point and shoot camera recommendation

[Be1n]

I'm trying to decide between the

Sony RX 100 mark 3
Canon G1x mark 2
Panasonic Lx100

Which one is the best at producing images with the lowest noise while capturing the most detail (not washed out)? And I tend to prefer a deep DOF.

 

[Indus]

You can spend $800 + tax on a new point and shoot but don't want the best thing for lowest noise and dof i.e. a dslr?

Seems silly since even an D7000 with a prime lens will give you 100 times better images even though a D7000 is what 5 years old now?

 

[guachi]

I'm familiar with the Sony and Panasonic. Thankfully, both are great cameras.

The Panasonic has a larger sensor (about 1.5x the area) and both have lenses of basically the same length and speed. The result is the Panasonic is probably a better choice if DOF control is important to you.

I ended up getting a LX100 and I love it. I looked at the Sony and Panasonic as a camera to grab as a secondary camera, space is more of an issue and I don't take my primary camera or, say, I'm going to see friends and I want a few snaps.

The Panasonic is larger than the Sony on account of its larger sensor, but I bought it anyway. Really, though, either is a great choice and it's great to have multiple fixed lens cameras with large sensors and a fast lenses as choices..

 

[Be1n]

You can spend $800 + tax on a new point and shoot but don't want the best thing for lowest noise and dof i.e. a dslr?

Seems silly since even an D7000 with a prime lens will give you 100 times better images even though a D7000 is what 5 years old now?

Don't you have to carry a set of lenses and swap them constantly?

 

[CuriousMike]

I'm trying to decide between the

Sony RX 100 mark 3
Canon G1x mark 2
Panasonic Lx100

Which one is the best at producing images with the lowest noise while capturing the most detail (not washed out)? And I tend to prefer a deep DOF.

All of these are going to produce good images.
You don't add "smallest" as a requirement.

- The LX100 *should* produce "lowest noise" due to largest sensor.

- The RX100 *might* produce "most detail" due to more megapixels.

- To be clear, deep DOF means you care about everything in focus... you don't care about a shallow DOF. If you want the deepest DOF possible, the smaller sensored Canon and Sony should provide that. However, if you use the LX100 to good effect, you should be able to recreate a deep DOF. Personally, I'd take the LX100 because it can create a deep DOF, but also a much shallower DOF than the other two can provide (when you want it.)

When you listed the three cameras, I immediately chose the LX100 -- but that's for me.
The LX100 will have the "best" overall photo quality with most flexibility. But... it loses out on resolution to the Sony and overall focal length to the Canon.

For your criteria, I'd be looking at the LX100 or the Sony.

Honestly, you're not going to go wrong with any of them.

 

[Be1n]

What about for shooting in scenarios where the light is dim?

 

[paperwastage]

What about for shooting in scenarios where the light is dim?

typically larger sensor would be better (low noise)

you want deep DOF, so lower aperture is not necessary better (since it gives you shallower DOF)



http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ima...1&x=-0.7498513106393709&y=-0.6074675598564057

go do your own comparison (there are other sites/scenarios where you can do this)

 

[CuriousMike]

What about for shooting in scenarios where the light is dim?

Then you care about larger sensor size, the aperture range of the lens and the overall sensor quality.

If you want large DOF in low light, ISO performance matters greatly.

 

[CuriousMike]

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ima...1&x=-0.7498513106393709&y=-0.6074675598564057

go do your own comparison (there are other sites/scenarios where you can do this)

The above is a perfect tool to try the various scenarios.

Be aware that the Canon seems to have a cooler color balance compared to the Sony and Panasonic... which I actually sorta prefer. But color balance is the easiest thing to change . Actual photo quality/sharpness is harder.

 

[Be1n]

Didn't know those sites existed.

Thanks.

 

[Be1n]

Question on a basic topic, how is the aperture related to film format.

For example, this has a 35mm equivalent of 30mm. Do we interpret the f/3.5 as the speed for 11mm or 30mm?

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/acil/lenses/1_nikkor_11-275mm_f35-56/

 

[CuriousMike]

Google "photographic equivalence" for a bunch of internet arm waving.

As I understand it, f/3.5 is f/3.5 no matter the sensor size.

However, there is a relationship between sensor size and focal length that means the apparent DOF is "different" when using a 1" sensor at f/3.5 vs a full-frame (35mm) sensor at f/3.5

So, you would have a larger DOF with the 1" sensor at f/3.5 at the same camera->subject distance than you would with a FullFrame sensor at f/3.5 at the same camera->subject distance.

But I'm repeating myself.
But I'm repeating myself.

 

[finbarqs]

let's just drop this deep DOF and shallow DOF and just call it "I want a really nice blurry background with a good subject in front"

 

[Be1n]

Google "photographic equivalence" for a bunch of internet arm waving.

As I understand it, f/3.5 is f/3.5 no matter the sensor size.

However, there is a relationship between sensor size and focal length that means the apparent DOF is "different" when using a 1" sensor at f/3.5 vs a full-frame (35mm) sensor at f/3.5

So, you would have a larger DOF with the 1" sensor at f/3.5 at the same camera->subject distance than you would with a FullFrame sensor at f/3.5 at the same camera->subject distance.

But I'm repeating myself.
But I'm repeating myself.

I was asking if that custom lens was slower than what cameras like this come with.

http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/picture/?f=47982

It says f/2.7 on the body.

 

[CuriousMike]

I was asking if that custom lens was slower than what cameras like this come with.

http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/picture/?f=47982

It says f/2.7 on the body.

It says f/2.7 to f/5.9 -- which means it's a variable aperture lens.
i.e., the aperture changes as you zoom... as you zoom, the lens lets in less light and your camera has to "work harder" to get a similar image to a non-variable aperture lens.

The Canon you just linked to is a small sensor camera, which means it will really struggle in low-light. You're going in the wrong direction for overall image quality compared to the first three cameras you picked.

The below image shows you how aperture changes as focal length increases on various smallest->small sensor cameras.