![]() By using these extreme aperture settings (for a compact camera) it is able to create nice portrait shots with shallow depth of field. It offers a maximum aperture of f/1.8 in the wide-angle setting (28mm) to f/2.5 in the tele setting (112mm 35mm film equivalent). Just like the XZ-1, the XZ-2 has a very fast lens system. Compared to its forerunner, it now offers a higher resolution (920,000 instead of 610,000 pixels). For even more impressive performance, particularly in low-light, larger sensor cameras should be considered, but with the exception of the remarkable Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100, few are as genuinely compact and as inherently flexible as these cameras.The monitor can be flipped up- and downward. ![]() As for low-light, the Olympus takes the lead but the scores are quite close. Even though it’s likely to have the same sensor as the Olympus, some performance enhancements have been made giving it the edge in Color Depth and Dynamic Range at base and low ISOs. The Nikon Coolpix P7700, however, is a slightly different case. The Olympus even nudges ahead in our Sports use case, out-performing both those models in the low-light scores. Its overall sensor performance scores are a significant improvement on the original XZ-1 and easily measure up to the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 and Canon PowerShot G15. ![]() The Olympus has a choice of two models, both originally designed for their micro 4:3 bodies but no less compatible with the XZ-2.Īlthough Olympus hasn’t updated the lens, the redesigned body, with its tilting screen and in particular the new sensor, means the XZ-2 compares favorably with the latest offerings from rivals. It’s also worth noting the decision to drop the optical finder of previous iterations may be a shortcoming for some users, especially as there’s no option to add an electronic finder. Not only does it have the longest zoom range, equivalent to 28-200mm, only a slightly ‘slower’ f/2.0-4.0 maximum variable aperture, and useful articulated 3-inch rear screen but, with a DxOMark score of 53, it performs very well indeed. The Nikon, however, is a very strong challenger. You might see performance differences between the Canon and Nikon but the XZ-2 sits in the middle of those two in terms of the quality of sensor output. Qualitatively, the improvements in image quality wouldn’t be noticeable and that’s also likely true in the Low-Light ISO scores, where the Olympus is ahead slightly. Like rivals, the upgrade to CMOS technology allows Full HD video (1080p) as well as 720p video at 30fps, and a doubling of sensitivity up to ISO12800.Īlthough the measurements are close, the Nikon P7700 has an additional 0.47Ev in Dynamic Range at base ISO over the Olympus XZ-2.Ĭompared with the Nikon, the XZ-2 can’t quite match it in Color Depth or Dynamic Range. The XZ-2 also has a tilting 3-inch touch-sensitive screen and provision for an optional electronic EVF (the same finders as the firms’ 4:3 models) although at $600, the addition of either the $160 VF-3 or higher-res $249 VF-2 makes the combination pricey. One nice control feature of the XZ-2 is the Hybrid control ring surrounding the lens, it can be used to alter a number of settings including aperture values, shutter speeds and adjust EV compensation among others. This is attached to a stabilized platform, much like the firm’s 4:3 cameras and features a 6-24mm f/1.8-2.5 (28-112mm equivalent in 35mm terms) iZuiko-Digital branded zoom lens. The Olympus XZ-2 iHS measures just 113 x 65.4 x 48mm (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.9″) and weighs 346g (12.20 oz ) but packs a 12Mpix 1/1.7-inch type (7.44×5.58mm) backside illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor. High-end enthusiast orientated digital compact cameras like this one promise high-quality imagery in a very small form factor.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |