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.

Read More......

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.

Read More......

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.

Read More......

This content has been moved to the new SeriousCompacts.com.

Click here to go to the new location

Read More......

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.

Read More......

Read More......

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)

Read More......

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.

Read More......

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.

Read More......

This content has been moved to the new SeriousCompacts.com.

Click here to go to the new location

Read More......

This content has been moved to the new SeriousCompacts.com.

Click here to go to the new location

Read More......

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

Read More......

Much of the discussion regarding Sigma's cameras, with their Foveon sensors, has focused on the low megapixel count and "high per pixel sharpness" of the native output files. Yet at the print sizes most of us tend to use, neither of these characteristics, one of which tends to balance the other, dominates image quality. On the other hand, the dynamic range of the output and the range of tones within that range have a significant impact on image quality at any print size.

The dynamic range (DR) capability of a camera depends on the sensor technology used (see more discussion here and here); but in general, for a given type of sensor technology, DR will correlate with sensel (sensor "pixel") size. The DP1 has a very large sensel area. Given this and anecdotal reports from Sigma DSLR users about the DR of those cameras, I was optimistic about the DP1 DR.

Dynamic range test results can often be confusing. Two reputable sites will use the same method, such as Imatest, and come up with significantly different results. There are rarely practical examples shown to demonstrate the detected differences. Furthermore, dynamic range testing is often done on in-camera JPEGs, so the information gained doesn't reflect the entire sensor capability and is of limited practical use to me as a primarily RAW shooter.

My method is pretty straightforward. I take a single photo of a high DR scene, one which exceeds the DR capability of the camera sensor. I then "push" the image to +2EV and examine the shadow detail. Next, I push the same image to -2EV and look at the highlight information. The ability of the camera to simultaneously capture both the shadow and highlight detail from a challenging scene can thus be determined in a practical manner. It is critical that a single capture be used to look at both shadow and highlight latitude. With any camera, it would be easy to demonstrate good highlight detail from one capture and good shadow detail from another, since ambient lighting conditions and camera exposure settings can be vary between two captures.

I chose to compare the DP1 DR to that of the Canon 5D and E-420 since those are the most compact digital representatives of the 35mm and Four Thirds formats, respectively. The 5D was used with the Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 lens, and the Olympus with the ZD 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom at 14mm. The Canon image was taken at f/11 and 1/100s. The Olympus and Sigma images were at f/5.6 (for a similar depth of field to the Canon) and 1/400s (for an equal exposure). The three captures (one from each camera) occurred within a minute of one another, and the lighting conditions were not appreciably changing. All were at ISO 100. EXIF information is not embedded in the crops, but the RAW files are available for download at the end of the post. For details regarding processing workflow, please refer to the shootout introduction.

First, let's look at the highlight information. The specific area of examination is depicted by the yellow box in the following resized DP1 photo:



All crops shown are 100% without resizing. Here is the Canon 5D example, with the baseline conversion on the left and -2EV on the right:



As you can see, the tonality in the sky and car windshield was completely lost in the baseline capture and partially restored at -2EV. Likewise, a number of the small branches were restored.

Next we'll take a look at the E-420 performance in this area:



The baseline crop from the E-420 is similar to that of the 5D. However, the E-420 does not gain as much highlight detail by comparison at -2EV.

Finally, here is the DP1 sample:



Unlike the 5D and E-420, the DP1 has managed to retain some of the variation in the sky and car windshield, as well as the small branch definition, even in the baseline capture. At -2EV, there some further gain.

Looking at these results for highlight latitude, it is tempting to speculate that the DP1 was underexposed compared with the other cameras. However, as the EXIF in the RAW files will testify, the exposure settings were equivalent for the three cameras. Is it possible that in the moments between captures the ambient light dropped just in time for the DP1 capture? That is possible, though no such change was apparent. One way to get at this possibility is to see how the DP1 did from a shadow standpoint in the very same capture. One would expect that if a lower exposure is the exaplanation for the strong retention of highlight detail, that shadow detail would be compromised.

For shadow detail, I examined the two regions depicted in the following image:



Here is the Canon 5D examples, with the baseline conversion on the left and +2EV on the right in each of the two regions examined:



The additional apparent shadow detail at the +2EV setting comes, predictably, at the expense of greater noise.

Next we'll take a look at the E-420 performance in this area:



The comments from the 5D crop apply here as well.

