This has been bugging me for a while…
Have digi cameras got too big for their boots? Have the manufacturers, in the race to make the smallest body, most pixels, biggest zoom etc, neglected high picture quality?
My old Canon A80 (4.1Mp IIRC, 4X Optical, CF card) took great photos, easily.
Macro – put it in portrait, set macro, point, shoot:

Latest Canon SX200IS, (12X optical, 12Mp, SD card) takes about 4-5 practice shots to get a macro photo and then it still comes out crap. No detail, high noise, washed out colours.

Sports mode – The old camera had a sports mode, which took great action shots. Now I’ve got multiple useless “scene modes” (snow, firework, foliage, aquarium FFS!) but have to faff about manually with shutter priority to get a half decent action photo. Why is that?

Portrait mode – the old camera took nice portraits, the portrait mode set the aperture, so that the parts you wanted in focus were nice and sharp and the background was out of focus (that almost SLR look). The new one? Even using AP mode, with a wide aperture, everything is in focus.
Don’t get me started on indoors pics with flash!

And 12MP! I don’t need photos that size, have to reduce by 5X whenever I want to upload to the web (yeah I know I can change it.)
Is the high noise because it has to compress such big files onto a high capacity tiny SD card?

Anyway, I’m hoping someone will say it’s just my camera and that they have a new camera which can match the old ones… example pics would be useful.

cheers.

High noise is inherent on high pixel counts is it not (certainly on cheaper cameras).

I agree the race to get more features for less money is daft and produces poorer results.

Don’t get me started on indoors pics with flash!

99% of all such photos are ghastly 🙁

99% of all such photos are ghastly

I’m sure my old camera gave acceptable results though.
The recommendations aren’t coming thick and fast 🙁

I’m sure my old camera gave acceptable results though

in that case you must be easily pleased 🙂

Doesn’t my first post tell you different?! (I did say “acceptable”)

Hmm, do I take it from the lack of response that these Panasonic Lumix cameras aren’t all they’re cracked up to be? 😕

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

Doesn’t my first post tell you different?! (I did say “acceptable”)

well as far as on camera flash goes, it’s almost impossible to get a good shot that way, though they’re OK to provide fill for backlit subjects

Hmm, do I take it from the lack of response that these Panasonic Lumix cameras aren’t all they’re cracked up to be?

everyone raves about the GF1. I almost bought one on impulse yesterday for a laugh 🙂

footflaps – Member
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

Agrees with me then.. but doesn’t tell me which camera to buy! I wish I could still use my A80 but it doesn’t hold power anymore 🙁

Digital cameras have diversified. Now there are cameras for people who like to snap their mates at parties, cameras for people to take on outdoor sports, cameras for people who want to mess with settings, and cameras for people who want to get into it properly.

Your new one may not be the type of camera you want.

Mrs Grips has a new Sony camera – you can’t fiddle with the aperture and shutter speed etc, but it does things like track faces, detect smiles, take several shots on different settings so you can choose etc etc. It does these things very well and is perfect for her (and me when I’m just snapping).

By the way, the ‘sports’ mode may not be equal to the ‘scene modes’ on your new camera. Sports mode should be a ‘programme’ ie telling it to use fast shutter speeds. The scene modes (fireworks etc) are fine-tuning that for particular photographic challenges. Our Sony has sports, portrait etc modes then in addition to that it has an intelligent scene mode which THEN lets you choose snow, fireworks, underwater etc.

Depends if you want a fixed-lens compact or an interchangeable-lens “system” camera like the Panasonic GF1.

The latter has many of the advantages of a dSLR though response times and focus speed won’t be as sharp but it will really score on image quality, particularly for low light/high ISO situations due to its large sensor.

Fixed-lens compacts are less versatile and usually have smaller sensors so suffer from noise at higher ISO settings. These photos are from a Ricoh GX100 which is a great camera to use and the image quality is excellent in good light. Low-light performance is a bit ropey though and I almost never use it with the flash unless it’s to light up a back-lit subject. It does have a brilliant lens though and its macro performance is stunning for a compact.

India 060 by stuartie_c, on Flickr

India 191 by stuartie_c, on Flickr

R1012007 by stuartie_c, on Flickr

Last photo is only ISO400 but you can see the noise quite easily. It clips highlights quite badly too unless you shoot in RAW all the time (I’m too lazy).

I’ve also used a Panasonic Lumix LX3 which had better image quality in low light but I didn’t like the feel of it as much.

everyone raves about the GF1. I almost bought one on impulse yesterday for a laugh

It’s not really a compact tho, not in my book anyway.

Des
Why did you choose the Canon SX200IS? Did you look at the Canon S90?

It’s not really a compact tho, not in my book anyway.

it’s friggin tiny compared to my usual camera 🙂

Fixed-lens compacts are less versatile

In some ways. Although my old compact (with all the settings fiddleable) had a super macro mode where it could focus down to 3cm which led to a whole new world of photography close up. I have to spend something like £900 to get a macro capability for my DSLR and even then we’re only talking 15cm.

Thanks stuartie_c, will look at the Ricoh, those first 2 shots are great.

