X90 - 26x zoom is too big

Erik · 03-04-2010, 03:39 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

In good light like in this picture, my K10D would do much better at ISO 1600 than the HS10 does at 800.

Your K10D has pixels that are a ridiculous amount larger, so it should be far more than one stop better. Frankly, this Fujifilm looks like garbage, but considering the sensor it has to work with, it's not bad. Well, it is bad, but it's no worse than any other compact camera. They're all this bad.

gazonk · 03-04-2010, 07:09 AM

Originally posted by Erik

Your K10D has pixels that are a ridiculous amount larger, so it should be far more than one stop better.

Yes, but the guy I commented on seemed to think that the Fuji could compare to his K200D at ISO 800...

Erik · 03-04-2010, 07:52 AM

Right, sorry. The K200D, like the K10D (same sensor) is obviously in a whole different ballpark. The K200D isn't very pretty at ISO 1600 since it is fairly restrictive with NR, but using the stupid amount of destructive noise reduction that Fujifilm applies, you could probably push the K200D to ISO 6400 at least and get something similar to the Fujifilm at ISO 800.

jogiba · 03-04-2010, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by Erik

Right, sorry. The K200D, like the K10D (same sensor) is obviously in a whole different ballpark. The K200D isn't very pretty at ISO 1600 since it is fairly restrictive with NR, but using the stupid amount of destructive noise reduction that Fujifilm applies, you could probably push the K200D to ISO 6400 at least and get something similar to the Fujifilm at ISO 800.

Can you get 1080p video with a 24-720mm (35mm eqiv) AF lens with a Pentax DSLR for $499 ?

Last edited by jogiba; 03-04-2010 at 10:21 AM.

Erik · 03-04-2010, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by jogiba

Can you get 1080p video with a 24-720mm (35mm eqiv) AF lens with a Pentax DSLR for $499 ?

Naw, and if someone wants to buy a 26x superzoom then they should, but no one should have any misconceptions about the compromises involved in a miniscule sensor with that kind of ISO range, and the optical design of a lens with a range like that. It's just not going to take very sharp pictures, but some people will be fine with that for use as a "fun" camera.

Personally I would save my money another couple of months and get a K-x with an 18-250 lens any day of the week. Maybe throw a teleconverter into the mix if I really needed the range.

jogiba · 03-04-2010, 10:28 AM

I already have lenses from 6.5mm to 2350mm but I sometimes I want a 30x super wide angle all in one hybrid that also does 1080p HD video with AF. I like Butter Pecan ice cream, do you ?

BTW a TC on an 18-250 is not going to AF and it is not as wide angle as the HS-10.

Erik · 03-04-2010, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by jogiba

I already have lenses from 6.5mm to 2350mm but I sometimes I want a 30x super wide angle all in one hybrid that also does 1080p HD video with AF.

Which is why you should totally get one. Me, personally, I would be bugged by the low pixel-level IQ all the time and it would affect my enjoyment of the camera. Just not my thing. And what I really wanted to discuss was not personal preferentials, I just wanted to make it clear that the high ISO performance, for instance, of one of these beasts is in no way comparable to any digital SLR.

Originally posted by jogiba

BTW a TC on an 18-250 is not going to AF and it is not as wide angle as the HS-10.

I know. You often gotta compromise with these things, and again, personally, I'd prefer those compromises over the limitations imposed by the lens, sensor and usability of something like the X90 or aforementioned Fujifilm.

...I'm a fast prime guy anyway, I'd never buy a 18-250 or anything like that unless it was the only lens I was allowed on a trip by order of some strange foreign government.

gazonk · 03-05-2010, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Erik

I know. You often gotta compromise with these things, and again, personally, I'd prefer those compromises over the limitations imposed by the lens, sensor and usability of something like the X90 or aforementioned Fujifilm.

If you have to use a camera with such a small sensor, I find the W-series of Pentax to be a much more logical choice. They're pocketable, and I can use them on the beach and clean away sand and salt in tap water afterwards... The W80 of my daughter can't compete with the chroma noise level of the Fuji at ISO 800, but in Pentax tradition, the images IMHO look slightly more natural. The "super zooms" don't give you very much of an IQ advantage over a camera like the W80, they only buy you the tele reach, but you lose the pocketability and the water- and dustproof body (and, AFAIK, you don't get the crazy macro capability of the W series either).

thibs · 03-05-2010, 02:23 AM

Or LX3-like IMO but for other reasons of course.

gazonk · 03-05-2010, 02:59 AM

Originally posted by thibs

Or LX3-like IMO but for other reasons of course.

Sure, a camera like that is on my wish list too. But that's a somewhat larger sensor again.

thibs · 03-05-2010, 03:29 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

Sure, a camera like that is on my wish list too. But that's a somewhat larger sensor again.

Yep, feel free to ask for shots if want me to.

falconeye · 03-05-2010, 04:45 AM

Originally posted by twokatmew

how much detail can we reasonably expect from a 1/2.33 sensor at max zoom?

