IMAGE QUALITY OPTIO W80
Posted 12/12/2009 - 19:25
Link
Thanks for the heads up, was thinking of replaceing an old fuji Z1 with this.
Posted 12/12/2009 - 19:46
Link
Dont buy the W80, it`s very poor image quality does not rate a price of £50 let alone £200 ish. I just e mailed Pentax and asked if anything could be done. I am not expecting much of a reply.
Cedric
Cedric
Enjoy life
Posted 12/12/2009 - 19:56
Link
The WD60 has lower noise than the WD80, apparently, so does it have to be a non Pentax?
~Pete
Posted 12/12/2009 - 23:10
Link
Are you sure you're not set to an Auto ISO setting that is pushing it too high?
Best regards, John
Posted 13/12/2009 - 09:48
Link
Hi John, no I set the ISO manually. Makes no difference, with low 100 ISO still looks like its sprinkled with pepper dust. Looking at other review sites it seems the W80 is a dog. Pentax got this one wrong, hope they admit to it and do something or I guess the "Unfit for purpose" words will hit the mat in a local authority.
Cedric
Cedric
Enjoy life
Posted 13/12/2009 - 09:50
Link
Pete, I am beginning to lose faith with Pentax, want to keep an open mind and try something better.
Cedric
Cedric
Enjoy life
Posted 13/12/2009 - 11:33
Link
You may be disappointed with any high-pixel-count compact digital camera from any make. Either there is too much noise visible, or too much smeary noise reduction to crudely make the noise invisible. So I suggest an older model with fewer pixels.
~Pete
Posted 13/12/2009 - 11:54
Link
I'm with Pete here, only the more expensive units from Canon are interesting since they use a larger sensor but the rest
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Posted 13/12/2009 - 13:28
Link
The panasonic ones look ok, but if noise is more important than waterproofness, one of the early fuji F series link would be a good s/h choice, or the current F200. The Casio EX-Z1080 also scores comparatively well at high ISO. link
Unfortunately Pentax is in good company when it comes to producing noisy digital compacts; the cameras above are definitely exceptions to the norm.
Unfortunately Pentax is in good company when it comes to producing noisy digital compacts; the cameras above are definitely exceptions to the norm.
Posted 13/12/2009 - 13:51
Link
Anvh wrote:
I'm with Pete here, only the more expensive units from Canon are interesting since they use a larger sensor but the rest
Not wanting to plug other makes too much but as compacts go the Lumix LX3 is a stunning little camera. It too has a bigger sensor than most and keeps the pixel count to sensible level which results in really respectable high ISO performance for a compact. Coupled with fast and surprisingly good quality wide angle to short telephoto lens. I'm with Pete here, only the more expensive units from Canon are interesting since they use a larger sensor but the rest
It's so good I bought one for my wife in July
Huw
Edit: review link
Posted 13/12/2009 - 14:09
Link
The LX3's telephoto is so short that it hardly counts as telephoto. 60mm in 35mm-film terms. That puts me off upgrading my LX2 - which has an excellent lens but high noise.
~Pete
Posted 13/12/2009 - 14:16
Link
Agreed, but as a counter it is very useful at the wide end, much wider than other compacts tend to offer.... and good quality with it.
I must admit to being quite surprised how well the LX3 deals with noise at ISO 800 and 1600, much better than other compacts I've had experience using.
I must admit to being quite surprised how well the LX3 deals with noise at ISO 800 and 1600, much better than other compacts I've had experience using.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
1076 posts
17 years
East Suffolk
Cedric