Last week Ricoh released the first function-enhancing firmware update for the GRDII (v2.0). But, according to Ricoh, there is an issue with the recommended external flash by Sigma. They have temporarily suspended the download of the new firmware update.
"Due to unforeseen problems with the first function enhancing firmware for use in the GR DIGITAL II (v2.00) we he have suspended with immediate effect any further downloads. The problem occurred when using the recommended external flash (made by Sigma) in the continuous shooting mode.
For those users who would like to switch their firmware back from V2.00 to V1.12, please download V1.12 again from the download page on our site. We apologize for the inconvenience."
Update! April 8, 2008
Ricoh released a new version of the GRDII firmware. You can find the V2.01 firmware here.
Monday, March 31, 2008
New Ricoh GX100 review
Eric Jeschke of Red Skies at Night notified the forummembers of the dpreview.com Ricoh Talk that he posted a review on his blog of the Ricoh GX100. It is a good review for those looking for a serious compact. The most interesting part of his review are the possibly further improvements of this camera.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Canon 5D and Sigma DP1 Comparison at f/8 and ISO 200
Due to Amazon having processed DP1 pre-orders out of sequence, I am unfortunately still without my DP1. Thus living vicariously, I was happy to come across this thread at DPReview, where John Kenny was kind enough to share his 5D and DP1 comparison photos. The 5D was using the 24-105mm f/4L zoom lens at 28mm. Both cameras were set to f/8, ISO 200, on a tripod with self timer. John kindly made his RAW files available for download here.
I processed John's DP1 and 5D RAWs using Sigma Photo Pro 3.1 (Mac) and Capture One 3.7 Pro, respectively. In cases of upsizing, the Genuine Fractals 5 Photoshop plugin was used. I sharpened each photo slightly at the final output size.
Here's the resized scene as taken in by the 5D:
Resized DP1 image:
Here are the full-resolution comparison images:
Canon 5D at native resolution (12MP)
Sigma DP1 upscaled to 12MP
Canon 5D upscaled to 19.4MP (sufficient for 30 x 20 inch print at 180 pixels/inch)
Sigma DP1 upscaled to 19.4MP
For those who'd rather not examine the whole file, here's a comparison of a near-center 100% crop from the native 5D file on the left and an upscaled DP1 file on the right:
I'll let the results speak for themselves with just a few comments about the testing conditions. I personally would have preferred to see an ISO 100 comparison, as I'd expect higher ISOs to favor the 5D (albeit only very slightly at ISO 200). I'd also like to see them shot with the same depth of field (different f-numbers) since the current use of f/8 for both likely hinders 5D corner sharpness (would probably improved with a higher f-number) as well as DP1 overall detail (diffraction-limited at f/8).
Thanks again to John for sharing these. If anyone thinks my processing has misrepresented the capabilities of one or the other cameras, by all means download the RAW files and show us your version.
Addendum: As the following right side crop comparison shows, both the 5D and DP1 files suffer from aliasing effects. The 5D crop shows significant color aliasing as well as luminance moiré, whereas the DP1 crop is dominated by luminance moiré. So much for Foveon sensors not needing an AA filter.
Here is the DP1 crop before resizing, straight out of Sigma Photo Pro with all settings neutral other than custom white balance. As you can see, the moiré is present in the native file and was not introduced by Genuine Fractals.
I processed John's DP1 and 5D RAWs using Sigma Photo Pro 3.1 (Mac) and Capture One 3.7 Pro, respectively. In cases of upsizing, the Genuine Fractals 5 Photoshop plugin was used. I sharpened each photo slightly at the final output size.
Here's the resized scene as taken in by the 5D:
Resized DP1 image:
Here are the full-resolution comparison images:
Canon 5D at native resolution (12MP)
Sigma DP1 upscaled to 12MP
Canon 5D upscaled to 19.4MP (sufficient for 30 x 20 inch print at 180 pixels/inch)
Sigma DP1 upscaled to 19.4MP
For those who'd rather not examine the whole file, here's a comparison of a near-center 100% crop from the native 5D file on the left and an upscaled DP1 file on the right:
I'll let the results speak for themselves with just a few comments about the testing conditions. I personally would have preferred to see an ISO 100 comparison, as I'd expect higher ISOs to favor the 5D (albeit only very slightly at ISO 200). I'd also like to see them shot with the same depth of field (different f-numbers) since the current use of f/8 for both likely hinders 5D corner sharpness (would probably improved with a higher f-number) as well as DP1 overall detail (diffraction-limited at f/8).
Thanks again to John for sharing these. If anyone thinks my processing has misrepresented the capabilities of one or the other cameras, by all means download the RAW files and show us your version.
Addendum: As the following right side crop comparison shows, both the 5D and DP1 files suffer from aliasing effects. The 5D crop shows significant color aliasing as well as luminance moiré, whereas the DP1 crop is dominated by luminance moiré. So much for Foveon sensors not needing an AA filter.
Here is the DP1 crop before resizing, straight out of Sigma Photo Pro with all settings neutral other than custom white balance. As you can see, the moiré is present in the native file and was not introduced by Genuine Fractals.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Japanese DP1 Review and Sample Images
Japanese site DC.Watch has posted a review of the DP1 which includes a large number of sample images, both out-of-camera JPEGs and converted RAW files. An English translation of the review is found here.
PhotoReview Posts Review of the Sigma DP1
PhotoReview (http://www.photoreview.com.au/) has published an excellent online review of the Sigma DP1. Check it out (via PhotographyBlog) by clicking here.
The Challenge of the Small Sensor
Manufacturers use very small sensors and tiny lenses to create ultra compact cameras. Unfortunately small sensors require the photographers to make concessions regarding image quality. Whether that’s an issue or not depends largely on what look you’re after, how you’re going to use your images and your particular subject matter.To begin to understand the magnitude of the difference in image quality, I tested my Nikon D300 against our diminutive Panasonic FX35. The image below illustrates the relative sizes of the D300’s and the FX35’s sensors. The D300’s DX sensor has 13 times the area of the FX35’s 1/2.33” sensor.
The idea isn’t to determine which camera produces superior images; rather to understand how large the difference is. The results will form part of the decision making process when deciding which camera to bring along; as well as size, weight, responsiveness, etc.Photos of the following scene were taken simultaneously, with the cameras mounted on tripods. The shutters were released using the self-timer. The D300 had a Nikkor 35mm f/2 prime attached. I’ve compared crops from the following scene.
The results speak for themselves: the D300 crops are showing much finer details, even when comparing the D300’s ISO640 output to the FX35’s output at ISO100. The difference appears too great to be the result of the D300 resolution advantage alone (12 vs. 10 megapixels). Rather, I suspect the difference is also due to the FX35’s noise processing which obliterates fine, low contrast detail.These crops demonstrate the challenge facing designers of serious compact cameras. Still, considering that the FX35 weighs a mere 150g and includes a wide 25-100mm zoom, the results are surprisingly good.
Monday, March 24, 2008
New Spring Galleries for Five Serious Compacts at DC Resource
Via 1001 Noisy Cameras comes the news that DC Resource has added spring galleries for five new serious compacts, namely the Olympus E-420, Nikon D60, Ricoh R8, Panasonic FX35, and Olympus Stylus 1030SW. Each of these cameras brings something unique to the realm of compact camera photography. It's good to see that they are all in the queue for review by DC Resource.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Serious Canon Compacts, Then and Now
Ken Ko was kind enough to share this photo of a classy black duo of Canon compacts.
Pictured on the left, a Canonet GIII QL17 in the highly sought after black finish. On the right, the Canon Powershot G7 with Canon conversion lens adapter and filter.
The QL17 GIII, introduced in 1972, is a compact 35mm film rangefinder camera with a fixed 40mm f/1.7 lens. According to Steven Gandy of CameraQuest, over 1.2 million of these were sold between 1972 and 1982. The CameraQuest article has excellent information about the Canonet GIII QL17. A number of other excellent references can be found in the Camerapedia wiki. I have owned two of these in the more common chrome finish and found them to be excellent little (though heavy!) cameras. The specific strengths and weaknesses are covered nicely in the above references. The Canonet GIII QL17 is built to last, often requiring only new batteries and fresh light seals to work well after decades of non use. I recommend hink2u on Ebay as a reseller of restored Canonets for a reasonable price.
Looking at the photo, there can be no doubting the lineage. Unfortunately, Ken's beloved G7 has died after 14 months of gentle use without drops or other abuse. Meanwhile his friend's Canonet, after greater than 25 years, is probably working as well as ever. I doubt that any of today's digital serious compacts will endure like the classics of the past.
For more of Ken's photos of this pair, check out the full set on Flickr.