1.22 lambda N = 3.36 µm (size of a line pair at diffraction-limited max. resolution (5% MTF or so)).

Sensor height is 4.5mm making for max. 2680 LW/PH if the lens is diffraction limited fully open (which I heavily doubt) and maybe half of this in typical tests. Which would be 2.4 MPixels. f/5 is too slow for a sensor this small. Whatever be the focal length. Ok for video though.

Unsinkable II · 03-05-2010, 05:07 AM

I just wasn't impressed with noise, particularly at ISO800. My Canon SX1 would seem to do better, and it is supposed to be worse than the SX10 due to using a CMOS sensor. With the HS10 using a backlit sensor, I had expected to be wanting to ditch my SX1. Sadly for me, and happily for my wife, that doesn't look like being the case.

jogiba · 03-05-2010, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by Unsinkable II

I just wasn't impressed with noise, particularly at ISO800. My Canon SX1 would seem to do better, and it is supposed to be worse than the SX10 due to using a CMOS sensor. With the HS10 using a backlit sensor, I had expected to be wanting to ditch my SX1. Sadly for me, and happily for my wife, that doesn't look like being the case.

I hope Canon upgrades the SX1 with a BSI CMOS chip for 1080p60 and a 30x 24-720mm lens like on the HS10. I am not concerned with the still quality since I use my K-7 for that. There is no way in hell you will see a 24-720mm (35mm eqiv) F2.8/5.6 lens for Pentax DSLRs or any other APS-C/FF DSLR and you would need the 16-50mm F2.8 and 50-500mm F4/6.3 bigma to match it.

Biro · 03-05-2010, 09:29 AM

Well, again, just to clarify my position: I don't expect DSLR quality out of a camera like the Fuji HS10 - that's why there was a smiley face next to my remark about my K200D. It's called hyperbole. But megazooms like this can still be fun for vacations and non-critical applications. But - and we'll have to wait for some formal tests on this - if the HS10 can't beat the Canon SX class and the Panasonic FZ class, then it's dead before it even gets rolling. If IQ is as good as, say, Fuji's F100fs - but without the CA problems - then we might have something.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
X90 questions	LScrabeck	Pentax Compact Cameras	8	11-07-2010 06:47 PM
X90 Info-Where is it?	billyid	Pentax Compact Cameras	3	04-18-2010 08:44 PM
Pentax X90 - How long is 26x zoom	gubak	Pentax News and Rumors	3	03-22-2010 04:47 PM
BIG ZOOM FOR K20D	charliezap	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	01-23-2010 10:17 PM
Some of us have no business with zoom lens. BIG airplane pic!!	vmax84	Post Your Photos!	16	07-18-2009 07:59 PM

03-04-2010, 03:39 AM	#16
Erik Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Umeå, Sweden Posts: 755	Originally posted by gazonk In good light like in this picture, my K10D would do much better at ISO 1600 than the HS10 does at 800. Your K10D has pixels that are a ridiculous amount larger, so it should be far more than one stop better. Frankly, this Fujifilm looks like garbage, but considering the sensor it has to work with, it's not bad. Well, it is bad, but it's no worse than any other compact camera. They're all this bad.

03-04-2010, 07:09 AM	#17
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by Erik Your K10D has pixels that are a ridiculous amount larger, so it should be far more than one stop better. Yes, but the guy I commented on seemed to think that the Fuji could compare to his K200D at ISO 800...

03-04-2010, 07:52 AM	#18
Erik Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Umeå, Sweden Posts: 755	Right, sorry. The K200D, like the K10D (same sensor) is obviously in a whole different ballpark. The K200D isn't very pretty at ISO 1600 since it is fairly restrictive with NR, but using the stupid amount of destructive noise reduction that Fujifilm applies, you could probably push the K200D to ISO 6400 at least and get something similar to the Fujifilm at ISO 800.

03-04-2010, 10:13 AM	#19
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Originally posted by Erik Right, sorry. The K200D, like the K10D (same sensor) is obviously in a whole different ballpark. The K200D isn't very pretty at ISO 1600 since it is fairly restrictive with NR, but using the stupid amount of destructive noise reduction that Fujifilm applies, you could probably push the K200D to ISO 6400 at least and get something similar to the Fujifilm at ISO 800. Can you get 1080p video with a 24-720mm (35mm eqiv) AF lens with a Pentax DSLR for $499 ? Last edited by jogiba; 03-04-2010 at 10:21 AM.

03-04-2010, 10:18 AM	#20
Erik Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Umeå, Sweden Posts: 755	Originally posted by jogiba Can you get 1080p video with a 24-720mm (35mm eqiv) AF lens with a Pentax DSLR for $499 ? Naw, and if someone wants to buy a 26x superzoom then they should, but no one should have any misconceptions about the compromises involved in a miniscule sensor with that kind of ISO range, and the optical design of a lens with a range like that. It's just not going to take very sharp pictures, but some people will be fine with that for use as a "fun" camera. Personally I would save my money another couple of months and get a K-x with an 18-250 lens any day of the week. Maybe throw a teleconverter into the mix if I really needed the range.

