Often wondered this issue when choosing compact cameras. Although new Pannys sport Leica optics i think they are made under license elsewhere and not the true item! I know you can spend thousands on things like the Leica X1 but are there any mere mortal compacts which come with the bightingly crisp optics of say a Leica or Carl Zeiss? I understand german lenses are still considered the top of the tree??
What digital compact packs the sharpest lens?
- Thread starter Tuk
- Start date
sideshowbob
Champagne fascia aficionado
I think sharpness is overrated as a concept in photography. And any decent modern compact is likely to have a lens that's plenty good enough for the resolution ability of the average compact sensor.
(cliffpatte
Speed camera anarchist
Tuk
sharpness is not an issue that I have found with any compact cameras. Most compact cameras are limited to an F range from F3(ish) to F8 and the DOF is huge owing to the small sensor size (angle of view effect). If you look at other aspects of the lens, then you might want to look at stuff like: maximum aperture (if you want to render stuff out of focus); barrell and pincushion distortion (especially at the wide end); colour accuracy and contrast etc.
The leica designed lenses on the little Lumixes (eg the LX2 and to some extent the LX3) have low distortion, even contrast, relatively fast (the LX3 is F2), good colour rendition. Sadly most compact cameras don't have low noise and high sensitivity so a lot of the lens quality is lost in sensor noise in low light.
The Ricoh GRD3, Sigma DP2 and forthcoming Leica X1 all have excellent optics, but no zoom capability. The Foveon sensor on the DP2 gives you better use of the excellent lens than the small sensor on the GRD3. The X1 sample I saw on 10/9/09 seemed to be very good especially on the noise front, and so it should with (allegedly) the same sensor as the Nikon D300.
Best of the lot from the samples I have seen so far is probably the Canon G10
sharpness is not an issue that I have found with any compact cameras. Most compact cameras are limited to an F range from F3(ish) to F8 and the DOF is huge owing to the small sensor size (angle of view effect). If you look at other aspects of the lens, then you might want to look at stuff like: maximum aperture (if you want to render stuff out of focus); barrell and pincushion distortion (especially at the wide end); colour accuracy and contrast etc.
The leica designed lenses on the little Lumixes (eg the LX2 and to some extent the LX3) have low distortion, even contrast, relatively fast (the LX3 is F2), good colour rendition. Sadly most compact cameras don't have low noise and high sensitivity so a lot of the lens quality is lost in sensor noise in low light.
The Ricoh GRD3, Sigma DP2 and forthcoming Leica X1 all have excellent optics, but no zoom capability. The Foveon sensor on the DP2 gives you better use of the excellent lens than the small sensor on the GRD3. The X1 sample I saw on 10/9/09 seemed to be very good especially on the noise front, and so it should with (allegedly) the same sensor as the Nikon D300.
Best of the lot from the samples I have seen so far is probably the Canon G10
cubastreet
Espresso Fiend
Any compact with a legendary sensor? Which produces the nicest pics?
Rico
Bloody Colonials
doesn't matter - what good is the sharpest lens if you can't make great photos? a good photographer will make the best of the camera that's in his hands. A great camera does not a good photographer make. A great lens does not make a good camera.
find a camera that you'll use.
find a camera that you'll use.
So? It doesn't hurt to get the best camera for the money.
tropicaltaste
pfm Member
im still using an old nikon d2hs (4.1mp) with a 20mm lens and my friends are always asking how i get the quality etc ...
if ur not gonna print em big you dont need massive files... hence why the d2hs works for me and i got rid of the d200.
if ur not gonna print em big you dont need massive files... hence why the d2hs works for me and i got rid of the d200.
dan m
pfm Member
Personally, I'd be more concerned with ergonomics - a useable VF (or accessory shoe), zero shutter lag, and compact size would be my first priorities. Next, something with a focal length between 35 and 50 mm equivalent, faster the better (zoom not a high priority), and not too noisy at iso400 equivalent. Like most camera choices, I think you need to get to a camera shop and have a play.
Rico
Bloody Colonials
so what's the best camera for the money, then? Is it the one with the best lens? Or the one with the best metering? Or the one with the best warranty? None of this is important - it's a matter of if you like using it, you'll take it with you. The best camera is always the one you have with you. If you left it at home ("hey it was a supertest winner and had the best specs") you don't get the shot.
"best" really doesn't matter. It's how you make photographs that counts, and you can do that on a box brownie with half a clue.
My best camera isn't the one I always have with me, it's too bulky. It also happens to be the one with the best lens, and it's the lens(es) which make it the best one.
I can see what you're saying, I just thought the post came across as quite patronising. I also don't necessarily agree - yes, good pictures can be taken with a Brownie, but that doesn't mean a Hasselblad isn't a better camera, even if it is possible to take 'good' pictures with a Brownie.
Rico
Bloody Colonials
the hasselblad, or leica, or any camera you care to define as "the best" is **** all use when it's sitting at home, and you missed the shot of your daughter's first fish, or that car that flew over the crowd missing everyone, or that incredible sunset/rainbow/building/moment.
in that MOMENT, to MAKE great picture, the BEST camera is whatever you had with you. a box brownie will do - some amazing photographs have been made on something as rudimentary as a box brownie. Whatever you had that allowed you to capture the best photo you could, with the tools available, IN THAT MOMENT. The camera that allowed you to avoid that "oh man, I wish I had a camera with me. except I don't, because my best camera is so good I can't be arsed lugging it with me - would have been cool if I'd had it" statmement.
If you find that argument patronising, just keep on reading the lens sharpness tests. Mean time, I'll stick to making the best image I can when I see one, with whatever tool I have available.
(sorry, the last statement may have been patronising. the rest of the argument is certainly not intended to be). "It's all about the photographer, not about the kit".
in that MOMENT, to MAKE great picture, the BEST camera is whatever you had with you. a box brownie will do - some amazing photographs have been made on something as rudimentary as a box brownie. Whatever you had that allowed you to capture the best photo you could, with the tools available, IN THAT MOMENT. The camera that allowed you to avoid that "oh man, I wish I had a camera with me. except I don't, because my best camera is so good I can't be arsed lugging it with me - would have been cool if I'd had it" statmement.
If you find that argument patronising, just keep on reading the lens sharpness tests. Mean time, I'll stick to making the best image I can when I see one, with whatever tool I have available.
(sorry, the last statement may have been patronising. the rest of the argument is certainly not intended to be). "It's all about the photographer, not about the kit".
At one time while working for Kodak I had access to a disc camera well before they hit the streets and would pop it into a pocket and snap away to my heart's content. Not much to rave about now but the physics behind lens and film base spawned other photographic developments. When heading for the pub or curry house with friends this was always on hand to record the good, the bad and the ugly while my proper 0M2n stayed safe and sound at home. The grabbed snaps showing faces, friends & fashions form a window into the past that would not otherwise exist. As said previously the best camera is the one you have in your hand and not the one at home.
sideshowbob
Champagne fascia aficionado
People say this all the time, but it isn't really true. For example, somebody like our very own guybat is an excellent photographer, but as soon as he started using a Rolleiflex rather than his previous DSLR his pictures became an order of magnitude better, because the Rollei is a far better camera in just about every way for his style of photography.