Pictured on the left, a Canonet GIII QL17 in the highly sought after black finish. On the right, the Canon Powershot G7 with Canon conversion lens adapter and filter.
The QL17 GIII, introduced in 1972, is a compact 35mm film rangefinder camera with a fixed 40mm f/1.7 lens. According to Steven Gandy of CameraQuest, over 1.2 million of these were sold between 1972 and 1982. The CameraQuest article has excellent information about the Canonet GIII QL17. A number of other excellent references can be found in the Camerapedia wiki. I have owned two of these in the more common chrome finish and found them to be excellent little (though heavy!) cameras. The specific strengths and weaknesses are covered nicely in the above references. The Canonet GIII QL17 is built to last, often requiring only new batteries and fresh light seals to work well after decades of non use. I recommend hink2u on Ebay as a reseller of restored Canonets for a reasonable price.
Looking at the photo, there can be no doubting the lineage. Unfortunately, Ken's beloved G7 has died after 14 months of gentle use without drops or other abuse. Meanwhile his friend's Canonet, after greater than 25 years, is probably working as well as ever. I doubt that any of today's digital serious compacts will endure like the classics of the past.
For more of Ken's photos of this pair, check out the full set on Flickr.
Luminous Landscape Ricoh GX100 online
Finally the Ricoh GX100 review from Michael Reichmann on Luminous Landscape is online.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Ricoh GX100 review diary
Uwe Steinmueller of Digital Outback Photo started a diary about the Ricoh GX100. They usually do not review any compact cameras, but recently changed that with the requirement that these cameras can also record RAW files. The first compact camera they tested was the Canon G9. An excellent read by the way. Don't miss the personal review by Paul Nakroshis.
Their readers mentioned that some Ricoh cameras could also record RAW files and they noticed some forums of Ricoh users who showed "quite excellent pictures." So it is great Ricoh provided them with a camera.
Their readers mentioned that some Ricoh cameras could also record RAW files and they noticed some forums of Ricoh users who showed "quite excellent pictures." So it is great Ricoh provided them with a camera.
Can We Feature Your Photo on the Serious Compacts Blog?
We're going to experiment with a new regular item here on the Serious Compacts blog. From time to time, the blog will feature one of the excellent photos from the SeriousCompacts.com Flickr Group. To learn more about the group and how to add photos to it, see this post. If you're wondering whether your camera is "serious" enough or "compact" enough to join the group, then wonder no more. It is ;-).
Interested? Here's the thing: In order for us to share your work, we need your permission to do so. There are two ways you can grant this. The easiest way is to change the permissions on your photo in from "All Rights Reserved" to one of the Creative Commons licenses. Click here for more information about using Creative Commons licensing on Flickr. If you want to maintain all rights reserved and still want to give us special permission to publish your photo on the blog, then add the tag "ptposc" (Permission to Publish on Serious Compacts) to your Flickr image. We won't alter your work in any way, and of course we'll credit you along with a link back to your Flickr page.
Featured images from our Flickr group will be available, alongside featured artists from the "outside" world, by clicking on the "Featured" tab in the menu at the top of the blog. I don't know how often or how long we'll continue this feature. It depends on the interest we get. Any of the blog contributors can feature your work from the pool at any time. Just remember to give us permission!
Interested? Here's the thing: In order for us to share your work, we need your permission to do so. There are two ways you can grant this. The easiest way is to change the permissions on your photo in from "All Rights Reserved" to one of the Creative Commons licenses. Click here for more information about using Creative Commons licensing on Flickr. If you want to maintain all rights reserved and still want to give us special permission to publish your photo on the blog, then add the tag "ptposc" (Permission to Publish on Serious Compacts) to your Flickr image. We won't alter your work in any way, and of course we'll credit you along with a link back to your Flickr page.
Featured images from our Flickr group will be available, alongside featured artists from the "outside" world, by clicking on the "Featured" tab in the menu at the top of the blog. I don't know how often or how long we'll continue this feature. It depends on the interest we get. Any of the blog contributors can feature your work from the pool at any time. Just remember to give us permission!
Thursday, March 20, 2008
DPReviewer Reveals Priority List for Compact Reviews
Simon Joinson of DPReview recently posted a list of "really interesting compacts we'd like to review as soon as possible." I was disappointed to find that the GRD II is not on the list and likely won't be reviewed given his statement regarding 2007 models. Here's Simon's post in situ:
Note: The R8 review is now available here.
Simon's post can be found here.
Note: The R8 review is now available here.
Simon's post can be found here.
Fuji F100fd - It's Compact, but is it Serious? Part 3 of 3 (Dynamic Range)
Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - High ISO Noise
Part 3 - Dynamic Range
In practical terms, the dynamic range (DR) of a camera refers to it's ability to capture image detail in both very dark and very well lit areas of a single exposure. Using conventional sensor technology, this capability tends to correlate with sensor pixel (sensel) size. Working with RAW files generally allow one to access a greater portion of the DR captured in an exposure, and combining multiple exposures is a commonly-used method for capturing the dynamic range of a scene. For more on DR and the explanation of why pixel size matters, this DPReview article is a good place to start.
With the S3 and S5 DSLRs, Fujifilm implemented a novel sensor technology which incorporates two types of pixels of different sizes. The larger pixels are of the conventional DSLR type, whereas the smaller pixels capture additional "bright area" information. The simultaneous capture using these two different pixel types essentially allows the camera to obtain two different apparent exposures in a single image, and the result is class-leading DR based on additional highlight detail.
To date, no other manufacturer has introduced a production camera with such an effective system for improving the DR capability of a sensor. Instead, the approach taken by others has largely been to underexpose and then selectively map tones to incorporate greater highlight detail without actually increasing the DR. Highlight Tone Priority (HTP), featured on the latest Canon DSLRs, is an example of such an approach. The way HTP works is that the camera underexposes the shot to preserve highlights and then applies a proprietary contrast adjustment to "push up" low and midrange tones. For example, a Canon DSLR set to ISO 200 with HTP engaged will use aperture and shutter speed settings corresponding to those necessary for a proper apparent exposure at ISO 200. Meanwhile, the analog gain applied to the sensor is that of ISO 100 rather than ISO 200. Thus, the actual apparent exposure will be one stop underexposed. However, the in-camera JPEG processing is such that everything but the highlights is brightened as needed to simulate a proper apparent exposure in those areas. The result is that the highlights are properly exposed, and the expense is that the low and midtones are noisier because they represent ISO 100 (analog gain) "pushed" to ISO 200 (equivalent) using digital gain. This application of digital gain results in increased noise as explained in this rather technical thread and demonstrated in these examples from Joe Mama.
It is worth noting that the actual DR captured in a RAW file taken at ISO 200 with HTP enabled is no different than that of a corresponding RAW file taken at ISO 100 set for 1 stop of negative exposure compensation with HTP disabled. Nevertheless, this feature provides great value to the JPEG shooter for scenes prone to highlight clipping and may also benefit the RAW shooter who does not want to invest the time and energy in adjusting levels/curves after the fact (Canon's RAW conversion software will do the manipulation for you on RAW files obtained with HTP enabled). Click here to see Ron Purdy's excellent example of the benefit of HTP. Nikon's approach, termed Active D-Lighting, is also based on underexposure, though the implementation is different.
Fujifilm's press release for the F100fd states the following:
What isn't clear from this press release is exactly how the F100fd achieves "wide dynamic range" despite having tiny pixels (sensels). Does it truly, as they imply, feature a similar technology to that seen in the S3 and S5 DSLRs? Seems doubtful given that Fuji hasn't mentioned anything about different pixel types in the sensor. On the other hand, if it employing the same underexpose/tonemap approach being used by Canon and others, it would seem somewhat disingenuous to bill it as "wide dynamic range." Perhaps they are implementing an entirely novel way to boost actual DR. All they really say is that the wide DR is made possible by advances in the new sensor and onboard image processor. My guess is that the new sensor has implemented slightly lower read noise and that the rest of what we're getting here is similar to Canon's HTP.
Consider the following excerpt from the F100fd manual:
The relevant portions are as follows:
"When dynamic range is set to 200 % or 400 %, some [ ISO] settings cannot be selected. Also, some [ DYNAMIC RANGE] settings may not be selectable depending on the [ ISO] setting."
"Although wider dynamic range settings will allow you to take pictures with good levels of contrast, they will also increase the amount of speckling in your images. Choose the dynamic range setting that best suits the conditions."
So, basically, the use of "wide dynamic range" settings requires setting the camera to higher ISO values (probably ISO 200 minimum for 200% DR and ISO 400 minimum for 400% DR) and increases noise. To me, this strongly suggests that the wide DR function uses a similar approach to Canon's HTP, namely underexpose the whole image and then selectively "push up" everything but the highlights. Note that this approach to tone mapping does not preclude the possibility of other true contributions to improved DR such as measures to decrease read noise.
