Which small compact digital camera, 28mm, high ISO

[alen_borovicanin]

I am using (less and less) Canon EOS 5 and I would like to go

digital. I would like relatively responsive and solid feel and at

first I thought I would go DSLR, perheps Canon 350D, but I found out

that lately I do no care to change lenses, 28-135 mm IS suited me

fine all the time, and I would prefer also to travel light... so I

decided that I should buy small&light compact digital camera.

preferably wide angle zoom, I would love 28 mm, and also acceptable

higher ISO images... It looks that there is canon s80, panasonic dmc-

fx01, olympus c-7070... no camera is perfect... should I wait for

the next s80? did I miss any camera? do you have any experience,

what do you suggest? thanks in advance!

[Brian]

I am using the Olympus C-7070 and I'm very pleased with it. If high ISO is a big deal for you, this won't really cut it though - it does ISO 400, no more. Other than that, the lens is superb and the degree of control is amazing. I moved to it from a film SLR and find it suits me fine. It's now discontinued, so finding one may be a problem.

[dg1]

There's now some nice digicams with 28mm wide zooms, and the Ricoh GR-D with a top notch 28mm f/2.5 prime lens. High ISO is the problem, many like the Ricohs (GX8 is a good choice for a wide zoom) offer up to ISO 1600 but are noisy at those speeds. The GR-D images I've seen at 1600 are more like grainy 1600 film and not too bad. If you're willing to work with the higher noise and use some noise reduction software there are a lot of options. IMO The KM A series cameras are really nice, have built in IS, and excellent 7X 28mm-200mm f/2.8-3.6 (35mm equiv) lens. Enough range for most needs. .. A200 (or better yet if you found a NOS or refurbed A2). Also excellent flash capabilities with minolta's wireless ADI strobes.

[edgreene]

Panasonic LX1(FX01?), the only digital P&S camera that starts at 28mm. Image stabilized and a host of other features.

[robert_m3]

Fuji F10 gets some of the best reviews for its ISO 1600 performance. But it's only a

36mm-108mm equivalent, so that may be a deal breaker. Excellent battery life. I traded my

old Coolpix 4500 for one to put in my pocket and like the results.

[john_mccormack]

I chose the Canon S80 for its 28mm lens, high image quality (arguably superior to the Panasonics at low ISOs) and optical viewfinder, which isn't available on the Panasonics. The S80 is large compared to the Panasonics, but its size helps for good hand-holding. If you don't mind noise (I do), try the Panasonics.

[dg1]

There are quite a few P&S that start at 28mm, besides the panaleica. Almos every model offered by Ricoh for starters. Canon S70 Swhatever, KM A2, and the Casios are I think about 31mm or 32mm ..

[jcuknz]

I think most cameras come with a stitch programme on their set-up CD which permits you to join two or more photographs together so having a 'wide' lens is unimportant in my book. Having played with WA attachments I wouldn't bother with them as stitching gives you the panaramic look when required.

 

But some folk like the WA look so I suggest you also look at the Nikon 5400 complete with the Nikon WA attachment which gives you 18mm equivalent angle of view. You could go to www.dpreview.com, to the Nikon forum, and ask if there is a modern version of the 5400 becuase it is a bit slow in operation.

[rcoder]

What you're asking for doesn't actually exist, as far as I can tell. I did a lot of research and

tried out several models of all-in-one "prosumer" cameras, and basically came to the

conclusion that there was not a model on the market with acceptable low-light

performance.

 

Compact, "point & shoot" digicams have small sensors, which means they're unavoidably

noisy at high ISO values -- basically, anything over ISO 200. The best you can hope for is

fairly effective noise reduction software in-camera, but even the best algorithm loses

details in the search for smooth images.

 

Image stabilization also helps, but only with stationary subjects. If you're shooting mostly

landscapes or architecture, you may be okay, but capturing moving people in ambient

indoor lighting will be a challenge.

 

If you're coming from an SLR, you're also likely to miss the responsiveness and control in

switching to a P&S. Most compact cameras have "warmup" times (i.e., the time between

when you turn the camera on and when it will take the first picture) measured in seconds,

rather than tenths of a second as with a DSLR.

