Small Cameras with Big Sensors
December 27th, 2010, 5:00pm by MikeNot sure if you guys would have seen David Pogue’s article in the NY Times the other day, in which he surveyed three new point-and-shoot style cameras with bigger sensors (near digital SLR size), and fast lenses, which supposedly have much better low light performance. What do you photo guys think?
The three cameras are the Canon S95, the Panasonic/Lumix LX5, and the Samsung TL500. What do you guys think? We’re thinking of upgrading my camera — I’d say the vast majority of our pictures are in relatively low light, so we could really benefit. The downside to upgrading seems to be the low optical zoom (3.8x vs our current 10x). The Canon sounds great except for the battery life, and I like my current Lumix DMC-TZ5.
Thoughts?
December 27th, 2010 at 6:21 pm
I’ve heard only good things about the S95, and if you’re looking for a pocket camera, sounds like the best option. You might want to take a look at the micro four-thirds camera, or E.V.I.L. (electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens) like the Olympus Pen. Still pocketable, but bigger. Better low light, more expensive. Versatility of interchangeable lens, at the cost of integration.
DXoMark has a nice sensor measurement database, and they show the S95 as the best compact, but still handily trails the Olympus PEN & Pentax Kx (DSLR), see link. Bottom line, if it’s primarily low light, nothing beats a fast lens (f/1.4 or f/1.8) and a good DSLR.
December 27th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
Or a big honking flash.
December 27th, 2010 at 11:52 pm
Let’s say Joanie wanted better low light performance on her D40 — what type of lens would you guys recommend? Something fast, but how fast? We only have the standard kit lens, would want something pretty versatile (i.e., infrequent lens swapping, and traveling with only 1 lens), and not too expensive.
December 28th, 2010 at 12:39 am
Kelvin knows more about Nikon lenses. The deal is, the fastest lenses (f/1.4 or f/1.8) are fixed focal length– no zoom! Indoors, just get closer! I’d recommend a 35mm or even 24mm, if you’re mostly using it inside. The fast zoom lenses… usually a 16-50 f/2.8… are usually a lot more expensive, and not as good in low light. Something like this 35mm Nikkor lens. Used lenses can be a good deal, too, especially via KEH.
December 28th, 2010 at 12:47 am
Oh, and in case you didn’t know, the light gathering capability varies as the square of the lens aperture. So an f/1.4 lens is 4 times as “fast” as a f/2.8 lens, and 16 times as fast as a f/5.6 lens. So, instead of having an exposure time of 1/4 second with a f/5.6 aperture, you could take the same shot (with a much narrower focal place) in 1/60s with a f/1.4 aperture. With a 1 year old, big difference!
December 28th, 2010 at 10:11 am
D40 doesn’t have an internal focusing drive, so you can only autofocus with it using Nikon lenses designated as “AF-S.” Most of their zoom lenses have that anyway, but their prime (fixed focal lenth) lenses are hit-or-miss. For sure, there is a 35mm f/1.8 and a 50mm f1.4 lens that could work (cost between $200-300). I barely ever take my 50mm off my camera. You can get an idea of it’s field-of-view by setting Joaniels lens to 50mm (or 35mm).
December 28th, 2010 at 10:41 am
Oops, hit publish before finishing (or spell checking). Anyway, I think those 2 prime lenses would work for you, but that said, I’m pretty impressed with what I’ve seen of the S95. It’s a bit pricey for a compact, but I wouldn’t worry too much about the lack of zoom, I never miss the 10X zoom on my old camera and have a hard time justifying geting a longer lens now.
December 28th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Went to Best Buy to check out the S95 today, but it wasn’t in stock. They’re in sale there now ($369). Joanie is still interested in the potential lens for the D40. I don’t know what I was expecting, but $200-300 is a little more than we were thinking. Maybe I’ll check out these used lens places.
December 29th, 2010 at 2:58 am
Yes, the 35mm/1.8 retails for $200 and their 50mm/1.4 AF-S retails for $485. So unless you can get that 50mm at a great discount used, I’d cross it off the list. You can get the 50mm/1.8 I have for $100, but you’d have to manually focus (I couldn’t do it). The 35mm/1.8 was probably intended specifically for D40 users…