Let's look at an actual example. The following crops were taken from images provided at http://f100fd.seesaa.net/. Each image in the comparison was taken at a nominal ISO 400, f3.3, 1/100s, and these are 100% crops from the 6MP output mode of the F100fd. Click the image below to view at the intended size.
Don't know about you, but I am impressed. If Fuji is accomplishing this the way I think they are, then the noise we're seeing in the shadows and midtones of the DR 400% crop actually represents ISO 100 noise pushed two full stops. Yet to my eye, it's only barely more prominent than the noise in the native ISO 400 (DR 100%) crop. In fact, the most disturbing noise to me is the subtle pink and green blotching in the flat gray regions, and this is no different between the two crops. The highlight detail has been effectively reclaimed, and the rest of the image is virtually undisturbed with "good contrast levels" just as the manual claimed.
The Fuji F100fd has several strikes against it from the standpoint of a "serious" user, some or all of which may or may not matter to any given photographer. It lacks manual controls for aperture and shutter speed, RAW capability, and a viewfinder. The lens, in exchange for covering a long range, is relatively slow. The high ISO noise reduction cannot be disabled. However, as I mentioned in Part 1 of this series, there are now a number of full-resolution samples online to demonstrate that the F100fd output is of high quality, up to the standards for "serious" use. Add to that the fact that the high ISO output is unusually low in noise without what I'd consider an obnoxious level of smearing (though this is highly subjective) and that the highlight preservation is rather effective (albeit limited to use at high ISO settings), and I'd imagine that the Fuji F100fd will be the compact of choice for many of the photographers who don't enjoy postprocessing. We'll soon find out. I look forward to learning more with you when the F100fd hits the streets.
Part 2 - High ISO Noise
Part 3 - Dynamic Range
In practical terms, the dynamic range (DR) of a camera refers to it's ability to capture image detail in both very dark and very well lit areas of a single exposure. Using conventional sensor technology, this capability tends to correlate with sensor pixel (sensel) size. Working with RAW files generally allow one to access a greater portion of the DR captured in an exposure, and combining multiple exposures is a commonly-used method for capturing the dynamic range of a scene. For more on DR and the explanation of why pixel size matters, this DPReview article is a good place to start.
With the S3 and S5 DSLRs, Fujifilm implemented a novel sensor technology which incorporates two types of pixels of different sizes. The larger pixels are of the conventional DSLR type, whereas the smaller pixels capture additional "bright area" information. The simultaneous capture using these two different pixel types essentially allows the camera to obtain two different apparent exposures in a single image, and the result is class-leading DR based on additional highlight detail.
To date, no other manufacturer has introduced a production camera with such an effective system for improving the DR capability of a sensor. Instead, the approach taken by others has largely been to underexpose and then selectively map tones to incorporate greater highlight detail without actually increasing the DR. Highlight Tone Priority (HTP), featured on the latest Canon DSLRs, is an example of such an approach. The way HTP works is that the camera underexposes the shot to preserve highlights and then applies a proprietary contrast adjustment to "push up" low and midrange tones. For example, a Canon DSLR set to ISO 200 with HTP engaged will use aperture and shutter speed settings corresponding to those necessary for a proper apparent exposure at ISO 200. Meanwhile, the analog gain applied to the sensor is that of ISO 100 rather than ISO 200. Thus, the actual apparent exposure will be one stop underexposed. However, the in-camera JPEG processing is such that everything but the highlights is brightened as needed to simulate a proper apparent exposure in those areas. The result is that the highlights are properly exposed, and the expense is that the low and midtones are noisier because they represent ISO 100 (analog gain) "pushed" to ISO 200 (equivalent) using digital gain. This application of digital gain results in increased noise as explained in this rather technical thread and demonstrated in these examples from Joe Mama.
It is worth noting that the actual DR captured in a RAW file taken at ISO 200 with HTP enabled is no different than that of a corresponding RAW file taken at ISO 100 set for 1 stop of negative exposure compensation with HTP disabled. Nevertheless, this feature provides great value to the JPEG shooter for scenes prone to highlight clipping and may also benefit the RAW shooter who does not want to invest the time and energy in adjusting levels/curves after the fact (Canon's RAW conversion software will do the manipulation for you on RAW files obtained with HTP enabled). Click here to see Ron Purdy's excellent example of the benefit of HTP. Nikon's approach, termed Active D-Lighting, is also based on underexposure, though the implementation is different.
Fujifilm's press release for the F100fd states the following:
NEW Wide Dynamic Range
Dynamic Range, or the gradations of light that exist between bright and dark in any scene, can be easily detected by the human eye, but not by most cameras. Fujifilm first expanded dynamic range capture functionality on the professional imaging side with its FinePix S3 Pro digital camera. The technology, now perfected in the EISA Award-winning FinePix S5 Pro, has been brought to the consumer in the FinePix F100fd.
Through a combination of advances in Fujifilm’s new Super CCD HR VIII sensor and RP (Real Photo) Processor III, this wide dynamic range dramatically broadens tonal capability and guarantees exceptional rendition of photos with both bright highlights and dark shadows. This expansion of sensitivity captures greater detail, and subtle nuances of brightness and tonality that bring the photo closer to what the human eye actually sees helping to avoid the ‘white sky’ effect caused by the loss of fine highlight detail.
What isn't clear from this press release is exactly how the F100fd achieves "wide dynamic range" despite having tiny pixels (sensels). Does it truly, as they imply, feature a similar technology to that seen in the S3 and S5 DSLRs? Seems doubtful given that Fuji hasn't mentioned anything about different pixel types in the sensor. On the other hand, if it employing the same underexpose/tonemap approach being used by Canon and others, it would seem somewhat disingenuous to bill it as "wide dynamic range." Perhaps they are implementing an entirely novel way to boost actual DR. All they really say is that the wide DR is made possible by advances in the new sensor and onboard image processor. My guess is that the new sensor has implemented slightly lower read noise and that the rest of what we're getting here is similar to Canon's HTP.
Consider the following excerpt from the F100fd manual:
The relevant portions are as follows:
"When dynamic range is set to 200 % or 400 %, some [ ISO] settings cannot be selected. Also, some [ DYNAMIC RANGE] settings may not be selectable depending on the [ ISO] setting."
"Although wider dynamic range settings will allow you to take pictures with good levels of contrast, they will also increase the amount of speckling in your images. Choose the dynamic range setting that best suits the conditions."
So, basically, the use of "wide dynamic range" settings requires setting the camera to higher ISO values (probably ISO 200 minimum for 200% DR and ISO 400 minimum for 400% DR) and increases noise. To me, this strongly suggests that the wide DR function uses a similar approach to Canon's HTP, namely underexpose the whole image and then selectively "push up" everything but the highlights. Note that this approach to tone mapping does not preclude the possibility of other true contributions to improved DR such as measures to decrease read noise.
Let's look at an actual example. The following crops were taken from images provided at http://f100fd.seesaa.net/. Each image in the comparison was taken at a nominal ISO 400, f3.3, 1/100s, and these are 100% crops from the 6MP output mode of the F100fd. Click the image below to view at the intended size.
Don't know about you, but I am impressed. If Fuji is accomplishing this the way I think they are, then the noise we're seeing in the shadows and midtones of the DR 400% crop actually represents ISO 100 noise pushed two full stops. Yet to my eye, it's only barely more prominent than the noise in the native ISO 400 (DR 100%) crop. In fact, the most disturbing noise to me is the subtle pink and green blotching in the flat gray regions, and this is no different between the two crops. The highlight detail has been effectively reclaimed, and the rest of the image is virtually undisturbed with "good contrast levels" just as the manual claimed.
The Fuji F100fd has several strikes against it from the standpoint of a "serious" user, some or all of which may or may not matter to any given photographer. It lacks manual controls for aperture and shutter speed, RAW capability, and a viewfinder. The lens, in exchange for covering a long range, is relatively slow. The high ISO noise reduction cannot be disabled. However, as I mentioned in Part 1 of this series, there are now a number of full-resolution samples online to demonstrate that the F100fd output is of high quality, up to the standards for "serious" use. Add to that the fact that the high ISO output is unusually low in noise without what I'd consider an obnoxious level of smearing (though this is highly subjective) and that the highlight preservation is rather effective (albeit limited to use at high ISO settings), and I'd imagine that the Fuji F100fd will be the compact of choice for many of the photographers who don't enjoy postprocessing. We'll soon find out. I look forward to learning more with you when the F100fd hits the streets.