 

That being said, there are some very nice features on the higher-end P&S cameras, most

notably the impressive lenses and IS tech being bundled into them. The "superzoom"

models, in particular, often cost less than just the equivalent lens for an SLR, making the

rest of the camera effectively free.

 

Personally, I went with a DSLR, and shoot mostly with either a 50mm or 85mm prime. The

resulting kit is certainly a little bigger than most any all-in-one camera on the market, but

the fact that I'm able to capture candid nighttime shots handheld makes it worthwhile.

[steve_chan5]

I went with a "dark horse" contender, the Ricoh R3 (now replaced by the R4). It has a 28-200 zoom and image stabilization. I was prepared to be disappointed by the ISO400 performance, but was pleasantly surprised.

 

It was actually pretty good, considering the size of the sensor, and my ex, who has the Canon S80, seemed to think it was comparable if not a little better than her Canon in that regard. The camera is really small and handy - perfect for a carry everywhere camera. Image quality wasn't jaw dropping, but neither was it bad. In my opinion, the image quality is more than good enough for the convenience of the size, price and featureset. But thats a personal call.

[frank_skomial]

Get Casio Exilim EX-Z1000. It goes up to 3200 ISO, and has 10 Mega Pixels.

[oceanphysics]

If you want decent high ISO performance, go with the 350D. None of the digicams with their puny sensors work at high, or even medium, ISO's worth a damn, even if they fool the naive by putting big numbers on the spec sheets.

 

The only exception may be the Sony camera with the APS size sensor, but I haven't used it and you can get the 350D cheaper anyway.

[frank_skomial]

I guess question was about a small compact digital ? - so I did not recommend Canon 5D - that is known for low noise.

 

"None of the digicams with their puny sensors work at high" - I guess this refers to the digicams with sensor size 1/2.5".

 

EX-Z1000 has much bigger sersor, that is 1/1.8", and promise to deliver low noise electronics at high ISO. Need to prove it yet, hopefully soon. This camera will satisfy your request for a SMALL camera, as well as for COMPACT.

 

Sony DSC-R1 has the DX size sensor, and is in class of digicams (not a DSLR and not a range finder), but is bigger and heavier than many DSRL cameras.

[pbizarro]

I can share my experience:

 

1. I have a Panasonic LX1. I bought this camera because it offers an excellent lens, native 16:9 sensor (as opposed to cropping), an intuitive interface, RAW, total control, and OIS. There is no optical viewfinder, but given the quality of optical viewfinders in digicams, I do not miss it at all. The camera is fast, responsive, and you can actually see the LCD under bright sunshine. Noise is irrelevant up to ISO 100, unless you enjoy looking at your images at 200% on the screen, instead of printing them. At ISO 200 a bit a Neat Image solves the problem. ISO 400 looks bad, but then I do not need to use it, given that the OIS is very effective. I highly recommend this camera.

2. I also have a Ricoh GR Digital. I bought it because I loved the film equivalent. Again, the reasons are simple: intuitive interface, total control, RAW, fantastic 28mm lens (there is simply no distortion), and tough construction. Also, there is an optional optical viewfinder, which is more useful than the other tunnel vision ones. Apparently, and according to �200% on screen image specialists�, the camera is noisy. Again, things look good in prints up to ISO 200. ISO 400 requires Neat Image. The biggest problem is the time the camera takes to save a RAW file, over 10 seconds. I can live with it. I highly recommend this camera.

3. Some people prefer cameras like the Fujis, with excellent high ISO performance (F11, and F30). I would too, if they would offer RAW and a live histogram, and a lens that starts at 28mm. It is important to mention that good high ISO performance is obtained at the expense of image detail. There are no miracles here. With the Panasonic and the Ricoh, the detail is kept in the RAW file, and you are in control of post-processing your images.

[alina_m_lopez_marin]

I had the EOS 3 and purchased a Canon 10D, then a Rebel Xt and found them both wanting. I now have the Canon Xsi and

it meets my expectations. I highly recommend it. I know that this is a new posting to an old request but it is better late than

never.

Good luck.<div></div>

[bill_tuthill]

Hmm, harsh contrast, low saturation, lots of chroma noise.

I bet Noiseware could do better, but here is the Glacier Bay image

after minor editing with PaintShopPro.<div></div>