Serious Compacts - Photography, News, Discussion, and Reviews of Advanced Compact Cameras

Would you like to see us test the Ricoh GR Digital II?

2008-05-12T11:30:00.006-05:00

I have exchanged several emails with Mai Hayashi of the Ricoh International Sales & Marketing Group), but it is not yet clear whether they will provide a GRD II unit for comparative testing on Serious Compacts.

Ricoh makes some of the finest tools around for photographers who choose to use compacts. We have provided both technical and field reports on the excellent Caplio GX100 in the context of broad coverage of advanced Ricoh compacts.

If you'd like to see the GR Digital II or other Ricoh digital cameras tested on this site, please leave a comment on this post below. I've sent an email asking Ms. Hayashi to look at the comments here as proof of our readers' interest in Ricoh products.

5/14/08 Addendum - Good news! See comments for details, and please keep your comments and suggestions coming!

DP1 Shootout Update - More Compacts Coming...

2008-05-12T10:30:00.008-05:00

In Parts 1-3 of the Shootout, I compared to Sigma DP1 performance to that of the Canon 5D with EF 28mm f/2.8 lens and Olympus E-420 with ZD 14-42mm lens at 14mm. The Fuji F31 was the sole compact competitor in those tests and lived up to its reputation for excellent low light performance.

In the upcoming parts, I will test the Sigma DP1 against the Canon Powershot G9 and Leica D-LUX3.

Looking for a Place to Buy or Sell Compacts?

2008-05-11T18:14:00.007-05:00

I frequently have the urge to buy or sell used compacts, usually to fund other gear purchases. While there are many excellent places to buy, sell, and trade camera gear, most or all of these places have one or more of the following limitations:
• Sellers must pay a fee to list items for sale
• Sellers must pay a transaction fee
• Individuals must register to post an item for sale, or a response to an item for sale
• Site is brand specific
• Site is geared towards DSLRs and DSLR-related lenses, accessories, etc

For this reason, we've started a Serious Compacts Buy and Sell area where individuals can buy, sell, trade, or link to auctions of compact cameras and related accessories. The link to the 'Buy and Sell' board can be found in the top menu bar of this page.

Why Buy/Sell/Trade on the Serious Compacts Buy & Sell Board?
Reason #1: There are no fees.
Reason #2: This board is specifically for compact cameras and accessories for compact cameras.
Reason #3: Registration is not required.
Reason #4: Recent listings on the board will be promoted here on the Serious Compacts blog.

TWIP Photo Contest - 'Doors'

2008-05-11T16:04:00.002-05:00

TWIP Photo has been offering some nice prizes lately. The winner of their new photo contest, 'Doors', will receive an NFR (Not for Resale) copy of Apple's Aperture 2.1 as well as a copy of Adobe Lightroom and an Aperture 2.0 book. The total value of prizes is more than $500. This is a great opportunity to pick up some pricy RAW conversion applications for free. For contest details, go to TWIP Photo and scroll down to the May 9th entry "TWIP’s Photo Assignment Competition #7 - Doors".

An iCamera?

2008-05-08T23:19:00.000-05:00

By Mayank Bhatnagar

An exercise often taught to young designers to break their mind block, or to think "out of the box", is to envision their design problem being solved by masters of design. "How would your creative director do it? How would one of the legendary designers do it?" Just imagining someone solve one's design problem with his/her expertise or style is often enough to fill one's mind with ideas.

Coming to cameras or compacts specifically, one can't help but wonder if the camera manufacturers are currently going through a mind block. The variety and freshness of both form and function that one saw in compacts just a few years ago seems to have dried out (Thom Hogan's article at http://bythom.com/compact.htm illustrates the point beautifully), and most compacts look and feel more or less the same; it's like you've seen one, you've seen them all. Upgrades seem a mere formality. Stereotypically speaking, 2006: More zoom + 1 more megapixel; 2007: face recognition + 1 more megapixel; 2008: wide angle + 1 more megapixel (if you know what I mean :-). Sigma DP1, for now, seems to be an exception.

Coming to the point, do camera manufacturers or designers need to think out of the box today and get out of their mould? I believe yes. And a very simple thing they could do is envision an "iCamera"! If Apple were to make a camera, how would they do it? Knowing that Apple rethinks from scratch every product they make, a few things immediately come to one's mind:

- An extremely simple exterior design, very sturdy yet stylish

- ONLY TWO models to begin with: Say one with 24-120mm and the other with 35-300mm 'manually controlled' and image stabilized zooms with manual focus rings, followed by a camera that kills: a compact with a fixed 500mm f2.8 image stabilized lens :-). All with edge-to-edge sharpness. (Some of this technology exists today) So in all, just 3 models! Yaay!