Fuji F100fd - It's Compact, but is it Serious? Part 2 of 3 (High ISO Noise)
Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - High ISO Noise
Part 3 - Dynamic Range
Many readers of this site are aware that, beginning with the F10 and culminating with the F30, Fuji has offered arguably the best high ISO performance yet seen in a compact camera. Professional reviewers and photographers alike attributed this ability to a combination of Fuji's proprietary sensor technology, the decision to stick with only 6MP, and expert application of relatively heavy noise reduction. Whatever the contributing reasons, the results were compelling. Here is an example of a resized ISO 1600 shot I took of my son in relatively low light (f/5, 1/38s):
With the F50fd and now the F100fd, a number of reviewers, photography blogs, and Fuji fans have complained about Fuji's decision to follow suit in the megapixel hike. Surely they cannot deliver F30-class high ISO performance with the F100fd, which crams 12 million sensels into a small (1/1.6") sensor, right? Yet Fuji claims that with the F100fd, "ultrahigh sensitivity combined with the next-generation of noise reduction captures the moment in beautiful photos like no other compact digital camera." The truth, known to many readers of this site (though not all or I wouldn't be writing this), is that high megapixel counts don't really impact noise performance the way they are commonly believed to do so.
Everyone knows that noise which is apparent when an image is viewed at high magnification is far less apparent when the image is viewed small. Put another way, downsampling an image improves the apparent level of detail relative to noise. Judicious and skilled application of software noise reduction and sharpening during the downsampling process can further enhance this perception of detail/noise. The opposite is also true. When we upsize images, the apparent detail relative to noise decreases. Comparing a 12MP ISO 1600 image from the F100fd to a 6MP ISO 1600 image from the F30, there is no doubt that the one with smaller pixels (F100fd) will have far more noise when both images are viewed at 100% (pixel level); however, the 100% view is misleading. One should take into account that in producing output of equal size whether onscreen or in print, the high MP image will require more downsampling or less upscaling, either of which will improve the apparent detail/noise in the F100fd image relative to the F30 image. A number of individuals, clued in to this concept, have demonstrated similar high ISO results with high MP compacts relative to the "F30/F31 standard." For example, look here for Prognathous' demonstration of a resized, noise-reduced crop from the 10MP Ricoh GX100 compared to the in-camera JPEG output of the F31.
In theory, for two sensors of equal size and technology (same high ISO read noise and light capturing ability), the pixel (more accurately sensel) pitch should not impact high ISO detail relative to noise performance whatsoever at a given output size. For technical discussion, refer to the many posts by John Sheehy as well as those of Emil Martinec on these matters. While the theory makes intuitive sense to me, I have to admit that in practice it doesn't quite work out. Consider the following small pixel pitch vs large pixel pitch comparisons: 1Ds Mk II vs 5D, G7 vs F30, 1Ds Mk III vs D3. In each case the generation of sensor technology is assumed to be reasonably close, and the sensors are of similar size; hence light gathering ability should be nearly matched. As expected, the small-pixelled cameras show far more "per pixel" noise at high ISOs than do the large-pixelled cameras. Resizing both images to the same size output, these differences are greatly mitigated. Yet from the examples I have seen, the large-pixelled cameras continue to hold a slight high ISO edge even after resizing. Some maintain that such differences come down to software processing (NR, sharpening, etc). I'll leave it to folks like John and Emil to clarify those particulars. The main point here is that the pixel-level view is highly misleading and that the commonly held belief that more megapixels means poor high ISO performance is, at least for the most part, unfounded.
Fuji has undoubtedly been working to improve their sensor technology, but even so it is highly unlikely that the 12MP files from the F100fd will be able to match the 6MP images from the old F30 when compared at 100%. Knowing well that the pixel-level view makes quite an impression and that most people want to have their downsampling and noise reduction done for them, they have enabled the F100fd to offer the ability to process in-camera JPEGs as 6MP files (similar to the F30). Unfortunately I do not have the F100fd in hand for testing. However, a Chinese blog at http://f100fd.seesaa.net/ (English translation by Google here) has quite a few 6MP high ISO F100fd images. Click here to see some of their high ISO F100fd samples. To my eye, they look similar to the output of my old F30 and a bit better than I can get from downsampling high ISO images from other high MP compacts. I don't know if the Fuji advantage comes from better sensor technology or more sophisticated on-board noise reduction software, but the results are impressive. Then again, if you're the type who likes to selectively and sparingly use NR, no luck. The F100fd does not offer RAW and won't let you disable NR on in-camera JPEGs.
Addendum: Prognathous has done some excellent side-by-side testing of the high ISO performance of the Fuji F31 and F100fd. You can find his comparison here. It seems that the F31 is still class leading in this area, though the F100fd has a respectable result.
In the final bit of this three-part look ahead at the F100fd, I'll discuss Fuji's claims for wide dynamic range. That disclaimer once again: I have no inside information from Fuji, nor have I had the priviledge to yet test the F100fd. What follows is simply a discussion of the known technology with a measured dose of good-natured speculation.
Part 2 - High ISO Noise
Part 3 - Dynamic Range
Many readers of this site are aware that, beginning with the F10 and culminating with the F30, Fuji has offered arguably the best high ISO performance yet seen in a compact camera. Professional reviewers and photographers alike attributed this ability to a combination of Fuji's proprietary sensor technology, the decision to stick with only 6MP, and expert application of relatively heavy noise reduction. Whatever the contributing reasons, the results were compelling. Here is an example of a resized ISO 1600 shot I took of my son in relatively low light (f/5, 1/38s):
With the F50fd and now the F100fd, a number of reviewers, photography blogs, and Fuji fans have complained about Fuji's decision to follow suit in the megapixel hike. Surely they cannot deliver F30-class high ISO performance with the F100fd, which crams 12 million sensels into a small (1/1.6") sensor, right? Yet Fuji claims that with the F100fd, "ultrahigh sensitivity combined with the next-generation of noise reduction captures the moment in beautiful photos like no other compact digital camera." The truth, known to many readers of this site (though not all or I wouldn't be writing this), is that high megapixel counts don't really impact noise performance the way they are commonly believed to do so.
Everyone knows that noise which is apparent when an image is viewed at high magnification is far less apparent when the image is viewed small. Put another way, downsampling an image improves the apparent level of detail relative to noise. Judicious and skilled application of software noise reduction and sharpening during the downsampling process can further enhance this perception of detail/noise. The opposite is also true. When we upsize images, the apparent detail relative to noise decreases. Comparing a 12MP ISO 1600 image from the F100fd to a 6MP ISO 1600 image from the F30, there is no doubt that the one with smaller pixels (F100fd) will have far more noise when both images are viewed at 100% (pixel level); however, the 100% view is misleading. One should take into account that in producing output of equal size whether onscreen or in print, the high MP image will require more downsampling or less upscaling, either of which will improve the apparent detail/noise in the F100fd image relative to the F30 image. A number of individuals, clued in to this concept, have demonstrated similar high ISO results with high MP compacts relative to the "F30/F31 standard." For example, look here for Prognathous' demonstration of a resized, noise-reduced crop from the 10MP Ricoh GX100 compared to the in-camera JPEG output of the F31.
In theory, for two sensors of equal size and technology (same high ISO read noise and light capturing ability), the pixel (more accurately sensel) pitch should not impact high ISO detail relative to noise performance whatsoever at a given output size. For technical discussion, refer to the many posts by John Sheehy as well as those of Emil Martinec on these matters. While the theory makes intuitive sense to me, I have to admit that in practice it doesn't quite work out. Consider the following small pixel pitch vs large pixel pitch comparisons: 1Ds Mk II vs 5D, G7 vs F30, 1Ds Mk III vs D3. In each case the generation of sensor technology is assumed to be reasonably close, and the sensors are of similar size; hence light gathering ability should be nearly matched. As expected, the small-pixelled cameras show far more "per pixel" noise at high ISOs than do the large-pixelled cameras. Resizing both images to the same size output, these differences are greatly mitigated. Yet from the examples I have seen, the large-pixelled cameras continue to hold a slight high ISO edge even after resizing. Some maintain that such differences come down to software processing (NR, sharpening, etc). I'll leave it to folks like John and Emil to clarify those particulars. The main point here is that the pixel-level view is highly misleading and that the commonly held belief that more megapixels means poor high ISO performance is, at least for the most part, unfounded.
Fuji has undoubtedly been working to improve their sensor technology, but even so it is highly unlikely that the 12MP files from the F100fd will be able to match the 6MP images from the old F30 when compared at 100%. Knowing well that the pixel-level view makes quite an impression and that most people want to have their downsampling and noise reduction done for them, they have enabled the F100fd to offer the ability to process in-camera JPEGs as 6MP files (similar to the F30). Unfortunately I do not have the F100fd in hand for testing. However, a Chinese blog at http://f100fd.seesaa.net/ (English translation by Google here) has quite a few 6MP high ISO F100fd images. Click here to see some of their high ISO F100fd samples. To my eye, they look similar to the output of my old F30 and a bit better than I can get from downsampling high ISO images from other high MP compacts. I don't know if the Fuji advantage comes from better sensor technology or more sophisticated on-board noise reduction software, but the results are impressive. Then again, if you're the type who likes to selectively and sparingly use NR, no luck. The F100fd does not offer RAW and won't let you disable NR on in-camera JPEGs.
