Topic: Digital Compact recommendations? (Read 5832 times)

allmodjohns · « **on:** April 02, 2007, 10:07:07 pm »

Hi everyone. I'mhoping I can get some recommendations here to help settle my mind as to which digital compact to buy.

I've been looking over the net for the last couple of hours to find a compact for everyday use but that could also be a stop gap measure if I don't have my film SLR to hand. I'm hoping to travel to Japan for a couple of years soon and since I can't afford a decent DSLR and don't want to shoot umpteen rolls of film every month I'm looking for a good compact.

So far I seem to have come down to the Panasonic LX-2 and the Canon G7. The Panasonic seems to be winning me over with it's RAW capabilities although it seems to be either noisy or sufers from NR artifacts. Are these things that won't affect anything important I shoot in RAW?

Does anyone have any other recommendations? I've looked at the Ricoh GRD but it seems to be far too noisy even at low ISOs.

Any help is grately appreciated.

Thanks
John

jule · « **Reply #1 on:** April 02, 2007, 10:37:20 pm »

Quote

Hi everyone. I'mhoping I can get some recommendations here to help settle my mind as to which digital compact to buy.

I've been looking over the net for the last couple of hours to find a compact for everyday use but that could also be a stop gap measure if I don't have my film SLR to hand. I'm hoping to travel to Japan for a couple of years soon and since I can't afford a decent DSLR and don't want to shoot umpteen rolls of film every month I'm looking for a good compact.

So far I seem to have come down to the Panasonic LX-2 and the Canon G7. The Panasonic seems to be winning me over with it's RAW capabilities although it seems to be either noisy or sufers from NR artifacts. Are these things that won't affect anything important I shoot in RAW?

Does anyone have any other recommendations? I've looked at the Ricoh GRD but it seems to be far too noisy even at low ISOs.

Any help is grately appreciated.

Thanks
John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110339\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm a fan of the G7.

Julie

stever · « **Reply #2 on:** April 03, 2007, 01:13:11 am »

read the reviews at dpreview.com

allmodjohns · « **Reply #3 on:** April 03, 2007, 04:56:33 am »

Quote

read the reviews at dpreview.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110354\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have. As I said I'm looking for some other recommendations.

Dale_Cotton · « **Reply #4 on:** April 03, 2007, 11:02:58 am »

The LX2 noise is definitely there in the RAW. Question is: can you live with it? You can download these LX1 RAW files to see for yourself. They are very well done and the noise in the LX2 RAWs is not significantly different.

Paulo Bizarro · « **Reply #5 on:** April 04, 2007, 01:09:02 am »

Well, if you have read the reviews at Dpreview, there is not too much left to be said. Apart from some real world experience, that is.

In the last couple of years, I have tried several "serious" compact digicams, and this is my experience:

1. GRD: nice camera, yes there is noise, but there is also a lot of detail. Many cameras, like the Fuji (and the new Panasonics) combat noise by destroying detail too. Ricoh chose not to do that, so the images are quite processing-friendly. In the end, the long RAW writing time was just too annoying;

2. G7: this camera is "almost it", but the lack of RAW ended up killing it for me. This is a serious camera, for serious users, so it should have RAW. Mind you, it still produces very nice JPGs; what I feel is that the camera entices you to push the envelope, being so well put together, but when you do so, the results are disapointing. So I found myself using this camera for less serious applications than if it had RAW. Mixed feelings...

I have now bought the Panasonic FZ50. It is a different class of camera (bridge camera? DSLR shape and size, but still digicam?), but it isprobably the closest you can find to what a Canon Pro2 would be. It has a top quality Leica zoom lens, RAW, manual zoom and focus rings on the lens, nice EVF. It is a hard to beat package. The downside? To combat noise, Panasonic have decided to smear away the detail. Thankfully, you can shoot in RAW, and combat the noise as you wish.

The new Panasonic FZ8 is a downsized version of the FZ50 (also has RAW), so perhaps you can look at that one too.

There is also the just announced Ricoh GX-100, so the options are becoming more interesting, especially away from Canon and Nikon, who seem to be asleep...

Chris_T · « **Reply #6 on:** April 04, 2007, 09:00:34 am »

Not sure how compact you are looking for. But have you considered the Minolta A2 reviewed by Michael?

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...inolta-a2.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...hoosing-8.shtml

It is unfortunately no longer manufactured. It may be dicey to get an used one due to some reported problems with the earlier production units. The Canon Pro1 would also be a fine choice, but it lacks IS. Will there ever be a Pro2, with RAW?

Goodlistener · « **Reply #7 on:** April 11, 2007, 10:35:14 pm »

I'm not sure how "compact" you want the camera to be. I have a DSLR and wanted something small enough to fit in a pants, not jacket pocket. That ruled out the G-7.After 3 months of looking around and extensive stalking of DP review etc, I got a Fuji F31d. Its as good as they say it is - which is great.

This camera is small enough to put in a shirt pocket. The model with RAW and compact size that I was close to buying is Fuji S9000 which runs about $350 most places. I was interested in small size, low light capability, not willing to tolerate much noise at all. manual controls, high image qualty and long battery life and at least a 2.5 inch LCD display. Found it all, except for the RAW capability, in the Fuji F31d.

I spoke with a professioal freelancer who works the embassy circuit in Washington, DC today. He shoots JPEG simply to avoid some of the post procesing steps. For what its worth.

If you like theG-7, then you may want to look into a new Nikon direct competitor to the Canon G-7. The Nikon is called Coolpix (something?) 5000. More or less the same approach, looks like a 1970s rangefinder camera but no RAW.

I don't see the point in electronic viewfinder camersas but many of them have RAW capability. Once you get to their size and price you are in DSLR land as far as I can tell. The Nikon D40 is a very compact and user friendly DSLR if you want compact size, but just a wee bit larger tha what might fit in a jacket pocket.

Anyway, look at Fuji F31d, it has proven itself well in practice for me, and I gotta tell you, long batter life is more of a plus than you would guess it to be.

jeffok · « **Reply #8 on:** April 12, 2007, 12:28:16 am »

After a lot of research, I decided on the LX-2. There is a lot of chat in forums about the apparent high noise level at higher (over 400) ISO settings but my impression is that, compared to most compacts this sensor is really no better or worse than most other compacts. At ISO 100 and 200, the Leica lens captures outstanding images. The JPEG's look good and the camera has RAW so you can always tweak the images in Silkypix which is an excellent piece of software with proabably the best noise reduction functions I've seen.

If you are primarily going to use the camera outdoors, for landscapes and for creative work with the 16:9 format there is no other camera to match it. If RAW is not important to you and you don't mind a (much) larger compact with slightly better high ISO performance, the G7 might be a good option.

naisan · « **Reply #9 on:** April 15, 2007, 01:16:04 am »

I did same, am very happy.

The Ricoh is also looking very good in terms of ability to have manual control (joystick on panasonic / leica can be slow to use). . .

silly that nobody among these manuafacturers gets it right - with Ricoh gettig closest, but with awful RAW write times (14 sec?)

Author Topic: Digital Compact recommendations? (Read 5832 times)