.
>>
>> Yes, accessories are the cash-cows. But plenty of add-on lenses were
>> sold for 3-5x zoomed P&Ss.
>
> Actually not very many in percentage terms, which is why such
> accessories are so hard to find at retail.

They were a pain - much slower to add an accessory lens (typically
screw-on) than to change lenses on a DSLR. The accessory lenses for the
Sony DSC-R1 made it into a monster - much larger and heavier than the
equaivalent DSLR.

David
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

On Nov 7, 4:46 am, "David J Taylor" <david-tay....RemoveThis@blueyonder.not-this-
bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
> John Navas wrote:
> > On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:00:00 -0800, Rich <rander3....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote
> > in <1194393600.521630.263....RemoveThis@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >> On Nov 6, 11:22 pm, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> In article <4730af73$0$19582$4c368...@roadrunner.com>, Scott W
> >>> says...
>
> >>>> 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.
>
> >>> Aren't DSLRs subsidised by lens sales? Or at least the margins on
> >>> body + kit lens should be quite narrow.
>
> >> Yes, accessories are the cash-cows. But plenty of add-on lenses were
> >> sold for 3-5x zoomed P&Ss.
>
> > Actually not very many in percentage terms, which is why such
> > accessories are so hard to find at retail.
>
> They were a pain - much slower to add an accessory lens (typically
> screw-on) than to change lenses on a DSLR. The accessory lenses for the
> Sony DSC-R1 made it into a monster - much larger and heavier than the
> equaivalent DSLR.
>
> David

APS sized sensor. It was a noble effort by Sony.
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

On Nov 7, 4:37 pm, "David J Taylor" <david-tay....RemoveThis@blueyonder.not-this-
bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
> John Navas wrote:
> > On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:46:06 GMT, "David J Taylor"
> []
> >> They were a pain - much slower to add an accessory lens (typically
> >> screw-on) than to change lenses on a DSLR. ...
>
> > Yep. And a pain to lug around, just like SLR lenses.
>
> > I have OEM wide angle and telephoto adapters for my Olympus C-2500L,
> > and they were such a hassle that I finally just stopped using them.
>
> > That's a big part of why I love the huge zoom range of my DMC-FZ8.
> > While it's not as wide at 36 mm (35 mm equiv) as the latest 28 mm wide
> > zooms, it's faster at the tele end, and I can usually get the wide
> > angle I want, often wider than 28 mm (24 mm or even 20 mm), with
> > stitched images.
>
> Well, you can now take the approach of a single-walk round lens with a
> 27 - 300mm zoom range, available from several manufacturers, some
> including IS/VR. So there may not be a need to change lenses anything
> like as often. I weighed by DSLR versus my compact camera outfits, and
> the DSLR was only 3oz (85g) heavier, for a similar focal length range.
>
> I also use stitched images, and find them very effective (I use the
> paid-for AutoPano Pro variant of AutoStitch). I've also just bought a
> Panasonic TZ3 as an ultra-lightweight carry-round camera - that's 28 -
> 280mm.
>
> Cheers,
> David

The ultra compact P&S cameras serve a purpose, to be very portable and
still afford some kind of image, better than a camera phone.
The larger P&Ss also serve a purpose, as a practice target for a
strong 7-iron.
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 05:04:32 -0800, SMS ???• ?
<scharf.steven RemoveThis @geemail.com> wrote in
<4731b77b$0$79916$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>Rich wrote:
>
>> I had a look at the output (at 80 ISO) of a Fuji 9000 super zoom. It
>> looked like it had been filtered through textured glass, so inferior
>> to a decent DSLR output it wasn't funny.
>> I'm only guessing, but I would wager that if some company (whatever
>> happened to the Sigma??) put out a fixed lens, or 2-3x zoom P&S with a
>> relatively compact body and at least a 4/3rds sensor, for $800 it
>> would sell to the DSLR crowd anyway. Olympus produced a 35mm macro
>> lens with an f3.5 focal length. If that lens weren't in a macro body,
>> it would only occupy about 1/2" x 1/2" of space and would allow for a
>> body that would be easily pocketable.
>
>Then people would complain, "if only they had made the lens detachable
>and made other lenses available for wide-angle and telephoto," and
>demand for add-on lenses and adapters would boom again.
>
>Look what happened with the booming after-market for lenses and adapters
>for the high-end point and shoot cameras. ...

The aftermarket is actually pretty small, not "booming" -- the vast
majority of users don't buy such accessories, which is why they are so
hard to find at retail.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

nospam wrote:
>
> the tamron just started shipping a few weeks ago. because it is so
> new, there are no tests of it yet (that i have seen). so, how do you
> know it is 'not even close optically' ? you are just assuming it is
> not that great with zero facts to back it up.

