Author: Jeff Fenske Page 4 of 15

In continuing my discussion of the latest and greatest compact cameras, DxOMark has lab tests for all but the LX5. If you click here, you’ll see sensor data for the Nikon P7000, the Canon S95 and the Panasonic LX3 (LX5 data still isn’t out).

Nikon has always amazed me in how much they lag behind Canon in their compact Coolpix cameras, but they are catching up. I was kind of thrilled about this model because the lens reaches out so far, 200mm; though, wide-angle is more important to me than telephoto, so I went with the LX5.

On the starting page, the data for the Nikon looks like a let down. I had hoped for better, but when you look at all of the charts (clicking on the boxes above), that stats are not that much different than the Canon, and far above the LX3 (LX5 scores aren’t out yet and should do much better), so these are still very respectable results. But if you’re looking to get the most stunning color possible, Nikon is still not the way to go.

This Nikon is especially worth considering for those who really want to reach out and touch someone with their 28-200mm lens, 60 millimeters longer than the Canon G12. If you’d like to go wider, it also has a wide-angle adapter, but that’s another thing to carry around, and fiddle with if there isn’t much time to get a shot off — and it’s something like $200. The Nikon’s shot recovery time is slower, if that’s a factor for you.

If we punch in the Canon G12 instead of the LX3, its stats are really close to the S95, because I’m almost certain they use the same sensor. The main difference in image quality between the two Canons come from the different lenses. The G12’s much larger 28-140mm is probably the main reason some of the G12 shots look slightly better than the S95’s in the DPReview test I mentioned earlier.

it will be interesting to see how the LX5 compares once the data is out.

This is an update and continuation of my article: First major LX5 review published … if you’re looking to buy a high quality compact camera: Group test: Canon Powershot S95, Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5, Nikon Coolpix P7000

• • •

Of the three cameras listed, which really are the cream of the crop (with the addition of just-released Canon G12 comparison shots data), I recommended the Canon S95 for the average shooter, but the Panasonic LX5 for those like myself whom shooting wide angle at 24mm is really important. And there are other considerations which I didn’t mention.

A friend asked me which compact camera he should buy for his wife. She wants to shoot a school graduation in which she’ll be fairly far from the subject. I recommended the Nikon P7000, because it reaches out to 200mm, and the f/stop is still just 5.6, which is the amount of light the lens lets in (the bigger the number the less light).

Here are how these four stand up with zooming range and light gathering ability:

Canon S95 – the most compact of the bunch and great lcd:
28-105mm and f/2.8 – 4.5 (f/4.5 at 105 is the trade off for its ultra-compact size)

Panasononic LX5 – second most compact, extra wide-angle and very fast lens:
24-90mm and f/2.0-3.3 (90mm is the shortest zoom, but 24mm-wide is awesome!)

Nikon P7000 – larger, heavier, but really reaches out there with relatively low f/stop:
28-200mm and f/2.8-5.6

Canon G12 – bigger, like the Nikon, probably the sharpest (slightly), but not much better than the G11:
28-140mm and f/2.8 – 4.5 (notice how the S95 is 4.9 at 105mm while the G12 is faster at the longer 140mm length. I took this Kenny G shot hand-held at 140mm with the G11 from the back of the auditorium. Most would probably have trouble holding it that steady for the long exposures required by the low light of a concert. TECH NOTE: This shot was slightly cropped, which would be less necessary when shooting at 200mm with the Nikon P7000 — Kenny G’s face could have been clearer/more detail — but shooting even longer with a lower f/stop at 200mm would have been even more difficult to hold steady in this low-light setting.)

Bigger and heavier has its advantages (though we’re not talking that much bigger and heavier). It’s harder to keep an extremely lightweight camera steady, which is a huge consideration if you’re shooting at maximum telephoto distance, especially at 200mm!

Though image-stabilization (gyros) makes it possible, technique is important when shooting a telephoto lens hand-held. If it’s bright, and you’re shooting wide open (fastest f/stop – smallest number) the shutter speed can be faster, which makes it easier to not blur the shot. But if you’re shooting at 200mm in artificial light, you may want to increase the ISO to 400 or more and shoot wide open for sure.

Higher ISOs will add some ‘noise,’ which the camera will try to blur out (if shooting JPEG, which most people do. I shoot only in RAW), so the shot won’t be quite as sharp. But these cameras will do well at 400 ISO, and can go even higher if you’re still blurring the shots. I shoot everything at the lowest ISO unless I need to increase it for reasons such as mentioned here.

