A thoughtful analysis as usual, Moose. A few days ago Mike Johnston
proposed a design for a perfect pocket digicam. It was OK as far as
it went, but while he is an entertaining writer no one will accuse
him of being rigorous. Feature 2 and Feature 6 are two aspects of the
same issue. It is quoted here:
Feature 1: True shirt-pocket size
Reason: Many serious photogs who use p/s cameras do so because
they're portable and painless to pack.
Feature 2: No more than 8 megapixels—6 would be better
Reason: Where too-tiny sensors are concerned, more pixels mean lower
image quality, past a certain point.
Feature 3: RAW capability
Reason: Using a RAW converter is the best way to extract more image
quality out of any given sensor, and eliminates the worry and fuss of
setting white balance while shooting.
Feature 4: Waterproof, shockproof, and freeze-proof
Reason: A take-anywhere camera should be able to be taken anywhere.
Feature 5: A zoom lens of no more than 3X, 28–85mm equivalent, ƒ/2.8
or faster on the short end.
Reason: Greater magnification zooms compromise on image quality, and
are slower. Most photographers can do anything that needs doing with
these focal lengths.
Feature 6: Reasonably noise-free to ISO 400.
Reason: I know, it's asking a lot of a small sensor. Still, Fuji
manages.
Feature 7: An articulated LCD
Reason: Many tinycam users use the LCD as a viewfinder.
Feature 8: An optical viewfinder
Reason: Many tinycam users prefer not to use the LCD as a viewfinder.
Feature 9: Anti-Shake/Image Stabilization/Whatever Yawanna Callit
Reason: It's a very useful feature, especially in low light and with
tiny cameras that are hard to hold. (I'm still impressed with this
technology.)
Feature 10: Must be fast, responsive, and very quiet, with excellent
shutter lag and shutter release feel.
Reason: Because this is a criterion that should be met by any camera
that is meant to take pictures with.
I would add that it must have some way to check the exposure and
control it, especially since many of these small cameras have a very
limited dynamic range. Ergonomics and ease of use are a definite
factor as well. Both are more important than an articulated LCD, nice
as it is. I think his list of desired attributes explains his earlier
article condemning this type of camera. While the F30 has an
outstanding image I find it to be a distinctly limited camera
especially in light of this list while more capable cameras, as
usable cameras, are saddled with about two useful low ISOs, base and
the next one up.
I wonder why Fuji has not turned their sensor into a product. Seems
like they could take a big bite out of the Sony, Kodak and Panasonic
sensor sales. It would give Fuji for cash for R&D as well as profit
and certainly it would stimulate sensor development by the competition.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On May 20, 2007, at 3:23 PM, Moose wrote:
> My personal conclusion for the moment is that the F30 is a better
> overall bet than any of the 3-4x competition for both IQ and
> ergonomics
> and the ability to minimize subject movement blur. With my desire for
> longer reach, I'm trying out a Canyon A710 IS. I've been too busy/lazy
> to do any direct comparison testing, but I've seen enough to feel the
> question is a serious one worth further consideration.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|