Finally, here is the DP1 sample:



The pushed DP1 shadows were, to me, surprisingly clean. Clean enough to make me wonder whether some noise reduction is being applied by SPP during RAW conversion.

Based on this comparison I would conclude that DP1 exposure latitude at the base ISO is similar to that of the 5D and exceeds that of the E-420. Other comparisons I have done have been consistent with this observation.

You can download the RAW files for the three images used in this comparison by clicking the links below.



In Part 3 of the shootout, we'll take a look at the overall detail captured using the DP1 compared with the Canon 5D and Olympus E-420. Part 4 will compare the low light, high ISO performance of the same three cameras in addition to the current compact camera high ISO champ, the Fuji F31. The results may surprise you!

Addendum:
Sean Reid of Reid Reviews reminded me to discuss the impact of overall lens contrast on effective dynamic range. A lower contrast lens will tend to lighten the tones in the shadows (move them away from pure black) and, in doing so, may provide separation between shadow detail and the noise floor. The noise floor is the level at which the detail in deep shadows is lost among the file's digital noise. The effective dynamic range that a digital camera can record, therefore, is noticeably affected by lens contrast.

To truly isolate the DR ability of the cameras being compared, one would have to use the same lens on each camera. Clearly this is not possible with the three cameras being compared. Thus it is best to think of the results shown above as reflecting the particular camera-lens combinations used.

Read More......

As most visitors to this site probably know, the Sigma DP1 is the first of its kind, a compact camera with a sensor more than four times larger than any previously featured in a digital compact. Over the next several weeks, we will publish a series of tests comparing the DP1 both to larger cameras, with which it shares a common sensor size, as well as to its compact peers, which feature small sensors. The goal here isn't to comprehensively cover the features of the DP1. The DP1 is clearly attracting the interest of many large photography sites, so there will be no shortage of such coverage. Rather, we hope to share some interesting findings, ones which either aren't covered elsewhere or which we'd like to cover in a different way.

Some comments regarding methods, which apply to all sections of the shootout:
- Unless otherwise noted, all photos have been taken on a sturdy tripod with self timer.
- Images taken using DSLRs were taken using mirror lockup.
- All images are processed from RAW, unless the camera used does not offer this.
- All RAW files have had white balance adjusted as part of RAW conversion. This is done with an attempt to match WB between cameras as well as possible.
- DP1 RAW files were processed using Sigma Photo Pro (SPP) v3.2 (Mac) with all sliders to "0" unless otherwise specified. SPP was chosen because at the time of this writing, no other RAW processors yet support the DP1.
- E-420 RAW files were processed using Olympus Master v2.06 (Mac), which is currently the only RAW converter with E-420 support. All settings were at "0" unless otherwise noted. Gradation was set to "Normal".
- For dynamic range and high ISO detail/noise testing, Canon 5D RAW files were processed using Raw Developer v1.7.2 (Mac). This RAW converter was chosen because it does a relatively "straight" conversion. Settings were at default except that noise reduction was disabled. Sharpening was left at default.
- Both Master and SPP seem to apply sharpening at the "O" setting. This was left alone.

In many instances, we've had to make tough choices in terms of testing methods, especially with regards to processing files. For each test, RAW files will be available for download; so if you object to our choices, you will have the opportunity to make different ones with the same source material.

Part 2, coming soon, will feature a comparison of dynamic range between the Sigma DP1, Olympus E-420, and Canon 5D. Small sensor compact cameras will also be included for comparisons in subsequent parts of the shootout.

Read More......

- Do you still use you older film or digital compact?
- Still happily carrying a Rollei AFM 35 or Konica AF?
- Don't see any reason to upgrade from that trusty Sony DSC-V3 or Canon S70?
- Still frequently leave the DSLR at home and carry a Minolta A2 or Olympus C-5050 instead?
- Or do you simply have fond memories of a particular camera you wish you had kept?

Tell us about it. Contribute an article telling us why your camera deserves a place in the Serious Compacts Hall of Fame.

Here's how:
1) Join our Flickr group.
2) Start a new thread on the Discussion page, beginning the title with "S.C. Hall of Fame", for example the thread title might be "S.C. Hall of Fame - Canon Powershot G3".
3) Write your review as the original post in that thread. The discussion forum supports HTML, so feel free to include links and photos in your review.
4) Send us a note to let us know about your entry.

That's it! We'll link to your review from the blog front page and add your article link to the Serious Compacts Hall of Fame.

