Pentax Optio WS80
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX1
Casio EX-Z450
Nikon Coolpix S640
Canon PowerShot S90
Canon PowerShot G11
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7
Canon EOS 7D
Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Gary’s Parries 25/06/06
This week’s Gary’s Parries topics are:
1. 100 Megapixels In Your Pocket
2. I Saw The Light
Introducing this week’s Gary’s Parries column. Everything you always wanted to know about digital cameras, but were afraid to ask. No question too difficult, or too easy. As a Senior Principal Software Engineer, and a former Assistant Professor of Computer Information Systems, as well as a recording studio owner/operator, inventor, and now, a digital camera enthusiast, GARY has more digital camera knowledge in his entire brain than most people have in their little finger. In the unlikely event that GARY would not know the answer to your question, he will answer it anyway, true to the spirit of the word “Parries”, a fencing term which, in this context, implies “cleverly evasive answers”. So let your imagination run wild. Email all your nagging digital camera questions to: (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) , and then, En Garde!
You may also attach to your email an ORIGINAL PHOTO of your choosing. A preview of the photo will be displayed with your question, and a full-sized version will be just a click away. No personal information will be published with your question unless you specifically include it in the text or attached photo of your email, which may be further edited for grammar, content, or other reasons.
***
*** QUESTION 1—- 100 MEGAPIXELS IN YOUR POCKET
***
Hello Gary,
After reading the recent PhotographyBLOG announcement of the 100+ megapixel CCD developed for astrometry, I wondered just how long it would be before a 100 megapixel CCD was available in a consumer ultra-compact. So, I decided to plot the maximum number of megapixels in a 1/1.8” CCD for each year since 2000, and then extrapolate what year that maximum would reach 100 megapixels. What I found was that, by the year 2010, 100 megapixel CCD ultra-compacts will have become a reality (see the accompanying chart).
But then I asked myself, so what’s the point? Even if lenses with that kind of resolution could be made inexpensively enough for consumer cameras, the file sizes would be enormous, and for what purpose? Such resolution would be wasted on anything smaller than poster size prints. The largest paper my Epson Stylus Photo 2200 printer can handle is 13“ x 19”, and 10 megapixels resolution is plenty for that size.
For non-professional printing, I absolutely cannot see any need for CCDs with greater than 10 megapixels resolution. Do you agree Gary?
Sincerely,
Frank M.
***
*** ANSWER 1
***
Frank, that’s an interesting prediction. I look forward to seeing 100+ megapixel CCDs in consumer ultra-compacts by the year 2010, but not for the reasons you might think. My inclination would be to provide a simple means for implementing that highly elusive, 10x optical zoom, ultra-compact. Here’s how it would work.
As you suggested, for print sizes up to 13” x 19”, there really is not much point in having more than 10 megapixels resolution. So that would mean, if you had an ultra-compact with a standard 3x optical zoom lens and a 111 megapixel CCD, setting the camera’s image size to 10 megapixels would enable an additional 3.3x digital zoom, with no loss of image quality. That would yield 10x ‘total’ zoom at a reduced 10 megapixels with the same image quality as a 10x ‘optical’ zoom lens and 10 megapixel CCD.
The above calculations were made using a square aspect ratio for the 111 megapixel CCD. This makes perfect sense, since the multitude of pixels would allow you to use the camera’s internal cropping to achieve any desired aspect ratio and orientation, while still maintaining your camera’s horizontal orientation.
Frank, only three and a half years to go !!! 
***
*** TOPIC 2—- I SAW THE LIGHT
***
I am generally not a believer in ‘signs’ from above, but this one was just too powerful to ignore. As you know, I’ve been trying to decide which 10x zoom ultra-compact to give my wife for our anniversary, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ1 or Kodak EasyShare V610. It has been a tough choice, mainly because the TZ1 is not very compact and the V610 is not image stabilized. But lately, I’ve been leaning heavily towards the V610 … that is until watching television last night with my wife.
It was during a commercial for the TZ1 that my wife exclaimed, “Oh, I like that!” She was obviously referring to the TZ1’s OIS, which was being demonstrated in a moving car by a pretty model who was pointing the TZ1 out the car window and snapping a picture. My wife thought OIS would be a great feature to have in a camera, not realizing, of course, I was about to give her a camera without that feature.