Drop me a line if he ever comes up with performance comparison numbers
for the EF 70-200L f/2.8 IS.


-hh
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:46:06 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor RemoveThis @blueyonder.not-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote in
<yPfYi.43585$c_1.17941@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>:

>John Navas wrote:
>> On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:00:00 -0800, Rich <rander3127 RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote
>> in <1194393600.521630.263450 RemoveThis @d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>:
>>
>>> On Nov 6, 11:22 pm, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo... RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> In article <4730af73$0$19582$4c368...@roadrunner.com>, Scott W
>>>> says...

>>> Yes, accessories are the cash-cows. But plenty of add-on lenses were
>>> sold for 3-5x zoomed P&Ss.
>>
>> Actually not very many in percentage terms, which is why such
>> accessories are so hard to find at retail.
>
>They were a pain - much slower to add an accessory lens (typically
>screw-on) than to change lenses on a DSLR. ...

Yep. And a pain to lug around, just like SLR lenses.

I have OEM wide angle and telephoto adapters for my Olympus C-2500L, and
they were such a hassle that I finally just stopped using them.

That's a big part of why I love the huge zoom range of my DMC-FZ8.
While it's not as wide at 36 mm (35 mm equiv) as the latest 28 mm wide
zooms, it's faster at the tele end, and I can usually get the wide angle
I want, often wider than 28 mm (24 mm or even 20 mm), with stitched
images.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 10:07:50 -0800, Rich <rander3127.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote in
<1194458870.594293.30210.DeleteThis@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>:

>On Nov 7, 4:46 am, "David J Taylor" <david-tay....DeleteThis@blueyonder.not-this-
>bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
>> John Navas wrote:

>> They were a pain - much slower to add an accessory lens (typically
>> screw-on) than to change lenses on a DSLR. The accessory lenses for the
>> Sony DSC-R1 made it into a monster - much larger and heavier than the
>> equaivalent DSLR.

>APS sized sensor. It was a noble effort by Sony.

Depends on what you mean by notable -- the market clearly prefers
smaller size and weight to the minor benefits of larger sensor size.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

On Nov 7, 7:13 pm, dj_nme <dj_... DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> John Navas wrote:
> > On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 05:04:32 -0800, SMS ???· ?
> > <scharf.ste... DeleteThis @geemail.com> wrote in
> > <4731b77b$0$79916$742ec...@news.sonic.net>:
>
> >>Rich wrote:
>
> >>>I had a look at the output (at 80 ISO) of a Fuji 9000 super zoom. It
> >>>looked like it had been filtered through textured glass, so inferior
> >>>to a decent DSLR output it wasn't funny.
> >>>I'm only guessing, but I would wager that if some company (whatever
> >>>happened to the Sigma??) put out a fixed lens, or 2-3x zoom P&S with a
> >>>relatively compact body and at least a 4/3rds sensor, for $800 it
> >>>would sell to the DSLR crowd anyway. Olympus produced a 35mm macro
> >>>lens with an f3.5 focal length. If that lens weren't in a macro body,
> >>>it would only occupy about 1/2" x 1/2" of space and would allow for a
> >>>body that would be easily pocketable.
>
> >>Then people would complain, "if only they had made the lens detachable
> >>and made other lenses available for wide-angle and telephoto," and
> >>demand for add-on lenses and adapters would boom again.
>
> >>Look what happened with the booming after-market for lenses and adapters
> >>for the high-end point and shoot cameras. ...
>
> > The aftermarket is actually pretty small, not "booming" -- the vast
> > majority of users don't buy such accessories, which is why they are so
> > hard to find at retail.
>
> This does echo my experiences with finding wide and tele adapters for
> fixed lens cameras, in my city the camera shops only stock either a
> small selection of them made for video cameras (to small in diameter to
> be adapted) and some pricey ones made specifically for particular evf cams.
> Such as the Olympus adapters made for the E10 and E20 and the adapters
> for the Sony R1, neither of wich could be described as "cheap" compared
> to the retail price of some consumer level zoom (d)slr lenses.

Well, those weren't exactly cruddy 1/2.5" sensored P&Ss, where they?
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

Rich wrote:

>> This does echo my experiences with finding wide and tele adapters for
>> fixed lens cameras, in my city the camera shops only stock either a
>> small selection of them made for video cameras (to small in diameter to
>> be adapted) and some pricey ones made specifically for particular evf cams.
>> Such as the Olympus adapters made for the E10 and E20 and the adapters
>> for the Sony R1, neither of wich could be described as "cheap" compared
>> to the retail price of some consumer level zoom (d)slr lenses.
>
> Well, those weren't exactly cruddy 1/2.5" sensored P&Ss, where they?