- 8gb of internal memory + slot for flash memory card, 12gb of internal memory for the 500mm model (This technology already exists)

- RAW (.DNG), JPEG and PNG image image formats (This technology already exists)

- iPod like control wheel driven UI (This technology already exists)

- Large, wide screen, hi-rez touch-screen display with very quick, simple and customizable access to menus, which—together with the control wheel—would provide lightning fast access to controls. (This technology already exists in the iPhone and many other cellphones)

- Large (4/3 perhaps or larger), class-leading sensor technology

- ISO 25-1600, no high ISO noise till 1600 but 'extra' noise could be added through a filter for those fond of "old world high ISO digicam or film look" (This would also reduce dramatically the number of "high ISO noise" arguments on camera forums... just kidding :-)

- 10 megapixel (and not one more)

- SLR style viewfinder (and not EVF) + Live view

- 6 frames per second RAW capture in case of the 500mm model with extra-large memory buffer. 2 frames per second for the other two models. (this technology exists)

- Durable shutter with 100,000 shutter cycle (This technology already exists)

- The camera software would be coupled with Photoshop-like filters, which may include:
a) Automatic correction of lens distortions
b) Polariser
c) Hard and soft neutral density and graduated filters of varying intensity
d) Extra dymamic range, which would stitch two exposures of same shot into a high DR photo
e) Bokeh enhancement

- Lightning fast start-up and response time (This technology already exists in SLRs)

- Class leading battery life, say 600 shots with live view. (This technology already exists)

- A comfortable, rubberized grip. (This technology already exists)

- Weather sealed metal body and built-in lens (This technology already exists in SLRs)

- Built-in speedlight in the two lower models that would work with camera software to yield near-perfect flash photographs.

- Downloadable plugins and even softwares to enhance / add camera features. Developer tools to enable third parties to develop camera plugins. Here, the possibilities could be endless.... Eg: IR effect plugin, soft-focus portrait plugin, macro plugin and so forth

- Sync and updates with iPhoto through USB or Wi-Fi (just like iPod and iTunes)
Price: $999, $1199 for the 500mm model Yes, the above would be "Compact" or "Bridge" cameras. Please don't raise your eyebrows, just trying to think out of the box and into an iCamera! And no, this camera would NOT play music :-).

____________________________________________________________________________________

Mayank Bhatnagar is a New Delhi and Jaipur (India) based Fine Art Photographer, Graphic Designer, and Illustrator.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Featured Comment by Bruce Mcl:

I think the camera business right now is very similar to the cell phone business. There is a herd mentality to the manufacturers. They introduce new features slowly and as a group. Each company is allowed to have a little edge in one area of performance. Nobody would dare make a camera that is all around better then competitors, that would break the gentleman's agreement.

Apple would take a hard look at two things: form and purpose.

Purpose: What is digital photography supposed to do? What is being done well, what is being done badly, and what is not being done at all? Certainly keeping track of photos is not being done well. Apple would have built-in GPS and wireless. The camera would be continually uploading photos to a server that organizes and cross references the images by date and location. The charging dock would have faster connections available, and perhaps have a hard disk built into it for photo storage. Think of a Time Capsule that's photography oriented and Internet capable.

The photo sharing web site and the photo editing and organizing software would be a big part of the Apple camera experience. Imagine a very tightly coupled Photoshop Elements and Photoshop Express, with tightly coupled Lightroom as the Pro option.

The form factor would be unique. The sensor and LCD would be horizontal at the top of the camera, which means a mirror or prism is involved. It would be held like a pair of binoculars, with very good gripping for both hands. To take a photo you would peer through the EVF. Optionallly you could hold at waist level and look through the LCD. I think high grade white plastic would be used for the case.

One thing the camera would do well is photograph people indoors. A dual direct and bounce flash would be involved. Apple would find a way to make the flash give a lower color temperature than the typical blue tungsten flash so that the flash lighting would match the existing interior lighting, instead of clashing with at like every other camera in the world.

As far as lens size goes, I think 30-300 would just about do it. I like a wider angle but let's face it, if you don't know what you are doing, wide angle photos can look goofy. Apple will not make a camera that makes the user look like a poor photographer. And even with IS, you are going to get a lot of blurry photos at greater than 300 mm. Unless you have a 50 pound lens of course.

Obviously Apple would include very good video capability, but I don't think that was part of the question so I won't go there.

'Natural Textures' Photo Contest Winners

2008-05-08T19:44:00.003-05:00

Since starting less than two months ago, our Flickr community has quickly flourished and now includes contributions from 170 talented photographers. If you're interested in seeing quality photography done with compacts, our pool is a great place to start.

The theme of our first contest was "Natural Textures", and we were fortunate to receive 21 fantastic entries. The voting period is over, and I am happy to announce the winners.