Needless to say, I did a complete about face in my thinking. Well, not exactly. Thanks to the PhotographyBLOG announcement of Jeff Keller’s review of the Canon PowerShot SD700 IS at DCResource, I discovered, and not a moment too soon, that (1) the SD700 is highly rated for quality, performance, and ease of use, (2) it uses the USB 2.0 ‘High’ Speed transfer mode, as compared to the 40x slower ‘Full’ Speed mode used by both the TZ1 and V610, and (3) it has a 4x image stabilized zoom lens combined with an ultra-compact and VERY stylish body.
Okay, so the SD700 is not a 10x zoom; however, by now you all should realize, there is NO SUCH THING AS A HIGH-QUALITY, HIGH-ZOOM, ULTRA-COMPACT !!!
Now I’m so happy, no sorrow in sight …
[Note: Canon’s non-stabilized flagship predecessor to the PowerShot SD700 IS was the PowerShot SD550 (Digital IXUS 750 in the UK), which received a 5 (out of 5) star rating in the PhotographyBLOG Digital IXUS 750 Review. – Ed.]
***
[Column photo “The Photographer” by Brenda LaFleur of Brenda LaFleur Photography.]
Pentax Optio WS80 Review
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX1 Review
Casio EX-Z450 Review
Nikon Coolpix S640 Review
Canon PowerShot S90 Review
Pentax K-x
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX1
Ricoh CX2
#1 Gary's Parries
Sorry, Nick. I forgot to credit you for the photos in Topic 2. I really liked
your self-portrait shot, and the flower was just one of the MANY beautiful
flower shots you got that day. Thank you for submitting them. - GARY
3:04 pm - Sunday, June 25, 2006
#2 terry chay
Answer 1: You neglect to mention that with digital zoom, the light per pixel is less and digital noise would be greater. This is why 1/3" and 2/3" CCDs (in those cameras you mention in topic #1) have worse low light performance than the APS-C CCDs which have worse low light performance than 35mm (8/3").
There are still a number of changes we can have in optics (nanocrystal coating, telecentricity) and in-camera image processing to mitigate this, but it isn’t going to go up at that exponential rate your reader mentions.
Topic #1: If you “saw the light” and got a Canon SD700 IS (their first image stabilized compact), then you missed a wealth of offerings from other vendors. For instance, instead of the Lumix TZ1, why not it’s sister product, the Lumix FX01 which is also OIS. It's 3.6x zoom has the far more useful wide angle (28mm) than the zoom (140mm) and comes in $180 cheaper and without that crappy grainy LCD panel, grinding sound, and strange use of plastic parts. It’s major weakness is chroma noise at higher ISOs.
(Oh, as for USB 1.1 vs 2.0? Got $10 to spare for a card reader? Lexar makes one that will double as a storage case.)
Of the top of my head Panasonic and Nikon have been using optical image stabilzation in pocket cameras for quite a while (Mega OIS and VR). Konica-Minolta/Sony and Pentax has something just as good as optically stabilized (Anti-Shake and Shake Reduction System). Casio's does it with their digital signal processor (probably not as good). Fuji has an auto-ISO feature (they call it picture stabilization, it levers their better sensor performance).
There is a wealth of options out there once you’ve “seen the light.”
8:29 pm - Sunday, June 25, 2006
#3 nick in japan
#1.. Thank you for your kind words, keep up the great work!
9:36 pm - Sunday, June 25, 2006
#4 Gary's Parries
Touché, Terry!
Excellent point about less light per pixel with digital zoom. You are
absolutely correct except for one thing. By 2010 digital noise won't
be a problem. You heard it here first.
Equally good point about the FX01. BION that was my second choice,
and a close second at that. Ironically, the feature that kept it behind
the SD700 was its 28mm lens, as my wife needs a longer telephoto
end. It all comes down to what you need.
The SD700's 40x faster USB 2.0 High Speed mode was gravy, and
certainly not a deciding factor. The same with its exceptionally good
looks. Price was not a consideration.
