P&S at high ISO which one?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by jean, Dec 21, 2007.

  1. jean

    jean Guest

    I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I have
    been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers. I
    have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one have
    any personal experience with another camera or even with this particular
    Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly looking for no
    noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.

    Jean
    jean, Dec 21, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. jean

    Warren Block Guest

    jean <> wrote:
    > I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I have
    > been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers. I
    > have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    > seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one have
    > any personal experience with another camera or even with this particular
    > Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly looking for no
    > noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.


    Looking at the dpreview.com review of the P5100, the P5000 output looks
    a little better to me. The noise seems a little less noticeable, which
    would make sense due to the slightly lower pixel count.

    bhphotovideo.com has a refurb P5000 for $259.

    The Canon G9 compared in the review looks a bit better than either
    Nikon, though.

    --
    Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA
    Warren Block, Dec 21, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. jean

    jean Guest

    "Warren Block" <> a écrit dans le message de news:
    ...
    > jean <> wrote:
    >> I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I
    >> have
    >> been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers. I
    >> have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    >> seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one
    >> have
    >> any personal experience with another camera or even with this particular
    >> Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly looking for
    >> no
    >> noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.

    >
    > Looking at the dpreview.com review of the P5100, the P5000 output looks
    > a little better to me. The noise seems a little less noticeable, which
    > would make sense due to the slightly lower pixel count.
    >
    > bhphotovideo.com has a refurb P5000 for $259.
    >
    > The Canon G9 compared in the review looks a bit better than either
    > Nikon, though.


    It does, but only at ISO400, at 800 and 1600 it is really noisy, in fact
    noisier than the Nikon P5100. I agree the P5000 looks quite good but I'd
    rather buy localy just in case I want to return it.

    Jean
    jean, Dec 21, 2007
    #3
  4. jean

    Rich Guest

    On Dec 21, 11:55 am, "jean" <> wrote:
    > I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I have
    > been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers. I
    > have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    > seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one have
    > any personal experience with another camera or even with this particular
    > Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly looking for no
    > noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.
    >
    > Jean


    One with a 2/3" sensor. Oh wait, they don't make any anymore, only
    crap 1/1.8 and 1/2.5" sensors. Too bad.
    Rich, Dec 22, 2007
    #4
  5. Rich wrote:
    []
    > One with a 2/3" sensor. Oh wait, they don't make any anymore, only
    > crap 1/1.8 and 1/2.5" sensors. Too bad.


    So is there really a stunning difference in noise performance between
    2/3-inch and 1/1.8-inch? The smaller sensor is about 70% the area of the
    bigger, so it's not a whole lot fewer photons which are captured. The
    1/2.5-inch sensor is on 36% the capture area of the 2/3-inch, so that /is/
    quite a lot less.
    David J Taylor, Dec 22, 2007
    #5
  6. jean

    MG Guest

    "jean" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I
    >have been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers.
    >I have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    >seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one
    >have any personal experience with another camera or even with this
    >particular Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly
    >looking for no noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.
    >
    > Jean
    >


    Have you had a look at the Fuji series? F30 F31 F40

    MG
    MG, Dec 22, 2007
    #6
  7. On Dec 21, 10:55 am, "jean" <> wrote:
    > I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I have
    > been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers. I
    > have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    > seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one have
    > any personal experience with another camera or even with this particular
    > Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly looking for no
    > noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.
    >
    > Jean


    Look at the lenses. All other things being equal, the one with the
    lower f/# will win out. Even if not all else is equal, if you want
    good low light shooting, pick one with a fast (low f/# ) lens.
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota, Dec 22, 2007
    #7
  8. jean

    ransley Guest

    On Dec 22, 9:27 am, Don Stauffer in Minnesota <>
    wrote:
    > On Dec 21, 10:55 am, "jean" <> wrote:
    >
    > > I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I have
    > > been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers.  I
    > > have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    > > seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one have
    > > any personal experience with another camera or even with this particular
    > > Nikon that works good at high ISO settings?  I am specificaly looking for no
    > > noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.