Addendum: Prognathous has done some excellent side-by-side testing of the high ISO performance of the Fuji F31 and F100fd. You can find his comparison here. It seems that the F31 is still class leading in this area, though the F100fd has a respectable result.
In the final bit of this three-part look ahead at the F100fd, I'll discuss Fuji's claims for wide dynamic range. That disclaimer once again: I have no inside information from Fuji, nor have I had the priviledge to yet test the F100fd. What follows is simply a discussion of the known technology with a measured dose of good-natured speculation.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Two Potential Solutions for Shallow Depth of Field with Digital Compacts
Unlike film compacts, current digital compacts are unable to achieve a shallow depth of field, with the exceptions being telephoto and very close range photography. In part, this limitation has to do with the fact that digital sensors achieve best performance when incident light hits the sensor "straight on." The inherently deep DOF of small sensor compact cameras is considered by some to be a strength of the format. The Small Sensor Cameras forum at GetDPI.com is a great place for discussion of how to make the most of this class of camera. However many, myself included, would like to see the development of compact digital cameras capable of shallow DOF. The DP1 is a step in the right direction, with greater potential for shallow DOF than any other digital compact camera with a similarly wide angle field of view. However, even the DP1 is stuck with a deep DOF by film compact standards. The wonderful examples of shallow DOF shown by Carl Rytterfalk and others were made possible primarily through photography of very close subjects. Many people have wondered about the possibility of achieving shallow DOF using automatic software, but such a solution is believed impossible. There is simply no way for the camera processor to know which objects lay outside of the intended focus zone. The manual application of software to blur selectively during postprocessing can achieve the intended result but is often labor intensive and is generally considered to produce inferior results to shallow DOF achieved optically.
As the title of this post suggests, I recently came across two potential solutions for achieving shallow DOF with digital compacts. The first, while not as novel as the second, will be available much sooner. onOne Software, the makers of several highly-regarded Photoshop plugins including Genuine Fractals, have announced FocalPoint, a product which "recreates the look of selective focus and tilt-shift lenses." As I mentioned above, the concept of applying selective blur during postprocessing is nothing new. However, this plugin has the potential to improve the ease with which quality results are achievable, particularly by those of us who aren't Photoshop wizards. The screenshot below, provided by onOne, gives a suggestion of the type of control possible with this software.
The product description states that "FocalPoint gives photographers a way to create realistic depth of field control, plane of focus control and selective focus to any image after it is photographed allowing for more control and precision. The focus bug control in FocalPoint has a tangible, hardware feel much like using a lens. It makes it fast for a photographer to define the "sweet spot" either in a round shape or a plane and then control how much and of what kind of blur they would like to add. This has a huge benefit over hardware tools like auxiliary lenses and filters because it allows the photographer to control the focus after the image is taken, giving them more control and requiring fewer shots in camera." FocalPoint will be available in April for $159.95. I plan to download the demo at that time and will report back on my experiences with it.
The second potential solution meantioned earlier comes from Stanford University by way of Engadget. Researchers at Stanford are preparing a "multi-aperture camera." The pixels (sensels) of the 3MP sensor are 0.7 microns across and arranged in groups of 256 pixels. Each 256-pixel group is associated with it's own tiny lens. That makes more than 12,000 lenses! While this technology is expected to produce an image where everything is in focus, the spatial distribution of the lenses is such that any point in the image will be captured by at least four lens-sensor units, each from a slightly different perspective. This will allow precise determination of distances to all subjects in a given photo, much the same way two eyes provide a means for depth perception in human vision. The recorded distance information will make it possible to selectively defocus based on subject distance using software.
The image shown above doesn't look like anything we'll be throwing in a pocket any time soon. However, according to the article at PhysOrg.com, the multi-aperture camera will "look and feel like an ordinary camera, or even a smaller cell phone camera. The cell phone aspect is important, Fife said, given that 'the majority of the cameras in the world are now on phones.'" The many applications of this technology go far beyond that of achieving a shallow DOF with digital compacts, so be sure to check out the Physorg.com article for further information.
As the title of this post suggests, I recently came across two potential solutions for achieving shallow DOF with digital compacts. The first, while not as novel as the second, will be available much sooner. onOne Software, the makers of several highly-regarded Photoshop plugins including Genuine Fractals, have announced FocalPoint, a product which "recreates the look of selective focus and tilt-shift lenses." As I mentioned above, the concept of applying selective blur during postprocessing is nothing new. However, this plugin has the potential to improve the ease with which quality results are achievable, particularly by those of us who aren't Photoshop wizards. The screenshot below, provided by onOne, gives a suggestion of the type of control possible with this software.
The product description states that "FocalPoint gives photographers a way to create realistic depth of field control, plane of focus control and selective focus to any image after it is photographed allowing for more control and precision. The focus bug control in FocalPoint has a tangible, hardware feel much like using a lens. It makes it fast for a photographer to define the "sweet spot" either in a round shape or a plane and then control how much and of what kind of blur they would like to add. This has a huge benefit over hardware tools like auxiliary lenses and filters because it allows the photographer to control the focus after the image is taken, giving them more control and requiring fewer shots in camera." FocalPoint will be available in April for $159.95. I plan to download the demo at that time and will report back on my experiences with it.
The second potential solution meantioned earlier comes from Stanford University by way of Engadget. Researchers at Stanford are preparing a "multi-aperture camera." The pixels (sensels) of the 3MP sensor are 0.7 microns across and arranged in groups of 256 pixels. Each 256-pixel group is associated with it's own tiny lens. That makes more than 12,000 lenses! While this technology is expected to produce an image where everything is in focus, the spatial distribution of the lenses is such that any point in the image will be captured by at least four lens-sensor units, each from a slightly different perspective. This will allow precise determination of distances to all subjects in a given photo, much the same way two eyes provide a means for depth perception in human vision. The recorded distance information will make it possible to selectively defocus based on subject distance using software.
The image shown above doesn't look like anything we'll be throwing in a pocket any time soon. However, according to the article at PhysOrg.com, the multi-aperture camera will "look and feel like an ordinary camera, or even a smaller cell phone camera. The cell phone aspect is important, Fife said, given that 'the majority of the cameras in the world are now on phones.'" The many applications of this technology go far beyond that of achieving a shallow DOF with digital compacts, so be sure to check out the Physorg.com article for further information.
Sigma DP1 test on PopPhoto.com
PopPhoto.com published a test of the Sigma DP1 on their site. They say that the DP1 sets a new standard for image quality in a compact camera. Have a read here.
Panasonic FX500: Quite a Serious Ultra Compact
Weighing a mere 175g with battery, Panasonic’s new ultra compact FX500 is only 22mm thick. What makes the camera unusual is that it is the first FX series camera that includes full manual exposure control. In any of the manual exposure modes, aperture, shutter speed and exposure compensation can be selected by dragging sliders across the touch screen. There’s even a degree of control over the auto focus: you can touch the part of the scene that the camera is to focus on. The camera will then even track the chosen subject if it moves across the screen. Image parameters such as contrast, saturation, sharpening and even noise reduction can be set individually in 5 steps. Other than the lack of an option to record RAW files, the FX500 gives the photographer a surprising amount of control. The lens also offers a versatile range, starting from a very wide 25mm and ending at 125mm (35mm equivalent).Of course not much is known about how the FX500 performs in terms of image quality at this point. I suspect that its image quality will be very similar to the FX35, with which it shares the same 1/2.33” 10.7MP sensor. I’ll have a look at the FX35’s image quality when it arrives tomorrow.
All images courtesy of Panasonic.
Above: Manual control with on-screen shutter speed and aperture sliders
Above: Focus tracking
Monday, March 17, 2008
Said Karlsson's Impressions of the Sigma DP1
Just over a week ago, we reported on Said Karlsson's first impressions of the Sigma DP1. If you have an interest in the DP1 and haven't been following Said's blog since then, be sure to take a look at his second impressions, posted on Thursday. Nothing represents a new camera like great photos.
Fuji F100fd - It's Compact, but is it Serious? Part 1 of 3 (Introduction)
Part 1 - Introduction
Part 2 - High ISO Noise
Part 3 - Dynamic Range
When I shop for a pocket camera, there are three questions I ask.
