« [REVIEW–PENTAX K20D DSLR & Pentax 18-55mm lens] | Main | [REVIEW—NIKON COOLPIX P60] »
May 07, 2008
[ CHOICE RANKS DIGITAL CAMERAS ]
HERE'S SOME NEWS that will set the digital cat amongst the megapixel pigeons. Choice magazine is rating cameras this month and they reckon that if image quality is your top priority you should go for the Canon SX100is.
The Canon SX100is compact ($400) gets an image qaulity rating of 61 percent on the Choice table, whereas the Canon 40D DSLR ($2300) manages a miserable 53 per cent.
In fact in the top 16 cameras rated for image quality there is only one DSLR, the Nikon D80. Or, put another way, 7 DSLRs have lower ratings than 15 compacts.
Margaret Brown, camera tester for PhotoReview Australia, says that she is “surprised” by the ratings. She would never compare a compact with a DSLR. “Apples and oranges”, she says. Ms Brown uses the standard Imatest (www.imatest.com) process in order to eliminate, as far as possible, subjectivity in the process.
Dpreview.com, the London-based camera review web site, now owned by Amazon, may be putting the cameras back on the test bench to see where they went wrong. They give the Canon EOS 40D SLR an image rating of 9, and they say: “…the results speak for themselves; colorful (yet accurate) detailed images with low noise even at high sensitivities.”
Choice tells us that the Canon S5is superzoom is better in image quality than the 40D by about 10 percent. Dpreview, on the other hand, says of the S5is: “…Canon took an already great camera and…then put inside it a sensor that is noisier than its predecessor, meaning that – for the most part – the resolution increase simply isn't reflected in the output, thanks to the need for stronger noise reduction.” The camera gets a 7.5 rating for image quality.
Compact cameras, including those that Choice rates as having superior image quality, suffer from picture deterioration as the pixels increase. Noise (grain) levels rise and dynamic range – the ability to hold detail in shadows and highlights – diminishes. Neither of these issues is a serious problem with the Sony, Canon, and Nikon DSLRs that are rated as inferior.
So what does Choice know that has eluded other well regarded reviewers? The magazine shares results with a number of consumer associations around the world. “All the tests are carried out by professional labs in Europe that specialise in photographic testing.” But does anyone in Australia keep an eye out for anomalies that may need explanation?
Christopher Zinn, media spokesman for Choice, says that “Choice tests compact digital cameras and DSLRs using the same methodology because general consumers might consider buying either type and want side by side comparison.” He says that image quality for digital cameras is appraised by a group of experienced individuals who aren’t aware of which camera produced each image. “That way they can’t be influenced by brand, model or the latest press release from a manufacturer.” And experienced testers in Australia do watch for anomalies in the results.
We can only say of the image quality ratings that we beg to differ. We have yet to meet a compact camera that we consider matches any DSLR in image quality. Perhaps the ratings will give comfort to Choice subscribers who think that they have bought well when they find that their $550 camera is rated higher than some poseur’s $2300 DSLR. But Imaging has no plans to swap our Canon 40D for a Canon S5is.
*
Posted by terry at May 7, 2008 11:35 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://bleedingedge.com.au/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1466
Comments
I have read th article in question, and it doesn't surprise me at all. I'm a subscribe of Choice and they're wonderful for comparing coffee machines, fridges, vacuum cleaners, etc, but they've always been poor at comparing high-tech equipment. (Such as cameras and computers.)
So when I get my subscription copy of Choice, I pretty much ignore any articles about gadgets, but still trust them highly for everything else.
It's disappointing that they still can't get credible reviews of high-tech things, but at everything else they do is usually spot on.
Posted by: Galaxip at May 8, 2008 12:33 PM
Similar anomolies are often seen in tests of hi-fi equipment (including those published by Choice). It is a known phenomenon that hi-fi equipment with higher distortion is often considered to sound "better". Distortion can often be confused with more detail and can bring a warmth and softness to the sound which many find appealing.
Maybe there is a similar effect in photography. Maybe vignetting and flare and warmth and barrel distortion look good to the great unwashed. Warm and soft and glowing looks better than hard, cold and clinical. A serious photographer wants equipment that is transparent: which adds nothing to the result so that they can use their art to produce a desired effect. The point-and-shooter wants a photograph.
Posted by: happnndude at May 9, 2008 12:56 AM
I have never trusted the methodology used by Choice in any of their reviews. This story indicates to me that my instincts are correct and I'm glad I have never wasted my money on membership.
Posted by: RichardR at May 9, 2008 11:59 PM
By putting a DSLR in the hands of a novice is like giving a F1 car to a learner driver. Thom Hogan's guide to the D80 clearly says that if you want a point & shoot, don't buy a DSLR, i.e., DON'T use the auto feature. My coolpix 8700 will take a better "snap" than the D80, but when it comes to proper photography techniques, the DSLR has the power that a point & shoot can't match.
Posted by: Geoff at July 22, 2008 04:00 PM
Is it just me, or does this sound a little unlikely?
Posted by: Daniel Gara at July 23, 2008 12:27 PM