1st Place - "Stacked Lumber" by ndalum78 (27 votes):

2nd Place - "Red Tulips" by fxgeek (22 votes):

3rd Place - "Tree outside Central Library, Hull" by Hiding Pup (12 votes):

4th Place - "Prevailing Wind" by Wouter Brandsma (10 votes):

5th Place - "Crepe" by pbrouss84 (9 votes):

Thanks to all who submitted photos and/or voted, and congratulations to the contest winners!

Canon Powershot G10 at Photokina? CMOS?

2008-05-07T15:09:00.005-05:00

Mayank Bhatnagar started a thread in our discussion area regarding Canon's plans to use new CMOS sensors in compact cameras. As some may recall, this news was announced last summer. Rumors are circulating that we will see the first Canon compacts with larger sensors in time for Photokina in September of this year. While we've yet to see any good evidence for these rumors, Gordon Buck has posted evidence at Light Description that we will at least see a new G-series Powershot this year. Could the G10 feature a CMOS sensor, somewhat larger than the sensors found in the G-series to date? Or, as some rumors have suggested, could we see two advanced compacts from Canon at Photokina - one a G9 replacement, the other incorporating a larger (?CMOS) sensor?

It is likely that Panasonic, Canon, and Ricoh will introduce replacements for the LX2, G9, and GX100, respectively, in time for Photokina. We have reason to believe that both Canon and Panasonic are working to implement larger sensor designs in compacts, though we don't know when these compacts will be available, nor do we know whether they will supplement or replace existing lines. If anyone has more information, let us know!

Petteri Sulonen's Sigma DP1 Impressions Now Online

2008-05-04T15:01:00.005-05:00

I always enjoy reading camera and lens evaluations by Petteri Sulonen and have been waiting for this one since he first mentioned an interest in the DP1. Petteri has now posted his impressions, "A Diamond In The Rough: Sigma DP1". Having read every piece I could find online about the DP1, in English or otherwise, I've come across none more worthwhile than his writeup. If you're interested in reading more about the Sigma DP1, my advice is to start here.
(Thanks to Yerg)

Imaging Resource and Shutterbug Sigma DP1 Reviews

2008-05-02T08:30:00.003-05:00

Shawn Barnett has posted his Sigma DP1 review over at the Imaging Resource. This is the first review from one of the major online review sites. Shutterbug has also published their review.

New Hall of Fame Inductee - Canon A610/620

2008-05-01T12:48:00.005-05:00

Serious Compacts Flickr group member eikona has added an entry to our reader generated Hall of Fame, the Canon A610/620. Check out his post here. Thanks MB!

Click here to learn how to add one of your own favorites to our Hall of Fame.

'Natural Textures' Photo Contest Now Open for Voting

2008-05-01T09:39:00.015-05:00

Our first photo contest is now closed to submissions and open for voting. Thanks to all who submitted an entry!
Please take a few minutes to review some of the wonderful submissions and cast your vote.
The photos are shown below the poll, and voting will end after 7 days.

Which photo(s) do you like? Pick up to three selections: ( surveys)

Most of the images below have resized by Flickr and therefore may have more sharpening than intended by the photographer. Clicking on them will take you to the Flickr page, which in many cases will contain larger versions as well as commentary. Order of photos is as determined by Flickr.

"Ants Out for a Walk" by JD Hodges:

"Heil Banker" by slowbicycler:

Untitled photo by Photon-hunter:

"Something is falling from the tree" by Damiel:

"Red Tulips" by fxgeek:

"waiting" by -fs-:

"Tree outside Central Library, Hull" by Hiding Pup:

"Cables" by cliffordsax:

"Blue Flowers" by Ulf Bodin:

"Deer track" by RJY:

"flavors..." by f lynx:

"Prevailing Wind" by wrtb28mm:

"Crepe" by pbrouss84:

"Sealilly" by Skippy1958:

"Rock & Shells Weston Beach" by tom911r7:

"Stacked Lumber" by ndalum78:

Untitled photo by Kamerat:

"Wood Ring" by britton42x:

"Sand Pile" by jjvornov:

"lichen" by meaning of light:

Untitled photo by cristian.soreaga:

Sigma DP1 and Olympus E3 with 12-60mm Lens Compared in the ClubSNAP Forums

2008-04-30T16:35:00.006-05:00

Tomcat has posted an interesting comparison between the Sigma DP1 and Olympus E3 in the ClubSNAP forums. Whereas I chose the E-420 and inexpensive 14-42mm kit lens for the sake of using the most compact gear for each format in our shootout, Tomcat chose to go with Olympus flagship E3 and the high end ZD 12-60mm f/2.8-4 zoom, which some of you may recall was "Lens of the Year" according to The Online Photographer this past January.

His comparison can be found here.

