Any suggestions for a pocketable camera offering a square frame option?

pingflood · 01-01-2011, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by pentup

I read somewhere that with the LX5 when you choose a different aspect ratio, the diagonal of whatever format you select is set to match the sensor size, or something, optimizing the quality -- er, I'm expressing that badly, because I don't know anything about the format -- but I was wondering if the S95 does exactly the same thing, or is it simply masking portions of the image, which wouldn't be as desirable?

Hi, what the LX5 does is have a slightly oversized sensor that is cropped so that the field of view remains consistent in the different aspect ratio modes. It actually DOES mask portions of the sensor, and the entire sensor area is never used. Doesn't really do anything for image quality but many like having the field of view remaining the same.

I looked long and hard at the LX5 but the S95 won out for sheer pocketability. With the slightly thicker body (when including lens) and lens cap the LX5 is just a little too big, and if it doesn't fit in your pocket you may as well pack a NEX which blows away either camera IQ-wise.

pentup · 01-01-2011, 06:14 AM

Originally posted by pentup

I read somewhere that with the LX5 when you choose a different aspect ratio, the diagonal of whatever format you select is set to match the sensor size, or something, optimizing the quality -- er, I'm expressing that badly, because I don't know anything about the format -- but I was wondering if the S95 does exactly the same thing, or is it simply masking portions of the image, which wouldn't be as desirable?

Answering my own question, I found this:

"The total resolution of the LX5's CCD sensor is never used to create a single image. The LX5 only ever uses a crop from it, depending on aspect ratio. Although this may seem perverse, the result is that the lens offers the same diagonal angle of view in 16:9, 4:3 and 3:2 formats, making it much easier to get a feel for the behavior of the lens. It also means you make the most of the sensor's area, getting similar pixel counts in all modes, rather than losing a lot of resolution to cropping."
Enthusiast Compact Camera Group Test (Q4 2010) Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

Whether that actually means better IQ from the Panasonic than the Canon, I have no idea. I can't decide between the two of them, so I guess I'll leave the posh point and shoots alone for now.

pingflood · 01-01-2011, 06:53 AM

Well, it really does not affect IQ in any way. What it does is exactly the same as any other camera when using an aspect ratio that is not native to the sensor; just crops it a bit.

You can look at it as either neat, the camera lets me have similar MP count and angle of view thanks to this

or

why the heck won't they let you use the entire sensor instead of forcing you to always crop in some way?

If you are interested in the fancier point and shoots, do not forget about the Samsung EX-1 / TL-500. Or Ricoh GR-D III though that one is a bit of an odd bird.

pentup · 01-01-2011, 09:54 AM

Originally posted by pingflood

Well, it really does not affect IQ in any way. What it does is exactly the same as any other camera when using an aspect ratio that is not native to the sensor; just crops it a bit.

You can look at it as either neat, the camera lets me have similar MP count and angle of view thanks to this

or

why the heck won't they let you use the entire sensor instead of forcing you to always crop in some way?

If you are interested in the fancier point and shoots, do not forget about the Samsung EX-1 / TL-500. Or Ricoh GR-D III though that one is a bit of an odd bird.

Well, it seems to me it doesn't "just crop it" -- that's the whole point. As for using the entire sensor, it is using it -- but for the purpose of maintaining quality in all ratios. I believe the Lumix sensor is slightly larger than the S95's -- perhaps in order to accommodate the cropping?

Anyway, I'm sure you're right -- for my purposes the IQ difference if any is probably negligible. For all I know, the S95 may be better in other ways. If I do succumb to temptation though, I'd probably go for the Lumix for the sake of the 24mm and slightly faster (across the range) lens, and the much better battery capacity.

Thanks for mentioning the other two cameras -- the Ricoh is odd, and interesting. The close-focused pics I've seen from it look fantastic.