1) How well does the camera allow me to do my part? This is largely dependent on features such as those that follow:
- Aperture-priority, shutter speed priority, and true manual mode (independent aperture and shutter speed control)
- Focal length range
- Maximum lens aperture
- RAW capability
- Manual focus capability
- Quality of LCD and/or viewfinder
- Ergonomics
- Physical controls
- Operational speed (including autofocus speed, shutter lag, RAW buffer, etc)
- Camera size
2) How well does the camera do its part when I do mine? This consists of the following:
- Lens sharpness, distortion, contrast, bokeh, color
- Sensor ability to capture detail in optimal light
- Sensor detail relative to noise in suboptimal light
- Sensor dynamic range (effect of lens omitted here for discussion)
- Sensor effects on color
- Presence and effectiveness of image stabilization
- Battery life
- Weather resistance
The two categories above are largely what define the "seriousness" of a compact to me. Yet there is another category.
3) How well does the camera do its part if I don't want to do my part? Here we consider such features as face detection, which are of greatest importance to the person who doesn't want complete control over the picture-taking process.
One area which broadly falls under categories 2 & 3 is that of in-camera JPEG handling. There is no doubt that some compact camera photographers prefer to do "serious" work while shooting in JPEG mode, whereas others prefer RAW. For the former group, the in-camera handling of JPEGs is critical and raises the following questions:
- How flexible are in-camera settings for sharpness and noise reduction?
- How flexible are in-camera settings for color and contrast?
- What other operations is the camera performing with regards to tone mapping, and how much control can I exert over these?
What does all this have to do with the Fuji F100fd, and does the F100fd deserve to be called a "serious compact"? The second question is worth asking because the F100fd lacks important features from category 1, namely control of aperture/shutter speed and RAW capability. In this sense, it isn't a very serious compact at all. It is the heir of the F20/F40 more so than that of the more capable F30. Yet, having viewed a number of image samples from the F100fd, it is clear to me that this camera has the potential to produce "serious" results. In fact, despite having left out aperture and shutter speed controls, Fuji is referring to the F100fd as "the ultimate ‘F Series’ digital camera."
Boiled down to it's essence, the F100fd offers the promise of two potentially exciting capabilities. First, it is said to have a 1/1.6" 8th Generation Super CCD sensor capable of both recording 12MP of detail as well as maintaining high detail relative to noise at high ISO values in low light. Second, Fuji claims that "[the wide dynamic range] technology, now perfected in the EISA Award-winning FinePix S5 Pro, has been brought to the consumer in the FinePix F100fd." Before dismissing these claims out of hand, one ought to give Fuji the respect they are due. In terms of detail/noise, Fuji truly brought high ISO performance to compact cameras with the F10/11 and refined this capability with the F30. With regards to high dynamic range imaging, Fuji again successfully pushed the field with their S3 and S5 DSLRs. However, with today's technology, the F100fd's 5x zoom and shirt pocket size means a small sensor size; and while 1/1.6" is larger than most other small sensors, it isn't that much larger. Putting 12MP in a small sensor means a tiny sensel size. Part 2 of this series will address the question, "Can the tiny-senselled F100fd have a detail/noise performance similar to that of the 6MP Fuji F30?" Part 3 will address the F100fd dynamic range claims. Disclaimer: I have no inside information from Fuji, nor have I had the priviledge to yet test the F100fd. What follows is simply a discussion of the known technology with a measured dose of good-natured speculation.
A Rainy Day in Amsterdam
It was one of those days, one which usually falls on the weekend, where it rained the whole day. So if I was going to take photos, I had to take them by holding the camera under an umbrella. Unfortunately, I only have two hands, one of which was kept occupied trying to create the kind of dry environment amenable to modern electronic equipment. That left my right arm to hold and operate the camera.
A nice and light compact camera would have been most ideal, at least in terms of weight. But compact cameras with small sensors struggle on dark, overcast days. In any case, I don’t have a “serious compact” at the moment.
So that left my DSLR. I can’t hold my DSLR with the heavy zoom lens in one hand; the lens is heavy enough that I prefer supporting it with my other hand (never mind being able to operate the zoom ring).
It was the perfect opportunity to try out my new 35mm f/2 prime lens. It’s light enough that I can easily hold the D300 in one hand without it having the tendency to fall forward due to the weight of the lens.
At f/2, that lens is also bright enough for shooting in dim surroundings. I was a little worried that an equivalent focal length of 52mm wasn’t wide enough in the confined spaces of historic Amsterdam. But after I started shooting, I hardly missed a true wide angle, nor did I miss the sunshine.
A nice and light compact camera would have been most ideal, at least in terms of weight. But compact cameras with small sensors struggle on dark, overcast days. In any case, I don’t have a “serious compact” at the moment.
So that left my DSLR. I can’t hold my DSLR with the heavy zoom lens in one hand; the lens is heavy enough that I prefer supporting it with my other hand (never mind being able to operate the zoom ring).
It was the perfect opportunity to try out my new 35mm f/2 prime lens. It’s light enough that I can easily hold the D300 in one hand without it having the tendency to fall forward due to the weight of the lens.
At f/2, that lens is also bright enough for shooting in dim surroundings. I was a little worried that an equivalent focal length of 52mm wasn’t wide enough in the confined spaces of historic Amsterdam. But after I started shooting, I hardly missed a true wide angle, nor did I miss the sunshine.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Serious Compacts Flickr Group Created
We've just created a Serious Compacts Flickr Group as a place for readers of this blog to share photos and discuss common interests. If you look at the menu at the top of this blog, you'll see a link to the group.
Even if you primarily use another photo sharing site such as PBase, SmugMug, or Picasa Web Albums, joining Flickr is a free and easy way to interact with many interesting groups including ours. After joining Flickr, use any of the simple Flickr upload tools to get your photos into Flickr. AFter joining the Serious Compacts Group on Flickr, you'll be able to send any of your Flickr photos to the group by using the "Send to Group" option shown above each of your photos as shown below.
Hope to see some of you sharing thoughts and photos there soon!
Even if you primarily use another photo sharing site such as PBase, SmugMug, or Picasa Web Albums, joining Flickr is a free and easy way to interact with many interesting groups including ours. After joining Flickr, use any of the simple Flickr upload tools to get your photos into Flickr. AFter joining the Serious Compacts Group on Flickr, you'll be able to send any of your Flickr photos to the group by using the "Send to Group" option shown above each of your photos as shown below.
Hope to see some of you sharing thoughts and photos there soon!
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Euyoung's Six-Part Sigma DP1 Review
Euyoung has posted a six-part look at the Sigma DP1 on his blog at http://euyoung.blogspot.com/. It is easily the most thorough report I've seen yet on the DP1 and includes a detailed comparison with the GRD II. There's even a guest appearance from the Olympus E3 and Panasonic L10! The entries are written in Chinese, so English speakers may prefer to use the Google-provided translations below.
Preface - Initial Impressions
Part 1 - Box opening, camera and accessories introduced
Part 2 - DP1 LCD interface and menus
Part 3 - Report on build quality and operating performance
Part 4 - Comments on close focus, Foveon X3, and DP1 RAW vs JPEG
Part 5 - DP1 Compared to GRD2
Part 6 - Conclusion and sample images
Preface - Initial Impressions
Part 1 - Box opening, camera and accessories introduced
Part 2 - DP1 LCD interface and menus
Part 3 - Report on build quality and operating performance
Part 4 - Comments on close focus, Foveon X3, and DP1 RAW vs JPEG
Part 5 - DP1 Compared to GRD2
Part 6 - Conclusion and sample images
Featured Artist: Mitchell Kanashkevich
One thing we'd like to do here at Serious Compacts is feature the outstanding work being done with advanced compact gear. To me, an "advanced" camera is one that offers a high degree of control over the process of making photographs. "Compact" is more difficult to define. I tend to consider the smaller DSLRs to be compact, particularly when they're coupled to small and light primes or the smallest of zooms. For example, the Olympus E-410 coupled to the ZD 14-42mm zoom is about as compact as a Leica M-series camera with lens. That's just my personal take on where the upper end of "compact" lies. An interesting phenomenon of today's DSLR makers is that they tend to equate "small" with "entry level." So what kinds of artists use these "beginner" cameras?
Today's featured artist is Mitchell Kanashkevich, a 26-year old Australian photographer originally from Belarus. In his PBase profile, Mitchell cites Steve Mccurry, Olivier Follmi, Henri Cartier Bresson, Eugene H Johnson, Paolo Pellegrin, Phil Borges, Sebastio Salgado, and James Natchwey as favorite photographers. His "compact-ish" kit consists of a Canon 400D and several small and light primes. Mitchell's portraits of the people of India, Nepal, Thailand, and Belarus are remarkably warm and engaging, highlighting the great importance of the relationship between photographer and subject. He has great success in capturing both the outer and inner beauty of people met throughout his motorcycle journeys around the Indian sub-continent. Mitchell Kanashkevich's work is best viewed online at www.mitchellkphotos.com.