It’s crucial to not breath when squeezing the shutter, as it’s crucial to only move your shutter finger. Practice makes perfect. Check your shots by zooming into the photo on location, so you won’t have surprises afterward. And as I said in my previous post on these, the Canons show great detail while the LX5 is really disappointing in that you can only zoom in a few clicks without everything getting blurry. It’s good enough for checking basic sharpness though.

If you have any questions, feel free to comment below. I love these little cameras; though, they’re still sub-par for shooting fine-art prints with. I’m waiting for the next generation micro-4/3rds cameras to change that somewhat. But they’ll be bigger than any of these, except with the fixed-focal-length pancake lens, which I wouldn’t find very useful, because they’re always some middle-of-the-road focal length that I would rarely shoot at.

Happy shooting!

Jeff : )

I’ve been waiting for this review. I don’t know why it takes them so long, for in August, these models will likely all be replaced.

If you’ve followed this blog, the majority of the photos I’ve put up so far were shot with compact cameras, mostly the Canon G10 and G11, but since September of this year, I’ve been shooting the Panasonic LX5 exclusively.

I jumped the Canon ship (though I still shoot the 5D Mark II for the highest quality images, mostly which are not yet posted here) when the LX5 came out because I decided to sacrifice the longer reach of the G11 for the wider view of the LX5.

[Technically, the G11’s lens covers 28-140mm (35mm equivalent), while the LX5 covers 24-90mm, and its unique  “High-resolution 16:9 and 3:2 aspect ratio modes (thanks to multi-aspect sensor)” allows covering an even wider area at 24mm.

Also, Panasonic greatly improved the LX5 from their previous model, the LX3, while Canon didn’t change much in the S95 or the G12, compared to the S90 and G11.]

But what’s best for me is probably not best for the average shooter. I’ve actually steered people away from the LX5 and into Canon’s S95. It’s smaller, and Canon’s lcd screens are much more vivid and functional.

I’m really disappointed with the LX5’s lack of ability to zoom deep into pictures that have been shot, for example. This is a really fun and useful feature, and was almost a deal breaker for me.

If you’re interested in either of these cameras, including Canon’s G12 (which has many of the characteristics of the S95), Digital Photography Review finally, just today published their review of these three compact cameras: Group test: Canon Powershot S95, Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5, Nikon Coolpix P7000. Here is a paragraph from their conclusion:

Basically, what this means is that if you’re considering purchasing one of these cameras, you don’t need to worry about image quality. They are all – to any practical extent – essentially on a level. What differentiates them is their feature sets and their handling. The dpreview office is somewhat divided on which is the ‘best’ camera of the three, but on balance, we consider that the Canon S95 is the most pleasant to use. Although it lacks the huge range of customization available from the LX5, or the versatility of the P7000’s 28-200mm (equivalent) lens, the S95 is exceptionally quick, very portable, and produces great images. If you want more manual control, and you like the idea of a faster lens, there is no doubt – the LX5 is the camera for you. Given that the S95 and LX5 offer extremely similar image quality, unless you really need the 200mm (equivalent) lens, we would recommend both over the P7000, which languishes firmly in third place in this test.

The LX5 feels awkward and unrefined compared to Canon’s compacts. Canon has been making cameras since the 1930s. I’m willing to put up with some glitches to achieve a wider image, and its faster lens is nice at times. But for most, I would recommend the S95, or if you don’t mind more bulk and weight, the G12 has some advantages over the S95, but they really didn’t improve the camera much over the G11, which was disappointing for me. They’re giving Panasonic a bigger piece of the pie.

Feel free to comment, if you have any thoughts or questions. None of my blogs require personal data, like email address if you prefer to be anonymous.

Jeff

Related:

Watch what can be done with a compact camera | The LX5 to replace my G11?

These were the two main instructors at the class I just attended at the Brooks Institute in Santa Barbara, The Fine Art of Digital Printing:

John Paul Caponigro and R. Mac Holbert.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvVQop_DyaI]Fine Art Workflow

Make sure you get the best quality from your files, every time with an optimal workflow.
A Fine Art Workflow is different than a high productivity workflow. You should be able to choose either one.

A Fine Art Workflow is precise. Process your files for optimum results.

A Fine Art Workflow is fast. Standardization can lead to higher quality.

A Fine Art Workflow is flexible. Know why and when to make exceptions.

A Fine Art Workflow is modifiable / non-destructive. When your vision evolves your files should be able to evolve with you – easily.

Learn all the ins and outs of a Fine Art Workflow in this content packed DVD.