File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
What pocket camera with a retractable lens, has the best image quality? Price is no object.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Superzoom 321

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 (10.0x20061208 [20061208.beta.1251 02:00:00 cutoff; m branch]) WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern898Focal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:05:20 01:23:02Exposure Time1/5 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceTungstenFlashNo FlashFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1277Image Height903RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastHardSaturationHighSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Superzoom 321

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 (10.0x20061208 [20061208.beta.1251 02:00:00 cutoff; m branch]) WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.4Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern898Focal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:05:20 01:22:58Exposure Time1/5 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceTungstenFlashNo FlashFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1296Image Height890RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastHardSaturationHighSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
>>88455
Oh god, I remember that thread!
>> Anonymous
>>88455
Fuck, that image is awesome. Too bad Nikon D80 is too big.
>> Anonymous
Canon Powershot A650
>> Anonymous
When it comes out, the Sigma DP-1 will be the best and only full spec compact digital. I want one.
>> Anonymous
>>88476
DP1 is the Duke Nukem Forever of cameras, keep waiting lol.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>88476
I still say fixed 28mm (equiv) f/4 is fail. Too crazy wide, and a stop dimmer than I think is acceptable for a fixed-lens camera. Also, I have a low opinion of Sigma in general, but that's mostly just groundless personal prejudice.

I still want someone to make a digital equivalent of the Canonet QL17.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>88515
Oh, and on the actual topic of the thread, I'm going to add in my vote for the Canon A6x0 series as my favorite pocketable camera. The PowerShot G9 might give you better image quality if your definition of pocketable is lax enough.
>> Anonymous
>>88515
Crazy width aside, a slow f/4 lens and no IS means that DP1 users will frequently have to shoot at ISO 400-800 while point-and-shoot users will be able to get away with ISO 200 in the same situation. Given that Foveon sensors aren't exactly stellar when it comes to high ISOs, I'm not too excited about DP1.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>88522
Exactly.

What I'd be really excited about is something like a 1/1.8" sensor camera with a crazy bright lens. I'm not an optical engineer, so I could be talking completely out of my ass, but it seems to me like it shouldn't be that difficult to make an f/1.0 lens for a sensor that tiny.
>> Anonymous
>>88515I still want someone to make a digital equivalent of the Canonet QL17.

yeah me too. although i would prefer apeture priority operation. I would be very tempted to buy the sigma if it had a fast 40mm equivelent lens.

Until then i will continue to use my GSN.
>> Anonymous
>>88530

And my Lynx 1C
>> Anonymous
>>88471
Bah, it doesn't have a rechargeable lithium battery, instead uses AA. Also one side is a bit too bulky.
>> Anonymous
>>88525
>> it shouldn't be that difficult to make an f/1.0 lens for a sensor that tiny

You might think that, but there's a reason that there have been about ten f/1 or faster photographic-quality optical lenses ever sold. Of those, about two were usable on a day-to-day basis, and only one is considered to be a really good lens (good old Noctilux).

It doesn't really have anything to do with the size of the sensor. An f/1 gets so highly curved, and needs such powerful diverging elements, that it's almost impossible to correct for all the errors.

That, and if they put an f/1.0 lens in a point-and-shoot, people would get upset that only a tiny part of their image was in focus. Go and look at some Noctilux images to see that effect, and tell me if it's what PnS users are looking for.
>> Anonymous
>>88637
>That, and if they put an f/1.0 lens in a point-and-shoot, people would get upset that only a tiny part of their image was in focus.

Not really. The depth of field depends on the f-number, but it's also inversely proportional to the sensor size.
A 10mm f/1.0 lens on a 1/1.8" sensor (typical for compacts) will give the depth of field equivalent to ~50mm ~f/4.8 lens on a 35mm film camera; this isn't something to be upset about.
>> Anonymous
>>88652
Ah, good point. Somehow that slipped my mind (even though I'm always commenting about how much nicer a portrait is on 6x7 versus with my DSLR...)

Stuff about problematic optical formulae still stands though.
>> Anonymous
>>88653
I think sometime in the near future we'll see digicams with digitally corrected lenses - i.e. the lens is very bright and/or has a huge zoom range, but has massive distortion and lateral CAs that are fixed in post-processing by camera software. (The lens would still need to be corrected for spherical and longtitudinal chromatic aberrations, but that's much easier if you have the other half of the equation removed)