Today's featured artist is Mitchell Kanashkevich, a 26-year old Australian photographer originally from Belarus. In his PBase profile, Mitchell cites Steve Mccurry, Olivier Follmi, Henri Cartier Bresson, Eugene H Johnson, Paolo Pellegrin, Phil Borges, Sebastio Salgado, and James Natchwey as favorite photographers. His "compact-ish" kit consists of a Canon 400D and several small and light primes. Mitchell's portraits of the people of India, Nepal, Thailand, and Belarus are remarkably warm and engaging, highlighting the great importance of the relationship between photographer and subject. He has great success in capturing both the outer and inner beauty of people met throughout his motorcycle journeys around the Indian sub-continent. Mitchell Kanashkevich's work is best viewed online at www.mitchellkphotos.com.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Luminous Landscape announces Ricoh GX100 review
Michael Reichmann of The Luminous Landscape announced that he will post a brief hands-on review "of this fascinating little camera later in the week." The current homepage photograph on his site was made with the GX100.
The Year of the Prime
The market release of Sigma’s DP1 moves single focal length lenses back into the spotlight. The DP1 isn’t the first among modern digital compacts equipped with a 28mm equivalent prime lens; Ricoh introduced its 28mm, fixed focal length GRD in 2005.
Olympus’ new pancake lens has an equivalent focal length of 50mm. This is quite a bit narrower than the 28mm of the DP1 and GRD. 50mm is considered a “normal” lens; one which is thought to have the same angle of view as human eyesight. I’m speculating, but I wouldn’t be surprised if a Sigma DP2, or another large sensor compact from a competitor, doesn’t also have an integrated normal lens.
The Zuiko 25mm f/2.8 pancake lens has a diameter of 64mm, so it would almost fit the 60mm height of the current DP1 body. Therefore it seems that a 4/3 sensor compact with a 50mm equivalent f/2.8 lens is possible.
Below are scaled front views of both the DP1 and the Zuiko 25mm f/2.8 lens.
To get a feeling for working with normal prime lenses, I purchased a Nikkor 35mm f/2 lens for my Nikon D300. That yields an equivalent focal length of 52.5mm. My first impressions are that photographing with it is a lot less restrictive than I had imagined considering that my experience to date is solely with zoom lenses. In time I think I will start to see and frame photos with that particular focal length in mind.
Above: at a hefty 1200 grams this is still not compact, although certainly serious!
I’m going to be using the prime lens exclusively for the next few weeks. After that time, I hope to have a better understanding of whether to invest in a combination like the E-420 plus Zuiko 25mm lens.
Just supposing you had to take all your photos with only one prime lens, what focal length would it be? Would you find working with a prime lens restrictive? If I could figure that out, it would make deciding on any future fixed focal length cameras that much simpler. I’m hoping that the DP1 will be followed by other cameras in this class and, given the constraints of placing a large sensor in a compact body, it’s likely that at least some will have prime lenses.
Olympus’ new pancake lens has an equivalent focal length of 50mm. This is quite a bit narrower than the 28mm of the DP1 and GRD. 50mm is considered a “normal” lens; one which is thought to have the same angle of view as human eyesight. I’m speculating, but I wouldn’t be surprised if a Sigma DP2, or another large sensor compact from a competitor, doesn’t also have an integrated normal lens.
The Zuiko 25mm f/2.8 pancake lens has a diameter of 64mm, so it would almost fit the 60mm height of the current DP1 body. Therefore it seems that a 4/3 sensor compact with a 50mm equivalent f/2.8 lens is possible.
Below are scaled front views of both the DP1 and the Zuiko 25mm f/2.8 lens.
To get a feeling for working with normal prime lenses, I purchased a Nikkor 35mm f/2 lens for my Nikon D300. That yields an equivalent focal length of 52.5mm. My first impressions are that photographing with it is a lot less restrictive than I had imagined considering that my experience to date is solely with zoom lenses. In time I think I will start to see and frame photos with that particular focal length in mind.
Above: at a hefty 1200 grams this is still not compact, although certainly serious!
I’m going to be using the prime lens exclusively for the next few weeks. After that time, I hope to have a better understanding of whether to invest in a combination like the E-420 plus Zuiko 25mm lens.
Just supposing you had to take all your photos with only one prime lens, what focal length would it be? Would you find working with a prime lens restrictive? If I could figure that out, it would make deciding on any future fixed focal length cameras that much simpler. I’m hoping that the DP1 will be followed by other cameras in this class and, given the constraints of placing a large sensor in a compact body, it’s likely that at least some will have prime lenses.
Two New Ricoh Reviews on the "Mainstream" Review Sites
DPReview today published their review of the Ricoh R8, a very compact camera with a 28-200mm (equivalent) f/3.3-5.2 zoom lens coupled to a 10MP 1/2.3" sensor. On paper, the most glaring deficiency is the lack of RAW mode. In addition to DPReview, PhotographyBLOG has a recent review of the R8.
Earlier this week, Steve's Digicams posted their first review of a Ricoh, in this case the flagship GR Digital II. That review can be found here. DC Resource's GRD II review was their first Ricoh review since 2001.
As a rule, a Ricoh user can expect high lens performance, full manual controls, an excellent user interface, and good responsiveness. It's good to see the large review sites paying more attention to Ricoh compacts.
For the ultimate rundown of serious compact reviews, be sure to check out the Power Compacts Review Matrix at 1001 Noisy Bloggers. Special thanks to our noisy friends for highlighting Serious Compacts today.
Earlier this week, Steve's Digicams posted their first review of a Ricoh, in this case the flagship GR Digital II. That review can be found here. DC Resource's GRD II review was their first Ricoh review since 2001.
As a rule, a Ricoh user can expect high lens performance, full manual controls, an excellent user interface, and good responsiveness. It's good to see the large review sites paying more attention to Ricoh compacts.
For the ultimate rundown of serious compact reviews, be sure to check out the Power Compacts Review Matrix at 1001 Noisy Bloggers. Special thanks to our noisy friends for highlighting Serious Compacts today.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Zeiss Ikon Review on TOP
Speaking of "serious" compacts, Mike Johnston published his Zeiss Ikon ZI review today. Much respect to Zeiss and Cosina for introducing such a thoughtful product in the narrowest of markets. Respect to Mike also for doing much the same in writing this review.
Amin Foto Renamed to Serious Compacts
We have renamed this site as Serious Compacts. This was done to reflect our primary focus, which is on advanced compact cameras, i.e. compact cameras for photographers. The old name, Amin Foto, also seemed less appropriate since I am no longer the sole blog author. Björn Utpott has kindly agreed to contribute to the site, and we will be featuring other contributors as time goes along. Please update your any bookmarks with the new site address, www.seriouscompacts.com.
Addendum: Unfortunately, migrating the domain from AminPhoto.blogspot to AminFoto and then SeriousCompacts has had the unfortunate side effect of breaking all the links to old material in Google searches. This will likely get worked out as the new site is indexed. In the meanwhile, if you are looking for any old material, the search box in the upper left corner of the page should take you there.
Addendum: Unfortunately, migrating the domain from AminPhoto.blogspot to AminFoto and then SeriousCompacts has had the unfortunate side effect of breaking all the links to old material in Google searches. This will likely get worked out as the new site is indexed. In the meanwhile, if you are looking for any old material, the search box in the upper left corner of the page should take you there.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Public Service Message Re: Amazon DP1 Pre-Order
If you have pre-ordered the DP1 on Amazon and at the same time pre-ordered accessories such as the hood, your order is likely to not ship until May-June. This is because some accessories such as the hood will not be available until that time, and Amazon by default ships the whole order as one package. The solution is to specify to Amazon that they ship the items separately, at which point the estimated ship date for the DP1 will magically change from May-June to March 25 (unless you have chosen free "Super Saver Shipping," in which case they estimate March 31).
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Nik Software Viveza
Many photographers enjoy the benefits of tone mapping, the process of reassigning tones of an image to a distribution that looks good on screen or in print. In some cases, this process can be labor intensive, involving careful layer masking. Some RAW developers include intuitive controls over the process of tone mapping. LightZone is notable in this respect. Viveza utilizes Nik Software's U Point technology to allow remarkable control over specific tones without the use of layer masking. Viveza is incredibly easy to use. I downloaded the 15-day free trial less than an hour before making the video below. Despite having never before used any plugins from Nik Software, I was able to quickly pick up the basics after viewing a few short video tutorials. Given a cost just under $250, it is unlikely that I will buy Viveza since I'm pretty used to doing similar manipulations the "hard way." Nevertheless, two hours into my trial, I am impressed. The only real downside is that Viveza works at the level of TIFF files rather than directly on the RAW. In the following video, I take two of the Sigma DP1 RAW files provided by Carl Rytterfalk, quickly convert them in Sigma Photo Pro, and then process them using Viveza. The emphasis in this video is on Viveza itself, though I thought it would be fun to use DP1 files. See Carl's video here for a better demonstration of Sigma Photo Pro.