03-04-2010, 10:28 AM	#21
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	I already have lenses from 6.5mm to 2350mm but I sometimes I want a 30x super wide angle all in one hybrid that also does 1080p HD video with AF. I like Butter Pecan ice cream, do you ? BTW a TC on an 18-250 is not going to AF and it is not as wide angle as the HS-10.

03-04-2010, 10:47 AM	#22
Erik Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Umeå, Sweden Posts: 755	Originally posted by jogiba I already have lenses from 6.5mm to 2350mm but I sometimes I want a 30x super wide angle all in one hybrid that also does 1080p HD video with AF. Which is why you should totally get one. Me, personally, I would be bugged by the low pixel-level IQ all the time and it would affect my enjoyment of the camera. Just not my thing. And what I really wanted to discuss was not personal preferentials, I just wanted to make it clear that the high ISO performance, for instance, of one of these beasts is in no way comparable to any digital SLR. Originally posted by jogiba BTW a TC on an 18-250 is not going to AF and it is not as wide angle as the HS-10. I know. You often gotta compromise with these things, and again, personally, I'd prefer those compromises over the limitations imposed by the lens, sensor and usability of something like the X90 or aforementioned Fujifilm. ...I'm a fast prime guy anyway, I'd never buy a 18-250 or anything like that unless it was the only lens I was allowed on a trip by order of some strange foreign government.

03-05-2010, 01:43 AM	#23
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by Erik I know. You often gotta compromise with these things, and again, personally, I'd prefer those compromises over the limitations imposed by the lens, sensor and usability of something like the X90 or aforementioned Fujifilm. If you have to use a camera with such a small sensor, I find the W-series of Pentax to be a much more logical choice. They're pocketable, and I can use them on the beach and clean away sand and salt in tap water afterwards... The W80 of my daughter can't compete with the chroma noise level of the Fuji at ISO 800, but in Pentax tradition, the images IMHO look slightly more natural. The "super zooms" don't give you very much of an IQ advantage over a camera like the W80, they only buy you the tele reach, but you lose the pocketability and the water- and dustproof body (and, AFAIK, you don't get the crazy macro capability of the W series either).

03-05-2010, 02:23 AM	#24
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Or LX3-like IMO but for other reasons of course.

03-05-2010, 02:59 AM	#25
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by thibs Or LX3-like IMO but for other reasons of course. Sure, a camera like that is on my wish list too. But that's a somewhat larger sensor again.

03-05-2010, 03:29 AM	#26
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by gazonk Sure, a camera like that is on my wish list too. But that's a somewhat larger sensor again. Yep, feel free to ask for shots if want me to.

03-05-2010, 04:45 AM	#27
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by twokatmew how much detail can we reasonably expect from a 1/2.33 sensor at max zoom? 1.22 lambda N = 3.36 µm (size of a line pair at diffraction-limited max. resolution (5% MTF or so)). Sensor height is 4.5mm making for max. 2680 LW/PH if the lens is diffraction limited fully open (which I heavily doubt) and maybe half of this in typical tests. Which would be 2.4 MPixels. f/5 is too slow for a sensor this small. Whatever be the focal length. Ok for video though.

03-05-2010, 05:07 AM	#28
Unsinkable II Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,352	I just wasn't impressed with noise, particularly at ISO800. My Canon SX1 would seem to do better, and it is supposed to be worse than the SX10 due to using a CMOS sensor. With the HS10 using a backlit sensor, I had expected to be wanting to ditch my SX1. Sadly for me, and happily for my wife, that doesn't look like being the case.

03-05-2010, 07:58 AM	#29
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Originally posted by Unsinkable II I just wasn't impressed with noise, particularly at ISO800. My Canon SX1 would seem to do better, and it is supposed to be worse than the SX10 due to using a CMOS sensor. With the HS10 using a backlit sensor, I had expected to be wanting to ditch my SX1. Sadly for me, and happily for my wife, that doesn't look like being the case. I hope Canon upgrades the SX1 with a BSI CMOS chip for 1080p60 and a 30x 24-720mm lens like on the HS10. I am not concerned with the still quality since I use my K-7 for that. There is no way in hell you will see a 24-720mm (35mm eqiv) F2.8/5.6 lens for Pentax DSLRs or any other APS-C/FF DSLR and you would need the 16-50mm F2.8 and 50-500mm F4/6.3 bigma to match it.

03-05-2010, 09:29 AM	#30
Biro Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,200	Well, again, just to clarify my position: I don't expect DSLR quality out of a camera like the Fuji HS10 - that's why there was a smiley face next to my remark about my K200D. It's called hyperbole. But megazooms like this can still be fun for vacations and non-critical applications. But - and we'll have to wait for some formal tests on this - if the HS10 can't beat the Canon SX class and the Panasonic FZ class, then it's dead before it even gets rolling. If IQ is as good as, say, Fuji's F100fs - but without the CA problems - then we might have something.