Samsung TL350 sensor?

<p>Anyone know if the CMOS sensor is a larger one (like the APS-C in the Sigma DPx cameras? Or a tiny one? </p>

<p>They say it has good low light performance, but of course "good" depends on what you're comparing it to. Hard to imagine it's that good if it's got a tiny sensor. That said, I'm on the prowl for a decent P&S and I'd get the Canon G11 but but it's got a bigger body than I'd like. I need it pocketable size and so far find the offerings in P&S cameras dreadful.</p>

<p>Based on lens focal lengths (5.8 - 24) and claimed equivalents (24-120) it looks like a 5:1 crop factor to me. Certainly not an APS-C or even 4/3.</p>

<p><Chas></p>

The DPreview database says it is a 1/2.33" CMOS, 36 megapixels per square centimeter.

 

Low light compacts have been discussed to death here. I am sure someone will suggest the S90.

<p>I have a great AVCHD JVC Everio camcorder with 1/2.33"" sensor, and it has some 9 megapixels still photo mode.<br>

The pictures are so noisy, that all point & shoot cameras used over last 8 years would do better pictures.</p>

<p>Frank, I have a similar JVC to you, and as you describe, find that the still quality is so horrible I think its criminal to describe it as "able to shoot stills" at all. But... what I will say in defense of the sensor on those video cameras is that the noise culprit there is probably really horrible NR algorithms on the camera itself. I think a monkey could have done better than JVC. If you dropped the sensor off at your local zoo, I think the apes might be able to work up a better 9MP image than JVC did, and since they don't know much about the value of money, would probably work for free.</p>

<p>Incidentally, if you did that, the camera would probably smell a lot worse coming from the Apes than JVC, but some things are worth the extra headache.</p>

<p>All that said, I don't think a small sensor could touch a full frame, APS-C, or 4/3 sensor for noise. Or more accurately, it's entirely possible to make pictures off a good sensor look bad, but much harder or impossible to make pictures from a bad sensor look good.</p>

<p>I think I'm looking at getting a Panasonic LX3 or a Ricoh GRIII. Although I'm not 100% sure but I don't believe the Ricoh has zoom, which bugs me and is why I don't want a DPx from Sigma (well, that and the fact that their sensors stink). I really like my GF1 but it's not pocketable. If the LX3 is even close in quality and functionality, I'm all over it, even with more noise.</p>

The Samsung EX1 (TL500) has the same pixel density as the S90, and a faster lens. Hmm...