    >
    > > Jean

    >
    > Look at the lenses.  All other things being equal, the one with the
    > lower f/# will win out.  Even if not all else is equal, if you want
    > good low light shooting, pick one with a fast (low f/# ) lens.

    go to www.dpreview.com Check out Fuji they have the best sensor and
    high ISO performance, go to www.HammacherSchlemmer.com and buy one
    with their lifetime warranty, cameras break, you cant beat their
    warranty. I think it was the f30 at dpreview was called a " classic"
    it was so good. Sony has made most eveyones sensors for years but not
    Fujis
    ransley, Dec 22, 2007
    #8
  9. jean

    jean Guest

    "Don Stauffer in Minnesota" <> a écrit dans le message
    de news:
    ...
    > On Dec 21, 10:55 am, "jean" <> wrote:
    >> I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I
    >> have
    >> been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers. I
    >> have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    >> seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one
    >> have
    >> any personal experience with another camera or even with this particular
    >> Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly looking for
    >> no
    >> noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.
    >>
    >> Jean

    >
    > Look at the lenses. All other things being equal, the one with the
    > lower f/# will win out. Even if not all else is equal, if you want
    > good low light shooting, pick one with a fast (low f/# ) lens.
    >


    I used to have a Canon G6, it had a fast lens, but the high ISO shots were
    horrible. Granted the G6 is a few years old and advances were made in
    sensors (maybe) and image processing (most likely) but a fast lens is not
    always a guarantee of good low light performance.

    Jean
    jean, Dec 22, 2007
    #9
  10. jean

    jean Guest

    "MG" <> a écrit dans le message de news:
    ...
    >
    > "jean" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I
    >>have been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers.
    >>I have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    >>seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one
    >>have any personal experience with another camera or even with this
    >>particular Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly
    >>looking for no noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.
    >>
    >> Jean
    >>

    >
    > Have you had a look at the Fuji series? F30 F31 F40


    No, but I will.

    thanks

    Jean
    jean, Dec 22, 2007
    #10
  11. jean

    jean Guest

    "ransley" <> a écrit dans le message de news:
    ...
    On Dec 22, 9:27 am, Don Stauffer in Minnesota <>
    wrote:
    > On Dec 21, 10:55 am, "jean" <> wrote:
    >
    > > I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I
    > > have
    > > been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers. I
    > > have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    > > seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one
    > > have
    > > any personal experience with another camera or even with this particular
    > > Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly looking for
    > > no
    > > noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.

    >
    > > Jean

    >
    > Look at the lenses. All other things being equal, the one with the
    > lower f/# will win out. Even if not all else is equal, if you want
    > good low light shooting, pick one with a fast (low f/# ) lens.

    go to www.dpreview.com Check out Fuji they have the best sensor and
    high ISO performance, go to www.HammacherSchlemmer.com and buy one
    with their lifetime warranty, cameras break, you cant beat their
    warranty. I think it was the f30 at dpreview was called a " classic"
    it was so good. Sony has made most eveyones sensors for years but not
    Fujis

    Il'l check that out, thanks

    Jean
    jean, Dec 22, 2007
    #11
  12. jean

    Warren Block Guest

    jean <> wrote:
    > "ransley" <> a écrit dans le message de news:
    > go to www.dpreview.com Check out Fuji they have the best sensor and
    > high ISO performance, go to www.HammacherSchlemmer.com and buy one
    > with their lifetime warranty, cameras break, you cant beat their
    > warranty. I think it was the f30 at dpreview was called a " classic"
    > it was so good. Sony has made most eveyones sensors for years but not
    > Fujis
    >
    > Il'l check that out, thanks


    The only one there appears to be the slightly newer F20 with the Fuji
    logo removed from the front but left on the back:

    http://www.hammacher.com/publish/73698.asp

    The flash/no-flash shooting mode is a stock Fuji feature. The ad says
    230,000 pixels on the LCD, while an F20 really only has 153,000.

    --
    Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA
    Warren Block, Dec 22, 2007
    #12
  13. jean

    ransley Guest

    On Dec 22, 12:30 pm, Warren Block <> wrote:
    > jean <> wrote:
    > > "ransley" <> a écrit dans le message de news:
    > > go to  www.dpreview.com Check out Fuji they have the best sensor and
    > > high ISO performance, go towww.HammacherSchlemmer.comand buy one
    > > with their lifetime warranty, cameras break, you cant beat their
    > > warranty. I think it was the f30 at dpreview was called a " classic"
    > > it was so good. Sony has made most eveyones sensors for years but not
    > > Fujis