If you wish to contribute a separate review on a camera that is already in the Hall of Fame, please by all means do so; but start a separate discussion thread. That way we can properly recognize your contribution.

Many of these older models are underappreciated, and some are truly irreplaceable. Help us build up a valuable resource by contributing a piece on one of your favorite older cameras.

Read More......

The technical reviews published by sites such as DC Resource and DPReview are painstakingly prepared, important resources. However, nothing can replace the insights that an experienced photographer brings to the evaluation of a new photographic tool. Today, those of us interested in compact cameras in general, and the DP1 in particular, are fortunate to have two such reports. Michael Reichmann of The Luminous Landscape and Sean Reid of Reid Reviews have published their DP1 impressions.

Michael Reichmann's review of the DP1, titled "Sigma DP1 - A Compact Conundrum", contains comparisons between the DP1, the Canon G9, and the Ricoh GX100. It can be found here.

Sean Reid's DP1 review is taking place in stages. Part One compares the functionalities of the Sigma and the GRD2, whereas Part Two will include comparisons with the GRD2 and M8. Sean's reviews are available to paying subscribers at Reid Reviews.

Read More......

Björn's recent post "What Makes A Compact Camera Serious?" really drives home the fact that RAW mode is uncommon in the compact camera market. If one wants a compact camera with a sharp lens, manual exposure controls, and manual focus, there are many choices. Add RAW to the list of requirements, and the number of compacts on the list drops precipitously.

You might be able to guess, based on this post I wrote after Canon dropped RAW from the G7, how important RAW is to me. Nikon still doesn't have RAW in its high end compacts, and I know that they conduct regular user polls. Maybe the majority amongst even "serious" users don't care very much about RAW in their compact cameras.

How important is RAW to you? Please participate in the poll to the right, and let us know.

Addendum: The results are in. More than half of those participating consider RAW an absolutely necessary feature for an advanced compact. Thanks to all who responded!

Read More......

The SeriousCompacts.com Flickr Group is off to a great start. The pool now includes photographs by more than 70 photographers representing six continents. In order to encourage the continued growth of our Flickr community, I'm pleased to announce the first Serious Compacts Photo Contest. The assigment for this contest is "Natural Textures". All are welcome to compete and/or vote in the contest, and entry is free.

To compete, simply add your photo to the SeriousCompacts.com Flickr group and tag the entry with "seriouscompacts1".

You can get to the Flickr group by clicking the banner below:



Contest Rules:
- Participants must be members of the SeriousCompacts.com Flickr group.
- Only one photo submission per person.
- You must own the copyright to the image to enter it in the contest.
- Post-processing (with Photoshop, etc) is permitted.
- The camera/lens combination used to take the photo must be compact by your standards.
- Both film and digital camera submissions are welcome.
- Photos entered in the contest must have been taken in April 2008.
- Either the description or tags of each entry should specify the camera (and lens if separate) used to take the photo.

Contest Prizes (in US dollars):
1st Place: $100
2nd Place: $50
3rd Place: $25

The Flickr group is open to submissions at this time, and we will continue to accept entries through 11PM GMT on April 30, 2008. At that time, those of us who author here will post a subset of our favorite entries, and a vote will be held on the blog to determine the winners from those selected photos.*

*For the purposes of the vote, selected entries will be displayed on the blog. Winning entries will also be displayed here. By entering the contest, you agree to have your photo displayed here for these purposes.

Special thanks to Guy Mancuso for letting us announce this contest in the excellent Small Sensor Cameras Forum at GetDPI.com

Read More......

This content has been moved to the new SeriousCompacts.com.

Click here to go to the new location

Read More......

Hugh Denholm has done a four scene comparison between the Sigma DP1, Canon 1D Mk III, and Leica D-LUX 3. Check it out here.

Read More......

Edward Taylor has written a Sigma DP1 Review for The Online Photographer.

As I held it in my hands I thought to myself, "This is the future of P&S cameras." I didn’t realize at the time that it was also going to be a "blast from the past." Before going any further into what may seem like a good bit of criticism, let me say up front that I really like this camera, and, despite its high cost, would buy it again.

Click here to read the rest of the review.

Read More......

Mountain photographer Jack Brauer, not the "24 guy" Jack Bauer, posted an interesting article on his blog. He is in search of the ultimate, easily accessible, compact camera ready for quick shots while hiking (his primary camera is a Tachihara 4x5 large format wooden field camera).