Addendum - My take on those crops is that some of the difference in apparent detail comes from the DP1 image being slightly oversharpened (even at the default setting) and the E3 file being undersharpened. I'm also wondering whether the Olympus lens has a touch of decentering, as the bottom left crop (#2) looks a bit worse than the bottom right (#4). Despite these issues, it seems clear that the Sigma is showing more detail in the corner and edge, with remarkably even performance across the frame for a wide open lens. The 12-60 likely needs to be stopped down a bit more to compete with the DP1 lens performance in the periphery.

Somebody Call Fujifilm

2008-04-29T20:33:00.009-05:00

Call them, and tell them what they have.

Have you seen the beatdown the Fuji S100fs handed the Canon G9 in this DPReview comparison? Sure the Fuji had a disappointing showing on low contrast detail, and no, those tests didn't use files converted from RAW. Quibbles aside, the S100fs walked all over the G9 from ISO 400 and up.

Unfortunately for Fuji, the market for large, heavy, expensive DSLR-like cameras seems to be shrinking as lower end DSLRs continue to fall in price. I personally have no interest in a such a megazoom camera, though I admire the folks at Fuji for continuing to bring out unique products. Certainly there are those who have been waiting for just such a camera, and I don't doubt that it will sell in its niche.

From where I stand, however, all Fuji has to do is get that S100fs sensor into a compact. If Sigma can get an APS-C (1.7x) sensor in a compact with a prime, then Fuji can get their eighth generation, Super CCD HR 2/3" sensor (less than 1/4th the size of the Sigma sensor) in a compact with a good 3-5x zoom lens. They could keep the F100fd as their ultracompact and incorporate the sensor from the S100fs into a midsized camera. It would be the acclaimed return of the Fuji E-series. A version with a 10mm (38mm equivalent) f/1.8 lens would be unreal. They could call it the Klasse D, and it could look just like this.

If anyone at Fujifilm is reading this, please do the right thing.

Two Days Left to Enter Our Photo Contest

2008-04-29T09:57:00.004-05:00

Today and tomorrow only. More participation will bring additional contests, sponsors, and better prizes. Contests are fun, so come contribute a photo! Click here for contest details.

Eliminating Lag with Digital Compacts

2008-04-29T07:19:00.010-05:00

I was re-reading the excellent Sigma DP1 review by Edward Taylor on TOP and paused at the following statement:

"First let me make it clear that the DP1 is not and never could be what is referred to on TOP as a DMD (Decisive Moment Camera). Why? Because it is slow. That is one of the main reasons I called it a 'blast from the past.' It suffers from shutter lag, slow focusing, LCD screen lock, and slow write speeds like I haven’t seen in years."

As I'm sure Mr. Taylor and most of you reading this article know, shutter lag per se is no longer a major factor with digital cameras. The term "shutter lag" is commonly used to refer to the time that it takes a person to capture an image after attempting to do so. In this sense, shutter lag can be broken down into the following components:

1) Autofocus lag: The time it takes the camera to achieve focus. Generally on the order of 0.2 - 2 seconds. A major determinant of "overall lag."
2) Metering lag: The time it takes the camera to measure lighting conditions, calculate, and set aperture, shutter speed, and/or ISO. Brief but significant in relation to shutter lag.
3) LCD lag: The time it takes the LCD to reflect what is occurring in the scene. Again, brief but significant in relation to shutter lag.
4) Finger lag: The time it takes one's finger to move after deciding to make an image. Varies from short (but still significant) to really, really long depending on the photographer's reflexes and decisiveness.
5) Shutter lag: The time it takes the camera to register a capture after accounting for 1-4 above.

The good news is that, with most current cameras, nearly all of these components of lag can be eliminated.

Eliminating autofocus lag: The key here is to set the focus in advance, so that the time it takes to achieve focus lock does not interfere with capturing "the moment." This can be done in a variety of ways. The most common approach is the half press, which will achieve the focus and lock it until either the capture has occurred or the shutter button is released. This method has a few downsides: 1) it may require keeping the button half pressed for quite a long time; 2) on most cameras, this will also lock in exposure settings, which may differ from those optimal for the capture; 3) one frequently does not have sufficient time to achieve a half press focus lock when the moment presents itself; and 4) the DP1 LCD inexplicably freezes briefly at the moment of the half press.

Given these limitations, it is often necessary to use a different method. Many advanced compacts offer the ability to assign autofocus lock to a custom button. In the case of the DP1, this function can be assigned to the "AEL" button. The advantage of this method is that it avoids first two downsides above, needing to hold the half press for a long time and linking the focus point to the metering mechanism. The disadvantages are the same as 3 & 4 above.

