How To Choose a Compact Camera

I went through a process just recently that I see as one of the most common questions asked: “What camera do I buy?” In the last entry, I happened to have answered the same question, but for people looking at entry-level SLRs. This time, I am talking only of compact or point-and-shoot cameras. Of course, we all want something a little different, but I will try to keep this to what I would consider the essentials.

So, that is the first question. What is essential in a compact camera? Honestly, all we wanted was something small to do videos of our children since I am already carrying around my camera for the photographs. I think we can safely put the video issue aside, though, because almost all compact cameras take the same quality of video. What is the most important part of any camera? Image quality.

My search was to find the best compact camera possible, but not to pay a huge price for it. My research labors where not in vain.

Now, I do not know all the science of it all, but I know the size of the camera’s sensor has a huge part to play. That is fairly easy to understand. I also know that some companies can use a big sensor but still totally mess up the image quality with other factors in the chain, and some companies do pretty well at the impossible task of keeping decent quality from small sensors. Basically, though, the bigger that sensor, the better quality photos you will have. So, my first step was to research compact camera sensor sizes.

I know, this sounds ridiculous, but it is simply something the manufacturers do not want you to know. More megapixels from the same physical sized sensor is not going to give you much better results…if any better. So, I went to the trusty DPReview website, my first stop for research and reviews on cameras. I used their side-by-side comparison to go through (literally) every single compact camera they had in their lists. I found out pretty quickly that there are two basic physical sizes of compact camera sensors on the market: 1/2.5″ and 1/1.6″. I am assuming that is a diagonal measurement, like TV screens and computer monitors. So, even the bigger size is only just over a half inch…diagonally. It is a wonder they can take any decent photos!

So, I made a list of every single larger-sized sensor compact camera. The list itself was interesting. Now, don’t quote me on any of this; I am doing it from memory (I should have kept that list, huh?). Canon had some, but only among their expensive compacts (G9, G10). Of course, Leica had a couple, but you will pay for those too. Several companies were completely devoid of any larger sized sensor…Sony being the one I remember most. Samsung had a few, but very scattered here and there in their camera lines…therefore, it would be pretty hard to actually find one. FujiFilm was the real champion here. Their entire F-series line had the bigger sensor, and that line also has some very competitively priced cameras.

So, for the completely subjective part of this whole thing, my wife had recently shot on a friend’s Samsung compact camera. Since, I have seen photos from the same camera. She did not like the display, and when I saw the photos, I was absolutely appalled at the image quality. We know it was new. There just is not any excuse, regardless of how much it cost, for images that horrible. I am not kidding.

And for the other subjective input, my wife had also recently shot a FujiFilm compact that she kept saying how much she loved. I did not want her to influence me too much while figuring out which cameras were options, but then when the FujiFilm F-series showed so many larger sensor cameras in my list, we started looking that direction.

Again on DPReview, just offhand to try a different approach to find for high-quality compact cameras, I looked at their most highly rated cameras. What do you know, in the list of the most highly recommended cameras on their site, two FujiFilm F-series cameras were listed: the F31fd and F50fd. If you actually read through either of those reviews, you will see how little the extra megapixels help us. The F31fd review not only put it among the best compact cameras of its time, but the F50fd review, which was good in and of itself, still struggled to compare to the F31fd in image quality, especially noise at high ISO (film speed).

So, though I tried my best to search for a F31fd (because image quality better than most new cameras at an old camera price was fine by me) among the shops, I found some as old, but there were no 31s to be found. Actually, since I was actually looking in Singapore, I found that there were many F-series cameras not on my list…I guess they have some Asian versions that DPReview would know by different numbers. Anyway, we ended up buying the FujiFilm F50fd and are already impressed by the image quality.

As for all the other features they are trying to pack in new cameras and the extra megapixels, I would say image quality is the most important factor to most people. Woops. I do know of one feature the FujiFilm cameras have, which most do not, which really is a great feature I could talk about more some time. It has a setting on the dial where it will take two photos, back to back, one with flash and one without. Wonderful. If only more people could see how much better their photos were with the flash off!

So, I will give a respectful nod to the bigger sensor compact cameras from Canon, Leica, Panasonic, and (grudgingly) Samsung, but FujiFilm gives quite a variety of price and function in their F-series, all of which (as far as I can tell) have the (comparatively) larger sized sensor. FujiFilm F-series wins. Rarely would I specifically give brand names like this, but in this case, it really did seem to come out quite clearly.

Cooper Strange Written by:

6 Comments

  1. 2008-12-12

    Fujifilm make GREAT compact cameras…

    The issue with sensor size is kind of the case, but the real issue is that to cram the MPs into a smaller sensor means it is more difficult technologically to make as high a quality sensor… And so the arguement for sensor size is correct. So long as it’s a good quality sensor, the larger one will be able to more accurately record and with less noise. It’s also easier and therefore cheaper to make a larger sensor, so for the price it should be higher quality… But the margin is ever narrowing for compacts and usually I think the most difficult issue for compacts is the lens. As people want to make cameras more and more compact the lens suffers, with light passing through more glass than it needs to or being cleverly distorted to fit into the tiny case…

    But yeah, I had a Fujifilm F700 a few years ago and til I dropped it in a puddle it was easily my favourite camera! That was before my dslr though!! I replaced it with an olympus mju and the quality is nowhere near as good, but it is waterproof and shockproof so that is a big bonus for a kayaker! Or even just to let kids play with it!

  2. 2008-12-19

    You say it is easier, and therefore cheaper, to make a larger sensor, but is that totally right? I thought a bigger chunck of silicone (that is what the sensors are made on, right?) will cost quite a big more. The more sensors they can cut out of that round plate, the better (for them). So, though cheaper to actually make, the base material on which to make the sensor is more expensive, I think.

  3. 2008-12-20

    I’m pretty sure the increase of cost to ensure the precision required in manufacturing a small chip over a large chip which gives the same quality output will outweigh the saving of silicone… largely because digital imaging is still in the realms of cutting edge electronics…

    Basically what I was trying to say in an embarrassingly long winded way is that if you use the same precision to make a larger chip as to make the smaller one the percentage margins of error will be much lower on the larger chip, so it should give much better results… although in that case it will be more expensive than the smaller chip…
    But I think that the margin in plain quality between full and various sized crop frames is much lower now than it has been, hence things like the four-thirds system, cropped format sensors that, while still not quite up to speed in the pro’s eyes, produce results that most of us wouldn’t know the difference from… Compacts come in a little after, but still not far I reckon…

    I’d say the biggest difference comes on a compact with the lens… and Fuji do the whole system well if you ask me…

    Japan really has the digital camera market in it’s pocket huh?!

  4. 2008-12-22

    Japan pretty much has the whole market, yes…I guess you still have Leica…well, maybe that is it.

    I see what you are saying about the price, technology required, and such to produce those chips. And you are totally right in saying that 4/3rds would be a great system for those buying the bottom end of the SLR market: smaller, quality is the same to their eyes, performance is similar.

  5. 2009-03-18

    One thing is still true, the bigger the physical pixel size, the less the noise. So, you are still better off with a bigger sensor, given the same megapixels, when noise is concerned.

Comments are closed.