noise on W60

uccemebug · 07-22-2009, 12:08 AM

My kid's 18 months old now and is becoming both very active and very capable of making it difficult to take photos. I've already managed to drop one of SLR's while trying to juggle him and the camera!

I'm considering a W60, but I'm leery about degraded noise and sharpness as a result of the high pixel density in that camera (and all of the point and shoots). The workaround I've thought up is to simply shoot at a lower resolution.

But I'm curious: has anyone tried this route as a means of avoiding the excessive noise of the tiny point-and-shoot sensors? Does it work, or is it achieved by simply shooting at full resolution and down-sampling?

*Jonson PL* · 07-22-2009, 05:23 AM

I believe down-sampling, would be the way to go. Can't find the links right now.

But DSLR would still be better. Maybe a used K100 or *Ist Ds. Will up the Iso and make it possible to use higher shutterspeed

uccemebug · 07-22-2009, 06:18 AM

Originally Posted by Jonson PL

I believe down-sampling, would be the way to go. Can't find the links right now.

But DSLR would still be better. Maybe a used K100 or *Ist Ds. Will up the Iso and make it possible to use higher shutterspeed

Thanks for the response! I do have an *istDS now but it's not really suitable for the kid's environment (even less so than the film cameras, which are at least cheap to replace!). 8^D

I'll do a bit of digging to see about down-sampling examples, try to find some people who are doing it.

*Jonson PL* · 07-22-2009, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by uccemebug

Thanks for the response! I do have an *istDS now but it's not really suitable for the kid's environment (even less so than the film cameras, which are at least cheap to replace!). 8^D

I'll do a bit of digging to see about down-sampling examples, try to find some people who are doing it.

Read the links, posted here by Jeffkrol :
Could someone explain FF advantage ?

Downsampling seem the way to go.

Andres · 07-22-2009, 10:28 AM

I'm happy with the W60 noise... ISO 50 - 100 and 200 is very good, 400 and 800 is good for a P&S and 1600 and more is like a wet newspaper

after all is a P&S...

Andres · 07-22-2009, 10:46 AM

Here you can see a sample.

Flying over cotton (Pentax W60)

uccemebug · 07-23-2009, 04:57 AM

Thanks, everyone, for the suggestions and links. I suspect I'd be happy with the W60. It certainly came off well in the DPReview comparison!

'Waterproof' Camera Group Test (Q2 2009) Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

As far as downsampling, I would be interested to see how it fares with ~6MP photos.

*Jonson PL* · 07-23-2009, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by uccemebug

Thanks, everyone, for the suggestions and links. I suspect I'd be happy with the W60. It certainly came off well in the DPReview comparison!

'Waterproof' Camera Group Test (Q2 2009) Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

Thanks, I hadn't seen

elho_cid · 09-26-2009, 03:22 PM

I was positively impressed by the W60 performance. I took few photos using it set on auto ISO 50-800 and we reviewed rhw pictures with my family on a large full HD TV (directly from SD card, so it really was 1080lines). Even ISO 800 snapshots looked very good.

uccemebug · 09-26-2009, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by elho_cid

I was positively impressed by the W60 performance. I took few photos using it set on auto ISO 50-800 and we reviewed rhw pictures with my family on a large full HD TV (directly from SD card, so it really was 1080lines). Even ISO 800 snapshots looked very good.

Thanks for the response!

*dnaseigel* · 09-27-2009, 06:05 AM

Originally Posted by uccemebug

My kid's 18 months old now and is becoming both very active and very capable of making it difficult to take photos. I've already managed to drop one of SLR's while trying to juggle him and the camera!

I'm considering a W60, but I'm leery about degraded noise and sharpness as a result of the high pixel density in that camera (and all of the point and shoots). The workaround I've thought up is to simply shoot at a lower resolution.

But I'm curious: has anyone tried this route as a means of avoiding the excessive noise of the tiny point-and-shoot sensors? Does it work, or is it achieved by simply shooting at full resolution and down-sampling?

Some time has passed since you posted this, and you probably picked up the camera already. I solved my issues with noise by purchasing a Canon HF-DC1 slave flash. It responds very nicely to the built in flash (don't use red-eye reduction) and easily extends the flash range to 12meters at ISO 200. It has an auto function so the thyristor regulates the light output to give consistent amounts of light on each shot. The one downside to it is the included bracket to hold the flash is not suitable for mounting next to the camera, so I generally hold the flash a little above the camera when I shoot. Red-eye is a near impossibilitiy and I even get the chance to try bounce flash with it. The flash is no taller than the camera and is super portable. You may wish to take a look at that item.

David

uccemebug · 09-27-2009, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by dnaseigel

Some time has passed since you posted this, and you probably picked up the camera already. I solved my issues with noise by purchasing a Canon HF-DC1 slave flash. It responds very nicely to the built in flash (don't use red-eye reduction) and easily extends the flash range to 12meters at ISO 200. It has an auto function so the thyristor regulates the light output to give consistent amounts of light on each shot. The one downside to it is the included bracket to hold the flash is not suitable for mounting next to the camera, so I generally hold the flash a little above the camera when I shoot. Red-eye is a near impossibilitiy and I even get the chance to try bounce flash with it. The flash is no taller than the camera and is super portable. You may wish to take a look at that item.

David

Thanks for the tip. An interesting little flash unit!