How to get around all of these issues? Focus manually. Zone focusing has long been a method employed by photographers, and never has it been easier than with today's advanced compacts. With a typical compact camera used at the wide end of the zoom, manually focusing to about 3 meters will keep just about everything beyond 1.5m in focus. If you shoot wide and know that your subject will be in very close range, then simply set the focus to 1 or 2m. Experiment! DOF Master is an excellent online resource to help guide experimentation with a particular camera; however, it takes only brief trial and error to learn which manual focus settings to use for a certain application with any given compact digital camera. With zone focusing, the major component of lag is gone.

Eliminating metering lag: Metering lag can be dealt with in the same three ways as autofocus lag, with the same advantages and weaknesses in each case. A half press will lock in exposure settings but will tie this to focus and requires holding the button, sometimes for long periods. Metering can frequently be controlled with a separate, sometimes customizable button; however, there will still be a lag if one leaves the task of metering until "the moment". Again, the ultimate solution is to control the exposure settings manually. This takes a bit more getting used to than does setting the focus manually, but one can use the settings chosen by the camera as a guide. Many cameras (regrettably not the DP1) offer a live histogram, which is an excellent aid in choosing exposure settings.

Eliminating LCD lag: The key here is to keep at least one eye directly on the subject. The most direct way to accomplish this is through the use of a built-in or accessory optical viewfinder. However, when an optical viewfinder is not available or not preferred, it is still possible to keep an eye directly on the scene while glancing occasionally at the LCD screen to establish framing. This is a trick I employ all the time when using compacts to photograph my young children. With three and five year old boys, every bit of lag counts. I often found that I could not capture a fleeting smile while looking at the LCD. With my eyes directly on the child after framing is established, the hit rate is quite a bit higher. The other advantage of this method is that the subject is nearly always more engaged and natural with the photographer making direct eye contact.

Eliminating finger lag: I have no advice here. However, the use of digital has done much to help counteract hesistant finger syndrome. We no longer worry whether the picture we are making is worth the price of the film, development, and print.

That's it. All we are left with is shutter lag, which is generally an insignificant period of time. Of course there is also the matter of having the camera out of the case, on, and with the lens extended (where applicable); these are outside the realm of what anyone considers with regards to "shutter lag" but no less critical for getting the shot.

Here is an example from this past weekend where I put the aforementioned techniques to practice. I was walking in Washington, DC with my family. The sun was shining, and I had the DP1 set to manually focus at 2m with exposure settings locked at f/8, 1/160s, and ISO 100. After seeing a Segway tour approaching, I called over my little sons to take a look. This got the attention of a woman riding, and she smiled at me. Seeing an opportunity, I raised the DP1 to establish framing. At this point, recognizing that I had called over the kids and was about to take her photo, she began to laugh. I think she felt a bit silly on that Segway. Having established rough framing on the LCD, my eyes were directly on her. Making the capture at the instant she started laughing was no problem.

While finger lag (more accurately, brain lag) remains a significant problem for me, I frankly can't remember the last time shutter lag kept me from getting the shot. Of course I would have been out of luck if the next photo opportunity had presented itself during the 4-5 odd seconds the DP1 pauses to consider between shots. Luckily or unluckily, decisive moments never seem to come that quickly in succession for me.

Examples of DP1 Exposure Latitude

2008-04-28T20:26:00.009-05:00

Regions of DP1 images which have been significantly overexposed or underexposed are often recoverable using Sigma Photo Pro. I'll give a couple real world examples of this remarkable exposure latitude.

I was at a friend's wedding yesterday. We were in the dark hall of a castle, waiting to toast the bride and groom. Thinking I had set my DP1 for ISO 800, I dialed in f/4 and a shutter speed of 1/10th of a second, which is about as long as I can hold the DP1 steady. Even if I had set the ISO as planned, the resulting photo would have been at least a stop underexposed. Unfortunately, I had left the camera at ISO 100. Here is the resulting image, straight out of SPP with no manipulation other than resizing:

(Click image for intended viewing size)
With any other compact digital camera I have owned in the past, that file would have been a complete loss. After pushing the X3F exposure maximally, processing using the SPP monotone conversion, adjusting levels/curves in Photoshop, and resizing, here's what I got:

(Click image for intended viewing size)

With the DP1, I was able to pull enough out of the shadows to preserve the memory of the occasion.

So that's the shadow latitude, what about the highlights? In Part 2 of the DP1 Shootout, I gave a sample of the DP1 highlight retention at ISO 100. However, the highlight recovery at higher ISOs can at times be shocking. Here's one example from Satuday afternoon at the National Museum of Natural History in Washington, DC. Shot at ISO 800, f/4, 1/10s. Original image with no manipulation other than resizing:

(Click image for intended viewing size)
After processing in SPP:

(Click image for intended viewing size)
I suspect that the DP1 is using an "underexpose and push" method, similar to Canon's Highlight Tone Priority, to achieve high ISOs. No other reason comes to mind for why the high ISO files show far greater highlight recovery potential than do the ISO 100 images. Whatever the explanation, the DP1, as compared with either the Canon 5D or Olympus E-420, seems both less prone to blow highlights at high ISO and more able to recover them. The downside is that the DP1 shadow recovery is somewhat compromised at high ISO. It's a tradeoff I'm happy to accept, with results that are generally more "film-like" than I am used to seeing from digital cameras.