I agree, once you get away from high-zoom there are many options
for ultra-compacts. I think it was Jeff Keller's review that sold me.
Nick, right back atcha.
9:44 pm - Sunday, June 25, 2006
#5 terry chay
Gary,
Rereading my comment, they sounded very negative. I forgot to compliment you on a great article! Also the SD700 IS is an excellent camera. It was one I recommend to a friend last week. I saw it in Best Buy the other day and it’s quite striking. In terms of style, it is more reminiscent of the older SD designs, which I liked more than the newer ones.
Take care,
terry
9:49 pm - Sunday, June 25, 2006
#6 Gary's Parries
Thank you for the compliment.
One of the major drawbacks of electronic mail is that you do not get to
hear the inflections in a person's voice, or see the expressions on their
face; hence, the wide variety of Smiley Faces.
I always go out of my way to soften my own emails, and for something
critical, I'll let it sit for a while, and then reread it before sending.
If I get an email that sounds negative (which yours did not BTW), I look
for the positive, and respond accordingly. If I guessed wrong, it annoys
the hell out of the originator, so it's a win-win situation.
10:23 pm - Sunday, June 25, 2006
#7 terry chay
Your article inspired me to write one:
http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml
Take care,
terry
3:32 am - Monday, June 26, 2006
#8 nick in japan
Mark! better make Terry Chay an offer to write for this Blog! Maybe just when Gary does his Tahoe thing, and we are left high and dry!!!
This is good stuff! and he likes the LX-1 to boot!
3:45 am - Monday, June 26, 2006
#9 Gary's Parries
Very interesting article. Unlike Nick, who was so easily impressed by
your use of an LX1, I'm much more difficult to please. For me, it was
your love of pizza that did it.
Seriously though, I think "Picture Stabilization" will win out in the end.
The use of high ISOs to enable faster shutter speeds solves not only
the image blur caused by camera shake, but also image blur caused
by moving subjects. None of the other forms do that.
The only drawbacks to "Picture Stabilization" are (1) the higher image
noise that comes with higher ISOs, and (2) the lack of super high ISO
levels needed for stabilization in very low light situations; however, the
technological advances currently on the horizon should eliminate both
of these drawbacks.
To that end, have you read about the new nanotechnology CIS with a
maximum ISO of 6.4 MILLION?
http://tinyurl.com/eoya3
5:02 am - Monday, June 26, 2006
#10 nick in japan
Gary, what horizon are you seeing? I'm convinced that the manufacturers are in collusion to cap out the quality of compact cameras so as to keep a definite separation between compacts and DSLR types. I think without a difference, DSLR sales, as well as lens makers, would suffer.
There are no CMOS compacts, nor Canon DO lens technology employed in compacts, that tells me something.
5:33 am - Monday, June 26, 2006
#11 Gary's Parries
The thing about collusion is that it doesn't work. If it did we would not
have DVDs, because of movie company collusion. There would be no
iTunes, because of record company collusion. And we would certainly
still be driving around in gas powered vehicles because of automobile
manufacturer collusion. Oh wait, we still are.
6:41 am - Monday, June 26, 2006
#12 nick in japan
Yes! There has to be a good reason that an Olympus XA looking camera ( I love them) with a sensor like the Nikon D2H, that has grainless images up to and including ASA 3200, and a lens like the GR Digital, that even surpasses Velvia Pro film in LPM data, isn't on the market. Collusion is my only answer.
Especially with all the lens folding, retro-focusing technology that's available!
7:04 am - Monday, June 26, 2006
#13 Gary's Parries
You may have a point, but one thing you are not taking into account.
The consumer market is growing MUCH faster than the professional
and semi-professional markets. At some point (and we may already
have reached it) it will be economically beneficial for manufacturers
to cater to compact digicams over DSLRs.
7:24 am - Monday, June 26, 2006
#14 nick in japan
EXACTLY! But the real world is dedicated to keeping sales going, people employed and the bottom line. The balance collusion continues, I see no reason that it won't. So we are stuck in limbo, so to speak.
You youngsters will see an ideal camera, I may have been born too early.
7:32 am - Monday, June 26, 2006