Why did you choose the Canon SX200IS? Did you look at the Canon S90?
It just seemed to be a high-range version of what I’d had before. Had 3 Canons and they were all great, but dying. Big lens like that, how could I go wrong? But it is so crap. I’ve had it over a year and now am going to replace it. (interesting that they are going for half the price on Ebay now)

[edit] Yes, Simon we know you use an SLR. 😉

DezB – Member

Thanks stuartie_c, will look at the Ricoh, those first 2 shots are great.

The more expensive Ricohs may be better, but my Caplio R7 has been back to be fixed Four times in less than 2 years. The detail is lacking, the focussing is not great, I won’t be getting another

Definitely not your camera unless it’s broken. My gf has a SX200IS and it takes great pics.

When you say “no detail, high noise”, etc are you comparing these at 100% zoom? The later camera will have three pixels for each of the older ones but there are limits on how much light comes on to each square mm of the sensor so (as linked/explained above) it won’t render three times the detail. Resize the 12MP one down to 4MP dimensions and compare again.

The SX200 can sometimes go for higher ISOs than necessary when doing macro-type pics in lower light. I’d imagine the reasoning is that it’s better to get a sharp but grainier picture than a blurry one from camera shake on a longer exposure (although IS helps a lot, assuming it’s switched on).

You have a load of manual control on that model though to make the camera do whatever you want it to do – which ultimately leads to much better photos than any auto modes can manage anyway.

You have to get the camera that suits what you want – it’s not simply a case of good, bad or higher up the range any more.

Yes, Simon we know you use an SLR

mu point was rather that insisting on smallness and then complaining about poor quality results isn’t sensible 🙂

SFB,

Everybody know you only ever use a dSLR as you spend an unhealthy proportion of your waking hours on here telling us about it.

The OP is asking about COMPACTS and I think it is reasonable to infer that he is interested in another COMPACT, so how about you shush the white noise?

mu point was rather that insisting on smallness and then complaining about poor quality results isn’t sensible

No, I don’t agree. You should be getting results almost as good from a compact if you have the right one for what you want. I had loads of brilliant results over the years from this:

You should be getting results almost as good from a compact if you have the right one for what you want

but that ugly thing you posted a pic of doesn’t look very compact either 🙁 And I’m not trying to bring DSLRs into the thread, I was talking about the GF1…

I’m sure Des knows that he’s never going to get DSLR quality in a proper pocket compact.
If you want it genuinely pocket size, but the best quality ‘compact camera’ photos and money isn’t a factor, look at the compacts on the market which have bigger sensors (CCD?). Panasonic LX5 (no inbuilt flash), Canon S90, I’m sure there are others. I think that’s probably about as good as you’re gonna get in a compact camera. If the 12X optical zoom is a must have, then we recently bought a panasonic TZ8, which takes good scene photos on auto mode, so far, It’s still to be used in any real testing sutuations yet.

That camera above (Olympus CZ-5050) took these – worth clickying to see the larger sizes.

P7190012 by molgrips, on Flickr

P7190023 by molgrips, on Flickr

P7190026 by molgrips, on Flickr

P7190002 by molgrips, on Flickr

These are taken with the Panasonic TZ8 last week in late afternoon and failing light, sport mode. I think the limitations of an inbuilt compact flash are apparent.

Yes I am after another compact. I was perfectly happy with the results I got from my older Canon, which was as small as you could expect.
To be honest the Panasonic pics above could have been taken by my Canon.

All I’m asking for is something as good (well, by now it should be better) than the old camera I had!
The Olympus and Ricohs are up there, but they ain’t compacts like compacts used to be.
I’m guessing the compact market has been shagged by the race for more features. Shame.

like I said, take a look at the panasonic LX5, canon S90, Ricoh GX200 and other compacts with larger sensors. I think they have 1/1.63″ CCD (a standard compact will be smaller 1/2.5″ CCD). It’s not an absoulute garantee, there will be other issues to take into consideration (ie lens quality), but it’s a good guide to finding the compacts that will produce better images (you pay for it, of course). I would have bought something like those, with superior sensor, but we wanted some other features they don’t have, like 12X optical zoom.

Second pic would have been better of with flash off….

I’m guessing the compact market has been shagged by the race for more features

That Olympus I posted by the way Dez came out in 2001.

And the market’s not ‘shagged’ – it’s just changed, that’s all. What you want will be out there, it’s just a question of finding it. Hell, I’ve got an older compact (and weatherproof) Oly you can have if you want. Small, not expensive, but has manual controls and a good macro.

The S90 looks very good. Gets excellent reviews.

it’s just a question of finding it

Indeed! Which is why I’m asking on here. S’working so far 🙂

Actually, I think S95 might be a newer version or the next model up, not sure.

Thanks to those who replied for the help here. Bought a Canon S95, as suggested by B.A.Nana and am very impressed so far.
Amazed at how tiny it is for one thing.
Still learning all the functions, but the photos are a big step up from the SX200.
Would post a sample but my company has just blocked Photobucket 🙁

Cheers folks.