The Pixel Race Continues

[gepetto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Out of all the companies making cameras it is sad how Panasonic takes a beating for actually being more innovative in their design approach than all the other companies combined. In particular how they have been thinking outside the box with their sensor design for their compact cameras. We are talking about compact cameras you do realize. Certainly the M8 or Nikon D80 are going to have better image quality. A D80 is not going to fit into your pocket either.

 

The FX100 is not stuffing more pixels into the same sensor. In fact I believe the pixel pitch is actually greater for the FX100 than previous FX line. The FX line has been using a sensor size of 1/2.5". The FX100 is using a sensor size of 1/1.72" which is over a third larger in total area for the sensor. A 2/3" sensor is nearly double the area of a 1/1/8" sensor. The FX100 is not stuffing pixels in the least.

 

It is rather funny when the LC1/D2 were released the cameras were panned because they only had 5 megapixels. Leica and Panasonic even used the fact that keeping the megapixel count down allowed for a larger per pixel pitch for sharper images as a selling point. People criticized them as though it was some marketing gimmick.

 

This is all old hat. Every time a new round of cameras are announced the same misinformation is started all over again.

 

I for one am glad Panasonic is always pushing the design with the help of Leica.

[sdai]

The FX100 is using a sensor size of 1/1.72" which is over a third larger in total area for the sensor. The FX100 is not stuffing pixels in the least.

 

Many other companies have been using 1/8" sensors in point and shooters long time ago ... you can find it in the Sony V3, Canon G6 etc.

 

What Panasonic is doing is ... well ... to say the least, definitely not groundbreaking. LOL

 

Just as a friendly reminder, they're best known in Japan and other Asian countries for rice cookers, washing machines and programmable automatic flushing toilet etc. It's a shame that Leica would let a household electronics company use a premium trademark in photography.

[Riley]

Just as a friendly reminder, they're best known in Japan and other Asian countries for rice cookers, washing machines and programmable automatic flushing toilet etc. It's a shame that Leica would let a household electronics company use a premium trademark in photography.

 

i guess you dont have to look far to find some overrated supercilious self effacing twat that will look the gift horse in the mouth. Quite likely if it were not for the relationship with Panasonic Leica would be gone, or at least trapped in the film era someplace competing with the antique camera market for a place in history.

[sdai]

... trapped in the film era someplace competing with the antique camera market for a place in history.

 

Good for Leica, mate ... Panasonic will never get there.

[gepetto]

Many other companies have been using 1/8" sensors in point and shooters long time ago ... you can find it in the Sony V3, Canon G6 etc.

Simon that is my point.

 

All the "Camera" companies basically produce cookie cutter products. Panasonic as you describe them who actually make cookie cutter appliances thought outside the box building the LX1/DLUX2 around a sensor with an aspect ratio of 16:9. This was really brilliant. Whose decision was it internally to use an LCD screen with an aspect ratio of 4:3 sounds like marketing saying no the consumer is not smart enough to use 16:9 they only understand 4:3.

 

If memory serves me I think our own Mark Norton pointed straight out this defect in the LX1/DLUX2. Not matching the aspect ratios between the screen and sensor limited the use of the camera in 16:9 which is the ratio using the largest amount of the sensor as this gave the smallest view on the LCD. The LX1/DLUX2 still takes very sharp images regardless. It is just harder using the full sensor as the image shrinks on the LCD.

 

Now someone could argue that it was a marketing decision to use an LCD with an aspect ratio of 4:3 so the next unit they can change the screen to 16:9 which may well be the scenario. As a consumer I can believe marketing could be that stupid. At least in the end the LX2/DLUX3 has a proper screen which really makes for a better tool.

 

In the LC1/D2 they optimized image quality first by using less pixels for larger pixel pitch and sharper images. The odd thing about the LC1/D2 was the 69mm filter thread. This could come back to the use of the 4:3 aspect ratio sensor. If they had used a sensor with a 3:2 aspect ratio they may have been able to make the LC1/D2 physically smaller more like the standard 67mm thread while maintaining the 28-90 f2 lens. Add the LCD and EVF in the same 3:2 ratio It starts looking more like a Leica M body than the boxy shape it came to be.

 

What we really need is for some entrepreneur to offer a complete LC1/D2 upgrade package. HD EVF and LCD. Better sensor with some sort of motion detection OIS capability built into it. It is a crying shame that beautiful lens is trapped in that camera.

 

Maybe Pana/Leica will increase the size of the sensor for the LX3/DLUX4 making the focal length wider to 24mm. They did this with the TZ line taking the first generation with a focal length of 35-350 increasing the size of the sensor pushed it to 28-280 without changing the size of the camera. This also increased the pixel count from 5 million effective to 7.

 

There they go again stuffing pixels.

[ho_co]

Gepetto, I fully agree with you. Panasonic’s digicams are definitely extremely innovative. They have very good image stabilization, an interesting “extra optical zoom,” good support for the 16:9 aspect ratio, etc. I think they are a great partner for Leica.

 

But like everyone else, they are on the “My pixel is bigger than yours” bandwagon.

 

For example: I don’t have a size for the 1/1.72” sensor, so here I substitute the horizontal dimension of the more standard 1/1.8” size. Dividing that by the 4000 pixel horizontal resolution gives a pixel pitch of 1.8 µm. Applying Nathan Myhrvold’s formula at Luminous landscape (i.e., multiplying by 1.054) gives a maximum usable aperture of f/1.9 to realize the 12 MP resolution of its sensor. But the maximum aperture of the lens is only f/2.8.

 

Thus, the DMC-FX100 joins a number of cameras like the Canon G7 which offer more pixels than they can ever make use of.

 

That's not a complaint per se. It's just that they are caught in the same marketing frenzy as everyone else.

 

--HC

[tommycrown]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Actually I was very surprised about IQ on this camera.

 

Check out the site:

 

Street photography with the new FX100: Panasonic Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

Leica may pick this up as the next C-Lux 3, who knows?

 

FX100 is little bit bulkier than C-Lux 2(FX30) though.

 

Tommy