2008-04-28T19:51:00.001-05:00

Sigma DP1 High ISO Color Shift Discussion by Ian Bogost

2008-04-28T18:44:00.000-05:00

If you have already seen Part 4 of the DP1 Shootout on this site, have a look at Ian Bogost's interesting article on the color shift affecting high ISO DP1 images.
(Thanks to Serhan Celik for the link)

DP1 Shootout Pt. 4b - High ISO Performance in Mixed Low Light

2008-04-26T22:50:00.012-05:00

In Part 4a of the shootout, I presented photos taken in low, incandescent lighting, a sort of "worst case" scenario for the DP1. In this next example, the samples were shot in a mixture of natural and incandescent light. The technical details for this set are otherwise the same as those in Part 4a with one exception. I forgot to move the tripod for the F31 shots, so the F31 crops in this comparison represent a different field of view corresponding to the difference in angle of view (35mm equivalent vs 28mm equivalent) at a given perspective.

Here is the overall test scene with the specific regions examined identified in the yellow boxes:

ISO 400 Crop 1:

ISO 400 Crop 2:

ISO 400 Crop 3:

ISO 400 Crop 4:

ISO 800 Crop 1:

ISO 800 Crop 2:

ISO 800 Crop 3:

ISO 800 Crop 4:

ISO 1600 Crop 1:

ISO 1600 Crop 2:

ISO 1600 Crop 3:

ISO 1600 Crop 4:

As was the case in Part 4a, color fidelity is a problem for the DP1 in this low light comparison, and the problem grows worse with each increase in ISO. However, looking at Part 4a, you can see that the problem was more severe when incandescent light was the sole source of illumination. For example, the shift and desaturation in the brick region shown in Part 4a was already severe in the DP1 ISO 400 image, whereas the similarly colored red curtain in this comparison is better preserved. With a good source of natural light and willingness to postprocess, better results than those shown here are possible. However, a simple boost in saturation will not solve the color problems that affect high ISO, low light DP1 images.

Addendum: After reviewing the RAW images a few more times, I decided on a different custom white balance for the DP1 images to best match the colors of the other cameras. It's a tricky call because matching colors from some regions of the image will throw off the match in others. Having arrived at a better overall white balance choice, I have now replaced the DP1 crops in the comparisons above. As always, feel free to play with the RAW files.

Thanks again to Serhan for lending me the Fuji F31 used in this test. Part 5 of the shootout will be coming soon.

DP1 Shootout Pt. 4a - High ISO Performance in Low, Incandescent Light

2008-04-25T02:53:00.003-05:00

The technology behind the Foveon sensor at the heart of the DP1 has been well covered elsewhere. One interesting aspect of the three-layered Foveon design is that the quality of color representation in low light is partially dependent on the spectrum of light available. For example, low light provided by natural light (i.e., sunlight through a window) will typically produce better colors than will a similar level of light coming from an incandescent source. I decided to do this first high ISO comparison as a sort of "worst case" demonstration. Here I will show crops from the Sigma DP1, Fujifilm F31, Canon 5D with 28mm f/2.8, and Olympus E-420 with 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 lens. The photo compared was taken in low light, indoors, with an incandescent light source.

The competitors:

The Sigma was shot at f/5.6, Fuji at f/4, Canon at f/11, and Olympus at f/5.6. Shutter speeds were manually determined to match exposures. For detailed EXIF information, please consult the files available for download at the end of this post. A sturdy tripod was used in all cases. The subject distance was altered for the F31 shot in order to keep the field of view consistent.

An important thing to note is that the crops are grouped by ISO, which may not be relevant to actual practice. For example, the Fuji F31 has a one stop advantage in maximal lens speed compared with the DP1 (f/2.8 vs f/4). Therefore, one might compare the ISO 800 F31 crops with the ISO 1600 equivalent (ISO 800 pushed one stop) DP1 crops. Likewise, the Canon lens has a one stop advantage over the DP1; thus one might want to compared the ISO 400 DP1 crop to an ISO 200 5D crop. However, using the Canon lens at f/2.8 will result in a more shallow DOF than will using the DP1 at f/4. Therefore one might choose to shoot the Canon at f/6.3-7.1 for acceptable DOF in a situation where f/4 would do with the DP1. In such a case, the more relevant comparison would be DP1 ISO 400 to Canon ISO 1000 or 1250. I will simply present the crops according to ISO and leave it to you to decide which ones should be compared.