Addendum: One very important thing I forgot to show is that by default, the version created by Viveza is on a new layer in Photoshop. Therefore, it makes for a good start for further selective masking if one is so inclined.
Addendum: One very important thing I forgot to show is that by default, the version created by Viveza is on a new layer in Photoshop. Therefore, it makes for a good start for further selective masking if one is so inclined.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Update on the DP1 Shootout
Thanks to all who have participated in the poll. Based on the results so far, I am planning a shootout with the Sigma DP1, Ricoh GRD II, and Canon 5D, beginning as soon as I receive the DP1. If I can stretch the budget a bit, a Canon G9 may find it's way into the shootout (but no promises).
Addendum - Due to the early availability of the E-420 & 14-42mm kit, this camera will be included as well. Unfortunately that stretches our working budget, and we may not be able to include the GRD II in the shootout. More on that later...
Addendum - Due to the early availability of the E-420 & 14-42mm kit, this camera will be included as well. Unfortunately that stretches our working budget, and we may not be able to include the GRD II in the shootout. More on that later...
Two Sigma DP1 Pro User Reviews Posted
Carl Rytterfalk has posted a YouTube video review of the DP1, and Said Karlsson has shared his 24-hour impressions of the DP1. Both reports are very well done.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Sigma DP1 Dynamic Range
There has been quite a bit of discussion about the DP1 performance compared with other compact cameras. Much of it has been negative. Some have pointed out that the low ISO DP1 images upscaled to 12MP fail to capture noticeably more detail than those from the excellent Canon G9 viewed at native size. Others have pointed to the disappointing high ISO results demonstrated by in-camera JPEGs from the pre-production DP1 used in the Imaging Resource Comparometer. Personally, I have been most impressed with the tonal range I'm seeing in the image samples we've seen from capable photographers. Download Sigma Photo Pro (SPP), get Carl Rytterfalk's DP1 RAW pack, and play. If you use a Mac, get SPP 3.1 here. Carl might just be able to help out the PC users ;-).
Addendum: Carl has kindly allowed me to use his RAW files as examples. Image #6 of 10 (SDIM0408.X3F) in the RAW pack, the photo of shoes on a table, shows quite a bit of exposure latitude despite being shot at ISO 400. The following animated GIF demonstrates the highlight headroom. Watch as the highlight slider in SPP is adjusted. The GIF is just over 1MB in size, so it may take a bit to load depending on your connection. Also, please note that the apparent noise is actually due to posterization, which results from the conversion to a 256-color GIF.
2nd Addendum: It seems that the ISO 400 and 800 DP1 images have a shocking amount of highlight headroom during RAW processing, whereas the shadows are nothing special (in fact, an early impression is that they seem rather blocked up). Click here for an example of the highlight latitude. The likely explanation for this is that the high ISO files actually represent "pushed" underexposed low ISO files. This would explain how the highlights are restorable with negative EV in post, which would act to simply reverse the push. I'd like to see an evaluation of the DP1 dynamic range at the base ISO.
Addendum: Carl has kindly allowed me to use his RAW files as examples. Image #6 of 10 (SDIM0408.X3F) in the RAW pack, the photo of shoes on a table, shows quite a bit of exposure latitude despite being shot at ISO 400. The following animated GIF demonstrates the highlight headroom. Watch as the highlight slider in SPP is adjusted. The GIF is just over 1MB in size, so it may take a bit to load depending on your connection. Also, please note that the apparent noise is actually due to posterization, which results from the conversion to a 256-color GIF.
2nd Addendum: It seems that the ISO 400 and 800 DP1 images have a shocking amount of highlight headroom during RAW processing, whereas the shadows are nothing special (in fact, an early impression is that they seem rather blocked up). Click here for an example of the highlight latitude. The likely explanation for this is that the high ISO files actually represent "pushed" underexposed low ISO files. This would explain how the highlights are restorable with negative EV in post, which would act to simply reverse the push. I'd like to see an evaluation of the DP1 dynamic range at the base ISO.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Shrinking Gap in Size Between DSLRs and Compacts
Today’s announcement of the Olympus ED 25mm f2.8 Zuiko Lens continues to decrease the gap in size between high end compact cameras and DSLRs.
Whether you choose the DP1 or an Olympus E-420 + 25mm lens, both systems have a fixed focal length. The choice is between a relatively wide 28mm on the DP1 or a normal 50mm with the new Zuiko lens (both 35mm equivalents).
But 535g may be light enough for some to keep an E-420 in their coat pocket; to have it with them all the time.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Insights into Future Advanced Compacts from Panasonic
Via the tireless 1001 Noisy Cameras comes news of Lets Go Digital's excellent interview with Panasonic. My read of the statements made by the Panasonic representative is that Panasonic has an LX2 placement in the works for Photokina and acknowledges the role of large sensors in the future of compact digital photography. I could have guessed both of these, but it is encouraging to hear them confirmed, even if only indirectly so.
Though most people seem to think of the Powershot G9 when they hear the term "advanced compact," I believe that companies like Panasonic, Ricoh, and now Sigma, are leading the way. The G9 is an outstanding execution of an evolving series, but Canon aren't innovating the way that these other companies are. As the market leader, I suppose there isn't much incentive for them to do so; but I can't help wondering what Canon could accomplish if they too were pushing the envelope. Meanwhile, of all the small sensor advanced compacts we are likely to see at Photokina, the Panasonic LX2 replacement has my greatest interest.
Though most people seem to think of the Powershot G9 when they hear the term "advanced compact," I believe that companies like Panasonic, Ricoh, and now Sigma, are leading the way. The G9 is an outstanding execution of an evolving series, but Canon aren't innovating the way that these other companies are. As the market leader, I suppose there isn't much incentive for them to do so; but I can't help wondering what Canon could accomplish if they too were pushing the envelope. Meanwhile, of all the small sensor advanced compacts we are likely to see at Photokina, the Panasonic LX2 replacement has my greatest interest.
Rytterfalk.com - One Day at a Time with the Sigma DP1
Carl Rytterfalk has posted early impressions of and samples (both stills and video) from the Sigma DP1 on each of the two days he has had the camera thus far. It is great to see even more of what this camera can do in the hands of a talented photographer. If you are interested in the DP1, be sure to bookmark www.rytterfalk.com.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
More Sigma DP Series Compacts Coming this Year?
As seen in a DPReview forum post, Sigma is apparently planning to release two more compacts, in addition to the DP1, later this year. This information reportedly comes via an Amateur Photographer (AP) interview of Sigma's founder Michiro Yamaki, and not surprisingly my friends over at 1001 Noisy Cameras once again beat me to the news =). The relevant quote from the AP article states "Expect to see two more compact cameras by the end of the year was the surprise news from Sigma's founder Michiro Yamaki during an exclusive meeting with AP." AP went on to speculate that these cameras may be similar to the DP1 but with different focal lengths and/or optical zoom capability.
I would love to see a Sigma DP series camera with a longer lens than the DP1. 40mm (equivalent) would be perfect. Given this preference, the AP interview caused me to consider cancelling my DP1 pre-order. However, I've decided against that since 1) I don't want to wait another 6 months or longer, and 2) I imagine carrying around two Sigma DPs of different focal lengths will work very well for me. That said, it makes no sense for Sigma to release this news now. This information could easily damage DP1 sales. Hopefully the AP interview won't have the same effect on the career of Mr. Yamaki that an earlier AP interview was believed by many to have had on that of Leica's previous CEO Mr. Lee. At any rate, I hope this news is true, and I'd like to see some of the other camera makers step in as well to challenge this space!
I would love to see a Sigma DP series camera with a longer lens than the DP1. 40mm (equivalent) would be perfect. Given this preference, the AP interview caused me to consider cancelling my DP1 pre-order. However, I've decided against that since 1) I don't want to wait another 6 months or longer, and 2) I imagine carrying around two Sigma DPs of different focal lengths will work very well for me. That said, it makes no sense for Sigma to release this news now. This information could easily damage DP1 sales. Hopefully the AP interview won't have the same effect on the career of Mr. Yamaki that an earlier AP interview was believed by many to have had on that of Leica's previous CEO Mr. Lee. At any rate, I hope this news is true, and I'd like to see some of the other camera makers step in as well to challenge this space!