LX2 high ISO raw files

[pengu]

Hello,

as there seems to be quite some interest in LX2 raw files and the noise level at higher ISOs, I thought, I'd share some pics. Some notes:

* Be careful, the file is huge (62.75 MB).

* All shots are from the same scene, shot on a tripod in a room lit by cloudy daylight. Program mode, all setting to default. RAW files @ ISO1600, ISO800, ISO400. The respective jpgs created by Silkypix (with all settings on default). 4 additional JPGs created directly in the LX2 @ ISO800 and ISO400, noise reduction set to high and low, respectively. All other image setting set on standard.

* Artistically, the scene sucks bad. But that was not the point, so please be gentle

* Yes, there is noise, and yes, the in camera procession kills detail. Could be a lot worse, though, imho. ISO400 is usable, ISO800 with limitations.

* @ISO400, the LX2 produces a lot less noise than my old Powershot G5.

* after these first tests, I'm very impressed with the cam.

* the value of these shots is very limited, as these are no "real life" scenarios. Don't read too much into it.

http://rapidshare.de/files/31695234/lx2_test.rar

Have fun!

[pengu]

Originally Posted by pengu http://rapidshare.de/files/31695234/lx2_test.rar

Sorry, had to delete the files, there were some complaints about rapidshare.

[ahsosl1e8]

why don't u post some 100% crops of the pictures?

[pengu]

Originally Posted by ahsosl1e8 why don't u post some 100% crops of the pictures?

Yeah, you're right. I wanted to provide the original raw files for the people interested, but I guess it's more convenient with crops. So here you go:

http://filexoom.com/files/15474/lx2_high_iso_crops.jpg

[odklizec]

ops..these ISO 800/1600 RAW shots looks terrible It looks there is something wrong with them? I mean all these horizontal lines inside the pictures? Could it be a problem with silkypix conversion?

[pengu]

Originally Posted by odklizec ops..these ISO 800/1600 RAW shots looks terrible It looks there is something wrong with them? I mean all these horizontal lines inside the pictures? Could it be a problem with silkypix conversion?

I don't think that this is a Sillypix problem, I guess that's normal behaviour.

Please note that this scene was intentionally composed to give the camera and the noise reduction a hard time: Low light, slow shutter speed (1/6th to 1/15th) and a lot of "fuzz" from the penguin and the peach.

The cam should give much better results in "real life" with better light conditions.

[odklizec]

Well I thought the LX2 and FZ50 sensors are very comparable in terms of output. Also the Venus III engine should be the same in LX2 and FZ50. But if you check these FZ50 crops (especially the RAW crops in them), there is no similar problem seen in FZ50 ISO800/1600 crops. So what you think?

http://filexoom.com/files/view/15340/ISO800_crops.png
http://filexoom.com/files/view/15340/ISO1600_crops.png

The full res. images can be found here..
http://www.pbase.com/fz3pics/fz50_lo...st_pics&page=3

There is no similar problem seen in any of these shots.

[tao]

Originally Posted by odklizec Well I thought the LX2 and FZ50 sensors are very comparable in terms of output. Also the Venus III engine should be the same in LX2 and FZ50. But if you check these FZ50 crops (especially the RAW crops in them), there is no similar problem seen in FZ50 ISO800/1600 crops. So what you think? http://filexoom.com/files/view/15340/ISO800_crops.png http://filexoom.com/files/view/15340/ISO1600_crops.png The full res. images can be found here.. http://www.pbase.com/fz3pics/fz50_lo...st_pics&page=3 There is no similar problem seen in any of these shots.

Both the LX2 and the FZ50 are 10MP... but the FZ50 has the larger sensor, is that the reason for the difference?

[pengu]

Here you go, some more crops, this time with better light conditions. I think, they look a lot better. The ISO 200 RAW is somewhat out of focus, sorry for that.

http://filexoom.com/files/15474/lx2_..._iso_crops.jpg

The more I play with the LX2, the more I like it.

Have fun.

[odklizec]

Thanks for them! These looks good. But the smearing of details in JPEG is clearly evident from ISO100 and it's getting worse with each higher ISO level. But RAW output is excellent. Only if it wouldn't be so big and slow to write

[pengu]

Originally Posted by odklizec Thanks for them! These looks good. But the smearing of details in JPEG is clearly evident from ISO100 and it's getting worse with each higher ISO level.

Yeah, but I don't think this is a issue up to and including ISO400, unless you want to print posters with 300 DPI. But no compact camera is designed for that. Even ISO800 RAW seems usable to me if the light is right.

[jawtab]

Your RAW iso400 is sharper than the iso200. a little camera shake by accident??

LX2 from your posts look very good up to iso400.

Thanks for taking the time to make those posts!

It's too bad their anti-noise engine eats away detail in JPG mode... but we're not shooting in JPG mode, now are we with this camera?!

Originally Posted by pengu Yeah, but I don't think this is a issue up to and including ISO400, unless you want to print posters with 300 DPI. But no compact camera is designed for that. Even ISO800 RAW seems usable to me if the light is right.

[pengu]

Originally Posted by jawtab Your RAW iso400 is sharper than the iso200. a little camera shake by accident??

Yes, I think so. Sorry. I took the shots on a tripod with a 2 sec self timer, but maybe the autofocus had some sort of problem.

Don't read to much into these crops, I just wanted to give a feeling about the cam, the LX2 should perform even better in real life.

Personally, I think the noise problem is way overrated, I mean, what do you want to do with a compact camera? For the usual web blogs, family album shots or 20x30cm prints, the LX2 is perfect. If you want to shot professional fotos for magazines or 300 dpi posters you need a DSL, no compact can do that job.

I'm off to Barcelona for a week now, let's see, what the LX2 can do there.

[jawtab]

I figured so much on the focus/shake... =P

I remeber my first canon 10d at ISO 1600 and 3200 was not very good. compacts should catch up eventually. slowly.

but for now I still enjoy slow shutter flash photography in low light situations and if not bring a light mini tripod.

iso1600 and 3200 are great for DSLRs w/ big wide open apertures.

iso400 max is perfect for me. I rarely shoot at night and only need 200 on average and 400 on occasion.

best of luck in barcelona! be sure to post your photos.

Originally Posted by pengu Yes, I think so. Sorry. I took the shots on a tripod with a 2 sec self timer, but maybe the autofocus had some sort of problem. Don't read to much into these crops, I just wanted to give a feeling about the cam, the LX2 should perform even better in real life. Personally, I think the noise problem is way overrated, I mean, what do you want to do with a compact camera? For the usual web blogs, family album shots or 20x30cm prints, the LX2 is perfect. If you want to shot professional fotos for magazines or 300 dpi posters you need a DSL, no compact can do that job. I'm off to Barcelona for a week now, let's see, what the LX2 can do there.

[ExplorerZ]

Originally Posted by jawtab I figured so much on the focus/shake... =P I remeber my first canon 10d at ISO 1600 and 3200 was not very good. compacts should catch up eventually. slowly. but for now I still enjoy slow shutter flash photography in low light situations and if not bring a light mini tripod. iso1600 and 3200 are great for DSLRs w/ big wide open apertures. iso400 max is perfect for me. I rarely shoot at night and only need 200 on average and 400 on occasion. best of luck in barcelona! be sure to post your photos.

sure compact will catch up like what fuji F30 have proven, but at the same time i guess dSLR will very soon be able to do well at ISO6400 by then. its a win-win solution