All images were resized using Photoshop Bicubic Sharper to match the diagonal pixel dimension of the native DP1 files. Therefore, the DP1 crops are at 100% of the original, and the 5D/E-420/F31 crops have been downsized as needed. All were shot RAW and processed using the settings specified in the introduction. The exception was the Fuji, which does not offer RAW. Although I custom white balanced all cameras at the time of use, all required further adjustment during RAW conversion to get a closer white balance match. I also applied a 25% cooling filter in Photoshop.

Here is the overall test scene with the specific regions examined identified in the yellow boxes:

ISO 400 Crop 1:

ISO 400 Crop 2:

ISO 400 Crop 3:

ISO 400 Crop 4:

ISO 800 Crop 1:

ISO 800 Crop 2:

ISO 800 Crop 3:

ISO 800 Crop 4:

ISO 1600 Crop 1:

ISO 1600 Crop 2:

ISO 1600 Crop 3:

ISO 1600 Crop 4:

I think these crops speak for themselves. With this quantity and spectrum of lighting, the DP1 high ISO color fidelity is poor. Boosting saturation in SPP (not shown) can help restore some punch, but it does not restore color accuracy. Nor does the use of custom WB use at the time of the shot help in any way that I could discern. On the positive side, high ISO DP1 files are clean, so black and white conversions can produce high quality results. The degree to which they are noise free raises the question as to whether SPP is applying some mandatory noise reduction. I look forward to trying 3rd party RAW processing applications as they become available and hope to read some analysis of the RAW files by those with expertise in that area.

What about the little Fuji? I think it can stand proud after this comparison. Sure there's some mandatory noise reduction going on with the F31, and yes it shows the least usable detail in this group. In my opinion, the good color fidelity of the F31 translates to better overall image quality than the Sigma DP1 for color, high ISO, small prints in this type of lighting. Especially so considering the one stop advantage of the Fuji lens (f/2.8 vs f/4), i.e. comparing F31 ISO 400 vs DP1 ISO 800 or F31 ISO 800 vs DP1 ISO 1600 (equivalent).

I realize that this comparison gives a somewhat different impression than the preliminary one I shared in the discussion area. Comments and suggestions are, as always, appreciated.

Special thanks to Serhan for lending me the Fuji F31 used in this test. In Part 4b of the shootout, I'll show the results from a similar comparison conducted in mixed low light.

DP1 Shootout Pt. 3s - Landscape Detail Comparison Supplement

2008-04-24T13:38:00.012-05:00

One of the emails I received after publishing Part 3 of the shootout suggested that I would achieve better results using Genuine Fractals rather than Photoshop Bicubic Smoother to upscale DP1 files. Therefore, I have decided to use this method in presenting some additional samples of landscape detail obtained with the Sigma DP1, Canon 5D, and Olympus E-420.

I've been using Genuine Fractals for a couple months now and really like it. Genuine Fractals does an excellent job of preserving detail while limiting aliasing effects. Below is a comparison of three different methods used to upsize a Sigma SD14 (same sensor as DP1) portrait taken by Carl Rytterfalk and shared at his excellent website, www.rytterfalk.com. Click the image for the intended viewing size:

Although Blow Up shows the least aliasing artifacts in the facial hair, there are visible artifacts in a diagonal pattern visible throughout the skin, made more apparent with subsequent sharpening. Genuine Fractals also creates occasional artifacts when upscaling, some of which are more obvious than others. However, the main reason I didn't use Genuine Fractals in Part 3 is that most people will use the tools built into Photoshop to upscale if they are going to upscale at all.

For this supplemental comparison, I used Genuine Fractals 5 as suggested. The technical details regarding the camera settings and processing choices are otherwise unchanged from what I wrote here. Once again I used the Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 lens on the 5D and the Olympus ZD 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 lens on the E-420. Before showing the samples, I'll just repeat two things for emphasis: 1) Processing choices were subjective, and the impression of detail can be changed by sharpening one file more than another. Therefore, consider processing the files yourself from the RAW files available at the end of this post. 2) These samples reflect both the camera and the lens used. The advantage of one camera over the other, from a detail standpoint, can be reversed with alternative lens choices.

The DP1 and E-420 samples shown below represent 100% crops of images that have been upsized to match the native 5D output size (12MP).
The specific area of examination is depicted by the yellow box in the resized photo preceding each set of crops.

An odd vertical line is visible in the middle crop above. I'm assuming that this was introduced by GF, but I am not certain.

All three crops showing some aliasing effects above, the Olympus less so than the other two.

Overall, my conclusions from this comparison are no different than those in Part 3.

