[suncrimson]

updated:

I found the RAW is significantly soft than JPG output. and the AWB in JPG is better than RAW.
The raw picture needs to be well sharpen then you can get some same result as JPG,
Check out the pic below:


----
Just made it at home under a tungsten light. very tough scene for AWB and higher iso.
All from RAW to JPG.
Not very scientific but hope can give anyone a reference.

The whole picture


Position 1


Position 2





*-* --- *-* Compare to S95
Both shoot in RAW and Av mode and AWB. the AWB in Pentax Q is not reliable compare to S95, but can be corrected if you shoot raw, or maybe pentax will update the firmware to solve this problem.


ISO 800, used autofocus and both focused on the left eye of winnie, the S95 is sharper than Q...will try again to see if we can get sharper picture from Q.
[img]http://www.alexzhen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/iso800.jpg[img]

ISO 1600


ISO 3200

---

Last edited by suncrimson; 10-08-2011 at 05:53 AM.

[terencio]

I'm not familiar with either of these cameras, so excuse me if this is a stupid question. What aperture did you dial in for this? To me it looks as if the Q is almost a stop darker that the S95.

[knightzerox]

I'm not familiar with either of these cameras, so excuse me if this is a stupid question. What aperture did you dial in for this? To me it looks as if the Q is almost a stop darker that the S95.

You're right, it should be about a +2/3 EV stop difference for the Canon. To get the same Depth of Field as the Q with an 8.5mm lens and f/4, the canon has to be shot at 10.701mm focal length and an aperture of f/5, or -2/3 EV from where it is now.

[suncrimson]

I'm not familiar with either of these cameras, so excuse me if this is a stupid question. What aperture did you dial in for this? To me it looks as if the Q is almost a stop darker that the S95.

The aperture and shutter speed are on the pictures, are they too small?
Yes, the image from Q is darker, same aperture, same shutter speed, same ISO, why difference? I really don't know.
This is also one of my question.
Can we say the ISO of Q is 2/3stop lower than the actually/real number?

[suncrimson]

You're right, it should be about a +2/3 EV stop difference for the Canon. To get the same Depth of Field as the Q with an 8.5mm lens and f/4, the canon has to be shot at 10.701mm focal length and an aperture of f/5, or -2/3 EV from where it is now.

I was not bothered by the DOF because the tiny sensor can get huge dof by using f4. That's why I didn't try to match it.

[terencio]

The aperture and shutter speed are on the pictures, are they too small?
Yes, the image from Q is darker, same aperture, same shutter speed, same ISO, why difference? I really don't know.
This is also one of my question.
Can we say the ISO of Q is 2/3stop lower than the actually/real number?

I guess I was so mesmerized by the histogram that I missed the settings .

There seems to me a bit more noise in the S95 at higher iso, but other than that I don't see anything that would justify paying almost double for the Q (except maybe the interchangeable lens). Based on this relatively small sample size, I actually like the IQ on the S95 much more. What has been your experience with these two in the wild?

[suncrimson]

I guess I was so mesmerized by the histogram that I missed the settings .
There seems to me a bit more noise in the S95 at higher iso, but other than that I don't see anything that would justify paying almost double for the Q (except maybe the interchangeable lens). Based on this relatively small sample size, I actually like the IQ on the S95 much more. What has been your experience with these two in the wild?

hehe, My feeling is pretty much like yours.
S95 wins on most perspective. Compact, convenient, versatile...it still one of the best compact out there.

The IQ of Q is not better than S95, no matter base iso of high iso.
The big selling point is the concept, interchangeable lens and looking. I think it is for people who really love pentax and willing to spend money for such a cute "toy".

I think pentax will lower the price of it when they really want to sell many, now they have no expectation on that, so...

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

The IQ of Q is not better than S95, no matter base iso of high iso.

Still, it shows that the difference between 1/2.3" (Q) and 1/1.7" (S95) sensors isn't anything to get excited about. The 1" sensor in the Nikon 1 system may be able to show some advantage, but that remains to be seen.