    >
    > > Il'l check that out, thanks

    >
    > The only one there appears to be the slightly newer F20 with the Fuji
    > logo removed from the front but left on the back:
    >
    > http://www.hammacher.com/publish/73698.asp
    >
    > The flash/no-flash shooting mode is a stock Fuji feature.  The ad says
    > 230,000 pixels on the LCD, while an F20 really only has 153,000.
    >
    > --
    > Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA


    for 160 its an older model but with the warranty and the fact some
    older sensors are better its a steal.
    ransley, Dec 22, 2007
    #13
  14. jean

    Paul Allen Guest

    On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:43:10 -0500
    "jean" <> wrote:

    >
    > "Don Stauffer in Minnesota" <> a écrit dans le
    > message de news:
    > ...
    > > On Dec 21, 10:55 am, "jean" <> wrote:
    > >> I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR
    > >> so I have
    > >> been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera
    > >> makers. I have not done an extensive search yet but so far the
    > >> Nikon Coolpix P5100 seems to have the best performance at ISO 400
    > >> and ISO 800, Does any one have
    > >> any personal experience with another camera or even with this
    > >> particular Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am
    > >> specificaly looking for no
    > >> noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.
    > >>
    > >> Jean

    > >
    > > Look at the lenses. All other things being equal, the one with the
    > > lower f/# will win out. Even if not all else is equal, if you want
    > > good low light shooting, pick one with a fast (low f/# ) lens.
    > >

    >
    > I used to have a Canon G6, it had a fast lens, but the high ISO shots
    > were horrible. Granted the G6 is a few years old and advances were
    > made in sensors (maybe) and image processing (most likely) but a fast
    > lens is not always a guarantee of good low light performance.


    It is not rational to reject a camera simply because it performs poorly
    at high ISO's. The sensors are up against fundamental physics
    limitations and simply *will* perform poorly at high ISO's. A fast
    lens means you can shoot at a lower ISO and get a decent image.
    Combining a fast lens with something like a Fuji sensor is the best
    you can do in a small camera.

    If you really require "no noise in the dark areas and good resolution
    too", get a DSLR. Not even a Fuji will do what you want.

    Paul Allen
    Paul Allen, Dec 22, 2007
    #14
  15. jean

    jean Guest

    "Paul Allen" <> a écrit dans le message de
    news: ldomain...
    On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:43:10 -0500
    "jean" <> wrote:

    >
    > "Don Stauffer in Minnesota" <> a écrit dans le
    > message de news:
    > ...
    > > On Dec 21, 10:55 am, "jean" <> wrote:
    > >> I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR
    > >> so I have
    > >> been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera
    > >> makers. I have not done an extensive search yet but so far the
    > >> Nikon Coolpix P5100 seems to have the best performance at ISO 400
    > >> and ISO 800, Does any one have
    > >> any personal experience with another camera or even with this
    > >> particular Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am
    > >> specificaly looking for no
    > >> noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.
    > >>
    > >> Jean

    > >
    > > Look at the lenses. All other things being equal, the one with the
    > > lower f/# will win out. Even if not all else is equal, if you want
    > > good low light shooting, pick one with a fast (low f/# ) lens.
    > >

    >
    > I used to have a Canon G6, it had a fast lens, but the high ISO shots
    > were horrible. Granted the G6 is a few years old and advances were
    > made in sensors (maybe) and image processing (most likely) but a fast
    > lens is not always a guarantee of good low light performance.


    It is not rational to reject a camera simply because it performs poorly
    at high ISO's. The sensors are up against fundamental physics
    limitations and simply *will* perform poorly at high ISO's. A fast
    lens means you can shoot at a lower ISO and get a decent image.
    Combining a fast lens with something like a Fuji sensor is the best
    you can do in a small camera.

    If you really require "no noise in the dark areas and good resolution
    too", get a DSLR. Not even a Fuji will do what you want.

    I do have a DSLR, in fact I have a Canon 10D, a Canon XTi Rebel and a Canon
    40D with some nice lenses. Most of the time I don't mind carrying either
    the Rebel or the 40D but once in a while it is not practical to take either
    of the cameras with me. I had a small Nikon Coolpix 5200 which I gave to my
    daughter. The Coolpix was small and it was also a small performer
    delivering good pictures only in excellent conditions. I am just looking
    for a small camera whose pictures will not all end up in the virtual
    trashcan.