In his article he compares the Fuji F30, Ricoh GX100, and the new Sigma DP1. He thinks the perfect camera would be a Ricoh GX100 with a Sigma/Foveon sensor inside.

Read More......

André Takeda, Just another girl in Belgrano

We are fortunate to already have contributions from many talented photographers in the recently created SC.com Flickr Group. As announced last month, we would like to occasionally feature excellent photos from the SC.com Pool here on the blog.

For the first feature, Wouter, Björn, and myself are pleased to recognize the outstanding square format work of André Takeda. André, a Brazilian writer with two published novels, currently lives in Buenos Aires, Argentina where he is Creative Director for Fox Latin American Channels. André is no newcomer to advanced compact cameras; however, he is new to advanced digital compact cameras, having recently begun to use a Ricoh GX100. You can find more of André's excellent work with both film and digital cameras in the Serious Compacts Pool or by directly visiting his Flickr photos, sets, or collections.

If you are interested in joining the Serious Compacts Pool, or if you already post there and would like your work to be considered for a feature on the blog, please see this post.

Read More......

Thanks to Henning Quarz for calling our attention to another excellent Ricoh GX100 review, this one published in October by Stefan Kälberer on his site Kurz Belichtet. The review, written in German, is quite thorough and features some top class pixel peeping,including a crop comparison between the GX100 and a Canon 20D DSLR. I found it an enjoyable read, even as an English translation provided by Google.

Read More......

If one is in the market for a current model compact camera with RAW capability and an optical zoom lens covering wide to telephoto, there are basically two choices, the Panasonic DMC-LX2 (including the Leica version, D-LUX 3) and the Ricoh Caplio GX100. Both of these are highly capable compact cameras. Recently, we have been providing quite a bit of GX100 coverage. To see some excellent work with the D-LUX 3, check out Jim Radcliffe's D-LUX 3 page here.

When faced with the prospect of buying one versus the other, I personally went for the GX100 due to its wider wide and, arguably, rawer RAW. I also liked having a hot shoe, mainly for the prospect of attaching an external viewfinder. However, the LX/D-LUX series has several notable strengths including a native 16:9 sensor, a format which I greatly enjoyed with the LX1. Since the "28mm equivalent" is based on the diagonal angle of view (AOV), a 16:9 format also means that the horizontal AOV at 28mm equivalent is significantly wider (and the vertical AOV significantly shorter) than it would be for a camera with a 4:3 aspect ratio. For a side-by-side view of the features offered by these two cameras, look to DPReview's feature comparison here.

The GX100 and LX2 offer widely distinct feature sets yet stand together and alone in their class. With these two cameras, Ricoh and Panasonic are leading the way with regards to what can be done with an excellent wide zoom lens and user access to RAW in a compact camera. The reason for this post is that we are hearing rumors (and in some cases more than just rumors) that both the GX100 and LX2 replacements will be introduced for Photokina in September. Panasonic made a point of holding back the LX2 replacement while introducing eight new models for PMA, and the Lets Go interview (via 1001 Noisy Cameras) suggests that Panasonic knows the importance of the LX2 in their lineup. Ichiro Kitao, Product Planning Manager Panasonic Optical Group, had the following to say when asked about the advanced compact camera market, particularly in relation to the Canon G9:

I think it is a very important segment. We have a camera in the pipeline for that segment; the Panasonic LX2. It is the year of the Photokina show so you can expect a lot from us. I suppose you can compare the Lumix LX2 to Canon's G9 camera. Not only the enhanced amateur is using this camera; we know that there are professionals too that use the Panasonic LX2 as an extra camera and for personal use. The concept of the Lumix LX2 is different than that of the PowerShot G9. We try to aim more at the emotional aspect of a compact camera. However; the possibilities of both cameras are quite alike.

Some have speculated that all we'll see is a couple of 12MP sensors thrown into the same old bodies, but I am more optimistic than that. Ricoh and Panasonic each have strong recent records of innovation. Invigorated by the introduction of the Sigma DP1 in the high end compact space, I believe both companies will come ready to battle for the advanced compact segment at Photokina this year. If Sigma brings out a DP series camera featuring a zoom lens, things will be even more interesting. What do you want to see in these upcoming serious compacts? Let us know in the thread over in the SeriousCompacts.com discussion forum on Flickr.

Read More......