01-01-2011, 06:14 AM	#17
pentup Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Flushing NY Photos: Albums Posts: 413	Originally posted by pentup I read somewhere that with the LX5 when you choose a different aspect ratio, the diagonal of whatever format you select is set to match the sensor size, or something, optimizing the quality -- er, I'm expressing that badly, because I don't know anything about the format -- but I was wondering if the S95 does exactly the same thing, or is it simply masking portions of the image, which wouldn't be as desirable? Answering my own question, I found this: "The total resolution of the LX5's CCD sensor is never used to create a single image. The LX5 only ever uses a crop from it, depending on aspect ratio. Although this may seem perverse, the result is that the lens offers the same diagonal angle of view in 16:9, 4:3 and 3:2 formats, making it much easier to get a feel for the behavior of the lens. It also means you make the most of the sensor's area, getting similar pixel counts in all modes, rather than losing a lot of resolution to cropping." Enthusiast Compact Camera Group Test (Q4 2010) Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review Whether that actually means better IQ from the Panasonic than the Canon, I have no idea. I can't decide between the two of them, so I guess I'll leave the posh point and shoots alone for now. Last edited by pentup; 01-01-2011 at 06:16 AM. Reason: added link

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pocketable light weight Panasonic FX50	waqas	Sold Items	4	12-29-2009 11:51 AM
Full frame Samsung Camera?	jadedrakerider	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	06-04-2009 04:13 PM
Samsung Full Frame Camera	dopeytree	Pentax News and Rumors	31	05-04-2009 01:14 PM
Full frame camera	12divizija	Post Your Photos!	0	01-26-2009 03:29 AM
pocketable DSLR?	pimocchio	Pentax DSLR Discussion	8	11-01-2007 12:15 PM

01-01-2011, 05:05 AM	#16
pingflood Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Borås, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,169	Originally posted by pentup I read somewhere that with the LX5 when you choose a different aspect ratio, the diagonal of whatever format you select is set to match the sensor size, or something, optimizing the quality -- er, I'm expressing that badly, because I don't know anything about the format -- but I was wondering if the S95 does exactly the same thing, or is it simply masking portions of the image, which wouldn't be as desirable? Hi, what the LX5 does is have a slightly oversized sensor that is cropped so that the field of view remains consistent in the different aspect ratio modes. It actually DOES mask portions of the sensor, and the entire sensor area is never used. Doesn't really do anything for image quality but many like having the field of view remaining the same. I looked long and hard at the LX5 but the S95 won out for sheer pocketability. With the slightly thicker body (when including lens) and lens cap the LX5 is just a little too big, and if it doesn't fit in your pocket you may as well pack a NEX which blows away either camera IQ-wise.

01-01-2011, 06:53 AM	#18
pingflood Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Borås, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,169	Well, it really does not affect IQ in any way. What it does is exactly the same as any other camera when using an aspect ratio that is not native to the sensor; just crops it a bit. You can look at it as either neat, the camera lets me have similar MP count and angle of view thanks to this or why the heck won't they let you use the entire sensor instead of forcing you to always crop in some way? If you are interested in the fancier point and shoots, do not forget about the Samsung EX-1 / TL-500. Or Ricoh GR-D III though that one is a bit of an odd bird.

01-01-2011, 09:54 AM	#19
pentup Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Flushing NY Photos: Albums Posts: 413	Originally posted by pingflood Well, it really does not affect IQ in any way. What it does is exactly the same as any other camera when using an aspect ratio that is not native to the sensor; just crops it a bit. You can look at it as either neat, the camera lets me have similar MP count and angle of view thanks to this or why the heck won't they let you use the entire sensor instead of forcing you to always crop in some way? If you are interested in the fancier point and shoots, do not forget about the Samsung EX-1 / TL-500. Or Ricoh GR-D III though that one is a bit of an odd bird. Well, it seems to me it doesn't "just crop it" -- that's the whole point. As for using the entire sensor, it is using it -- but for the purpose of maintaining quality in all ratios. I believe the Lumix sensor is slightly larger than the S95's -- perhaps in order to accommodate the cropping? Anyway, I'm sure you're right -- for my purposes the IQ difference if any is probably negligible. For all I know, the S95 may be better in other ways. If I do succumb to temptation though, I'd probably go for the Lumix for the sake of the 24mm and slightly faster (across the range) lens, and the much better battery capacity. Thanks for mentioning the other two cameras -- the Ricoh is odd, and interesting. The close-focused pics I've seen from it look fantastic.