    Small camera usually equals small lenses so to get a picture, you either
    reduce the speed which may give you a blurry picture or increase the ISO to
    keep the speed up. Increasing the ISO is usually rewarded with a noisy
    unuseable picture. As time goes on, the camera makers have made the changes
    necessary to get better pictures at high ISO and I just wanted to find out
    who made the best small camera with the best picture at high ISO settings.
    So far the Fuji looks good, at least a lot better than the competition, the
    one that looks the best is the Fujifilm F31fd but it's discontinued. It's
    replacement the F50fd looks good to, but not as good as it's older brother.

    Jean
    jean, Dec 23, 2007
    #15
  16. jean

    Rich Guest

    On Dec 22, 2:16 am, "David J Taylor" <-this-
    bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
    > Rich wrote:
    >
    > []
    >
    > > One with a 2/3" sensor. Oh wait, they don't make any anymore, only
    > > crap 1/1.8 and 1/2.5" sensors. Too bad.

    >
    > So is there really a stunning difference in noise performance between
    > 2/3-inch and 1/1.8-inch? The smaller sensor is about 70% the area of the
    > bigger, so it's not a whole lot fewer photons which are captured. The
    > 1/2.5-inch sensor is on 36% the capture area of the 2/3-inch, so that /is/
    > quite a lot less.


    Difference is, when 2/3rds sensors went out of production, they
    sported 8 megapixels, not the 10-12 the idiots are cramming onto the
    tiny sensors today.
    Rich, Dec 23, 2007
    #16
  17. jean

    Rich Guest

    On Dec 22, 8:48 am, "MG" <> wrote:
    > "jean" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    > >I am looking for a pocket camera when I don't want to carry a DSLR so I
    > >have been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera makers.
    > >I have not done an extensive search yet but so far the Nikon Coolpix P5100
    > >seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 and ISO 800, Does any one
    > >have any personal experience with another camera or even with this
    > >particular Nikon that works good at high ISO settings? I am specificaly
    > >looking for no noise in the dark areas and good resolution too.

    >
    > > Jean

    >
    > Have you had a look at the Fuji series? F30 F31 F40
    >
    > MG


    All out of production and hard to get. Meanwhile the junky F50 is the
    only choice.
    Rich, Dec 23, 2007
    #17
  18. Rich wrote:
    > On Dec 22, 2:16 am, "David J Taylor"
    > <-this- bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
    >> Rich wrote:
    >>
    >> []
    >>
    >>> One with a 2/3" sensor. Oh wait, they don't make any anymore, only
    >>> crap 1/1.8 and 1/2.5" sensors. Too bad.

    >>
    >> So is there really a stunning difference in noise performance between
    >> 2/3-inch and 1/1.8-inch? The smaller sensor is about 70% the area
    >> of the bigger, so it's not a whole lot fewer photons which are
    >> captured. The 1/2.5-inch sensor is on 36% the capture area of the
    >> 2/3-inch, so that /is/ quite a lot less.

    >
    > Difference is, when 2/3rds sensors went out of production, they
    > sported 8 megapixels, not the 10-12 the idiots are cramming onto the
    > tiny sensors today.


    Yes, using 5-6-8MP makes a lot more sense.

    By the way, I don't completely accept the argument about number of pixels.
    If the incoming light is as well utilised by the smaller pixels (and that
    is an "if", depends on micro-lenses, pixel fill factor etc.), then the
    effect of the larger pixel count is to change the noise spectrum of the
    image into one with more noise at a higher spatial frequency. You need to
    know how the eye/brain responds to that at normal viewing distances, not
    at pixel-peeping levels.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Dec 23, 2007
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. JD

    How do you convert a CD ISO to DVD ISO?

    JD, Aug 20, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    29,296
  2. Bill Smith
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    852
    DaveJ
    Aug 1, 2003
  3. Salem Derisavi

    Figuring out ISO settings in Auto ISO mode

    Salem Derisavi, Sep 28, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,546
    Andrew McDonald
    Sep 29, 2003
  4. Georgette Preddy

    Is Sigma's SD10 at ISO 1600 better than Canon's 1Ds at ISO 100?

    Georgette Preddy, Jul 11, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    703
    Randall Ainsworth
    Jul 15, 2004
  5. The Jesus of Suburbia

    Microcontrollers: which one ? which language ? which compiler ?

    The Jesus of Suburbia, Feb 11, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    511
Loading...

Share This Page