Choosing a camera – small, light weight, good low-light performance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by facts_please

A compact camera in APS-C format is not possible...

---

Apparently no one told Sigma, or all the manufacturers that made compact APS film cameras.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by facts_please

Colin S mentioned previously that most of his landscape shots were taken at between F/11 and F/22. Those seemed like high F/numbers to me at the time, but on reflection they are probably obtained with his 35mm format DLSR?

---

Correct (I'd suggest that it's probably what 95% of professional landscape shooters use). I only ever use a compact for photographing computer screens - documents etc - all low-quality stuff.

F11 - F22 is where the DoF kicks in - plus - it's usually desireable to have long exposures so this helps (although they're often augmented by a 2 to 8 stop variable ND filter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by facts_please
A compact camera in APS-C format is not possible...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Peach

Apparently no one told Sigma, or all the manufacturers that made compact APS film cameras.

---

Sorry for my sloppy wording. What I meant, and should have more precisely written, was :-

A compact digital camera in APS-C format, that gives equivalent image noise performance to an APS-C format SLR, is not possible.

Obviously, I am also assuming that the same type of sensor is used in both cases.

Which brings up the very intereresting subject of the Sigma DP1, which is a compact camera using a large sensor, similar in size to APS-C. Purely by coincidence, I read a review of that camera just 2 hours ago, where the reviewer was terribly disappointed that the DP1 did not live up to the promise of low noise performance similar to an APS-C SLR. Fortunately we know why, and so this comes as no surprise to us.

Two main reasons. Firstly, it is a fixed focal length 'prime' lens, rather that the zoom lenses found on nearly all consumer DLSRs. If Sigma had put a zoom lens of the same f/number on the camera, the lens would have been MUCH bigger, and it would no longer be nearly so compact.

The second reason, is that the lens has a pathetic speed of only f/4, something which again puzzled the reviewer. To keep the camera and lens 'compact' with a large sensor, they had no choice but to limit lens speed to f/4. Of course, they could have built that prime lens to be F/1.4, but then it would be the same rather large size lens that you find on an SLR, and the DP1 would no longer be a compact camera .......

In a nutshell, the DP1 has poor low light performance relative to an equivalent APS-C SLR, because the lens is physically small, and thus cannot collect much light. As I said in my original posting on this site, the size of the sensor does not inherently have anthing to do with it - it is the size of the lens that matters, and the DP1 is a superb example to illustrate the point.

Ooops, I wandered off the thread again.

Colin,

If you're still looking for feedback, you might find the following interesting ...

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

You can study specs all day, but eventually you need to see, feel and use the cameras in the real world. Thus I spent most of today in a camera shops, with the DMC-G1, E-420, E-520 and G10 all sitting side-by-side on the counter, with a most patient sales assistant allowing me to play with them all. The first to be crossed of the list was the DMC-G1. Sure, it was the smallest of the SLR style cameras, but not really any lighter. I didn’t find it particularly comfortable to hold and use, though doubtless would get used to it. However, when swapping between cameras, I quickly felt a preference for the traditional TTL viewfinders on the E-x20 SLR cameras. To be fair, under shop lighting conditions, the amount of detail available from the DMC-electronic viewfinder was the same, and the image was bright. However, the image had a shimmering look from the refresh rate that I didn’t like, and from what I have read the electronic viewfinder falls badly behind under poor light. The swiveling screen was lovely, but if you have a ‘proper’ TTL viewfinder, I think the screen would be rarely used anyway. Nonetheless, there are some situations where a swivel screen is brilliant, and I would prefer one if possible. More disadvantages of the EVF are that it reduces battery life compared to an optical viewfinder, and only contrast based AF is available. Next, the E-420 was rejected. Although smaller than the E-520, it was not as comfortable to hold, and has no image stabilization. Yes, the E-520 is slightly bigger than the G1 or E-420, but it was the nicest camera to use and to hold, and in practice I found this to override the slightly greater size. Wouldn’t it be great if a smaller and lighter version of the E-520 was available, with a quality articulated screen, larger viewfinder, and other small improvements. It is called the E-620, and should ship in May 09. If I go the SLR route, this appears to be my perfect choice. In addition, the Olympus 4/3 lenses are generally slightly smaller than the competing APS-C SLRs, and have a good reputation for quality as well – I believe ColinS is no great fan of the kit lenses that ship with the Canon EOS-450D, for example.