In Part 4, we'll take a look at the low light, high ISO performance of the same three cameras in addition to the current compact camera high ISO champ, the Fuji F31.

DP1 Shootout Pt. 3 - Landscape Detail Comparison with 5D and E-420

2008-04-22T21:03:00.022-05:00

In this part of the shootout, the ability of the DP1 to capture detail across the frame will be compared to that of the Canon 5D with EF 28mm f/2.8 lens and Olympus E-420 with ZD 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6. The particular lenses used here were chosen because they represent the most compact possible choices at the 28mm equivalent field of view for their respective systems. The results here may not be generalizable to the use of other lenses with these cameras. I recommend checking the lens evaluations at SLR Gear to see how the lenses used in this comparison perform compared to the larger and more expensive Canon and Olympus offerings.

Unfortunately, the absence of widespread support for the E-420 and DP1 RAW files necessitates the use of a different RAW converter for each of the three cameras in this comparison. Olympus Master and Sigma Photo Pro (SPP) are the only applications to support the E-420 and DP1 RAW files, respectively. I chose to use Phase One Capture One (C1) for the 5D file since this application does an excellent job of extracting detail from 5D RAW files. Ideally I would have liked to have used the same RAW conversion application for each of the three cameras.

The role of the AA filter, also called an optical low pass filter or blur filter, is worth mentioning here. The AA filter serves to blur high frequency information, reducing the occurrence of aliasing effects. The tradeoff for reduced aliasing is that the AA filter also reduces detail captured. Some of the perceived detail lost due to the AA filter can be made apparent again through the use of sharpening. Based on the published information, available test results, and my own experience, I believe that the 5D has a weak AA filter and the E-420 has a strong one. Thus the 5D requires just a bit of sharpening to regain the apparent sharpness lost to the AA filter, whereas the E-420 files require significantly more. Meanwhile, the DP1 lacks an AA filter altogether.

Some may feel that the "fairest" way to do this comparison is to leave the files as they come out of the RAW processor. I feel that this is suboptimal for two reasons. First, there is no reason to think that the three different RAW converters, at their respective default settings, are doing similar amounts of sharpening. Second, to sharpen all three files to the same extent handicaps the E-420 in particular since more sharpening is needed to get the best results out of that camera.

If you are interested in seeing them, the JPEG files prior to resizing can be downloaded below.

As is customary, the images were resized for comparison at the same output size. In this case, I chose to use Photoshop Bicubic Smoother to upscale the DP1 and E-420 files to the same diagonal pixel dimensions as the native 5D file, which was left as is. The choice of upscaling method was based primarily on the prevalence of Photoshop compared to the alternatives such as Genuine Fractals and Qimage. The processing choices made during RAW conversion, sharpening, and resizing were entirely subjective. I attempted to process each of the three files to a similar effect, maximizing apparent detail at the expense of slight oversharpening at the 100% view. The RAW files are available for download towards the end of this post for others to process according to their own preferences.

The 5D image was taken at 1/100s, f/11. The E-420 and DP1 were at 1/400s, f/5.6. All were at ISO 100. After taking ten captures with each camera using self timer and mirror lockup (where appropriate) on a sturdy tripod, the sharpest capture was chosen. SPP settings were at "0" except for highlights at "0.6" and X3 Fill Light at "0.2". Master settings were all at "0" with noise filter disabled and gradation at "Normal." C1 settings were "Standard Look" sharpening, Noise suppresion "Low", Color noise suppression "default".

The DP1 and E-420 samples shown below represent 100% crops of images that have been upsized to match the native 5D output size (12MP).
The specific area of examination is depicted by the yellow box in the resized photo preceding each set of crops.

Overall, the 5D and 28mm f/2.8 combination is capturing the most detail throughout the frame with the exception of the extreme corner. The DP1 seems to do a good job of keeping up with the E-420 and 14-42mm kit lens combination, though the Olympus seems to have the overall edge in detail. I think it's worth pointing out that the 5D and DP1 are cleaner overall than the E-420. The extra sharpening needed to overcome the strong E-420 AA filter is accentuating the noise in those files.

In the next part of the shootout, we'll take a look at the low light, high ISO performance of the same three cameras in addition to the current compact camera high ISO champ, the Fuji F31.

Serious Compacts Hall of Fame

2008-04-21T09:58:00.009-05:00

The cameras listed alphabetically below have been inducted into our reader generated Serious Compacts Hall of Fame. Click on a name to read the entry written by that individual.

Canon A610/620 - eikona
Sony DSC-V3 - sonomichele

Click here to learn how to add one of your own favorites to our Hall of Fame.

Digital Outback Photo DP1 Review Started

2008-04-20T17:16:00.001-05:00

DOP has begun their ongoing report on the Sigma DP1. You can find it here.