There are camera shops and then there are camera shops. There is exactly
one professional camera shop left in my area, Keeble and Shuchat. They
carried even the more esoteric lenses for the high-end P&S cameras, even
the less popular models.

It's true that the lenses for the better P&S cameras are quite
expensive, plus they can be quite a hassle as well, with the need to add
lens tubes, remove pieces of the camers so the lens tube can be mounted,
store those pieces somewhere, and use a case that can hold the camera
with the lens tube attached.

Before everyone that cared about real wide angle, and real telephoto
switched to D-SLRs, the lenses for the top-selling high-end point and
shoot cameras were widely sold, even at big-box stores (not hard as
there were only a few high-end P&S models that sold in enough volume to
make it worthwhile) Now they're a real niche item, since the high-end
point and shoot market has been decimated by D-SLRs.
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

On Nov 7, 6:26 pm, John Navas <spamfilt... RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 14:43:50 -0800, Rich <rander3... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in
> <1194475430.199350.33... RemoveThis @o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com>:
>
>
>
> >On Nov 7, 4:37 pm, "David J Taylor" <david-tay... RemoveThis @blueyonder.not-this-
> >bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
> >> John Navas wrote:
> >> > That's a big part of why I love the huge zoom range of my DMC-FZ8.
> >> > While it's not as wide at 36 mm (35 mm equiv) as the latest 28 mm wide
> >> > zooms, it's faster at the tele end, and I can usually get the wide
> >> > angle I want, often wider than 28 mm (24 mm or even 20 mm), with
> >> > stitched images.
>
> >> Well, you can now take the approach of a single-walk round lens with a
> >> 27 - 300mm zoom range, available from several manufacturers, some
> >> including IS/VR. So there may not be a need to change lenses anything
> >> like as often. I weighed by DSLR versus my compact camera outfits, and
> >> the DSLR was only 3oz (85g) heavier, for a similar focal length range.
>
> >> I also use stitched images, and find them very effective (I use the
> >> paid-for AutoPano Pro variant of AutoStitch). I've also just bought a
> >> Panasonic TZ3 as an ultra-lightweight carry-round camera - that's 28 -
> >> 280mm.
> >The ultra compact P&S cameras serve a purpose, to be very portable and
> >still afford some kind of image, better than a camera phone.
> >The larger P&Ss also serve a purpose, as a practice target for a
> >strong 7-iron.
>
> The compact Panasonic DMC-FZ8 prosumer super-zoom bridge camera is
> objectively better in terms of resolution than comparable DSLRs even
> with fixed focal length prime lenses, much less roughly comparable zoom
> lenses, and produces even better results in many cases due to big
> advantages in terms of size, weight, lens speed, lens quality, handling
> and flexibility.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>

Just to kind of highlight the differences, take this comparison. Now,
the Olympus E-330 is not by DSLR standards low noise, however the P&S
in question is only 4 megapixels on the 1/2.5" sensor. Can you
imagine what kind of noise issues a 8-12 megapixel model would have?
100% crops.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/88615381
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL 

John Navas wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:46:06 GMT, "David J Taylor"
[]
>> They were a pain - much slower to add an accessory lens (typically
>> screw-on) than to change lenses on a DSLR. ...
>
> Yep. And a pain to lug around, just like SLR lenses.
>
> I have OEM wide angle and telephoto adapters for my Olympus C-2500L,
> and they were such a hassle that I finally just stopped using them.
>
> That's a big part of why I love the huge zoom range of my DMC-FZ8.
> While it's not as wide at 36 mm (35 mm equiv) as the latest 28 mm wide
> zooms, it's faster at the tele end, and I can usually get the wide
> angle I want, often wider than 28 mm (24 mm or even 20 mm), with
> stitched images.

Well, you can now take the approach of a single-walk round lens with a
27 - 300mm zoom range, available from several manufacturers, some
including IS/VR. So there may not be a need to change lenses anything
like as often. I weighed by DSLR versus my compact camera outfits, and
the DSLR was only 3oz (85g) heavier, for a similar focal length range.

I also use stitched images, and find them very effective (I use the
paid-for AutoPano Pro variant of AutoStitch). I've also just bought a
Panasonic TZ3 as an ultra-lightweight carry-round camera - that's 28 -
280mm.

Cheers,
David
 >> Stay informed about: Point & shoots, no improvement as long as sensors stay SMALL