Speaking of lenses, the very considerable saving in buying an E-520/620 vs. a DMC-G1, allows me to think about a better lens. For example, Olympus offer a semi-pro quality 14-54mm (28-104) at F2.8-3.5, which would be very tempting as a general purpose lens with a bit more telephoto reach than the standard kit lens, plus higher speed and better image quality to boot. Another interesting alternative would be an 18-180mm (36-360) F3.5-6.3 ‘superzooom’, which is actually faster than the kit lens, and may end up with similar IQ as it is a much more expensive lens. Either of these lenses can be bundled with the E-520/620 for considerably less cost than the twin-lens kit DMC-G1. Only drawback is that these upper-level lenses are considerably larger and heavier than the kit lenses, making for a tough decision. However, with the added bonus of lens flexibility, the E-520/620 looks even more like a winner for me.

Ah, but then there is the Canon G1, the camera on my list that just refuses to go away. I took the G10 for a drive as well, and could not help but like it. So compact and convenient compared to the SLRs, and so easy to use, with a great screen as well. ColinS, I did look at http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml, and it confirmed what I have seen in the reviews, that a G10 can give very, very good image quality if you have enough light not to force higher ISOs. However, to take that beautiful landscape comparison shot, the guy braced the G10 against his tripod, and shot at 1/8 second. Lucky for him that he had the tripod to brace against, and that the lens was well towards the wide-angle end .... As I said previously, it is only because of the G10’s IS that it is a contender for me at all, and even then I really did want to avoid taking shots at 1/8 second to exploit the low noise performance. The example appears to justify my previous comments that it is very easy to run out of light with any G10 style of camera, and then you need to make compromises in taking the shot. I’m not a very compromising sort of person – had you noticed. :)

Maybe I need a G10 AND an SLR!! The G10 is still on my list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by facts_please

I believe ColinS is no great fan of the kit lenses that ship with the Canon EOS-450D, for example.

---

To be honest, I'm probably a bit hard on them - I'm a very uncompromising person too, and all I can say is that they fall well short of what I'm satisfied with - but - they can be perfectly adequate in a lot of situations.

Just yesterday I printer 2x 22" x 15" canvases of an image taken through one (not by me) - and it looked fine.

Anyone else tossing up between something like the G10, or one of the smaller SLRs, may find this of interest.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/g10.htm

Much as I love Ken's style, people should always read his "about" page before forming any opinions.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm

Yes, his comments need to be carefully interpreted.

His comments re the G10 are NOT a general review, but relate only to his needs, situation and personal preferences.

With that understood, I still found his experiences with the G10 in outdoor situations to be interesting, and consistent with the link you provided previously. He found the small size and general convenience of the G10 to be highly attractive, to the point where he increasingly left his 5D in the hotel. He is fussy on image quality, and found the G10 to be entirely satisfactory for landscape shooting, in most situations.

So - when are you going to be buying (whichever make & model you decide on)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colin Southern

So - when are you going to be buying (whichever make & model you decide on)?

---

As the Olympus E-620 does not ship until may, and my choice is between this and a G10, I guess I'll at least wait until May when I can get to see the E-620.

When I do buy something, I'll briefly drop back here to let you know what I got and how I find it.

Cheers, Colin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by facts_please

When I do buy something, I'll briefly drop back here to let you know what I got and how I find it.

---

Sounds like a plan :)

Get a DSLR and never look back