Travel Photography - Can anyone recommend a compact digital camera with a good optical zoom?

I'm looking to upgrade my several year old Canon Elph. It was great for travel and did a decent job with photo quality for casual use. But it very often gave me blurry shots in lower light situations and had a very poor 3x optical zoom.

I was looking at the Casio EX-H10 (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0906/09061101casioexh10.asp) as I was very excited about the 10x optical zoom in such a small form factor. Unfortunately the early reviews don't seem to be great.

I'm not aware of too many other models (of any brand) out right now with such a good zoom. Anyone know of something that might be a good alternative? Thanks.

Panasonic DMC-ZR1. Even though it's only a 8x zoom.

Second the Panny recommendation in this category. If 10x is a minimum, the ZS1 will give you 12x.

I would go for the older Panasonic DMC-TZ5 just for the lower pixel density.

Canon SX110IS has a 10x zoom
Canon SX10IS has a 20x zoom

Canon SX110IS has a 10x zoom
Canon SX10IS has a 20x zoomBoth true, both good cameras, but neither has the compact form factor the OP wants. If s/he wanted something this large, Panasonic aficionados would recommend the FZ35/38. There are comparable "bridge" cameras in most other firms' product lines as well, but reviewers tend to prefer one of those two (Canon or Panasonic).

I would go for the older Panasonic DMC-TZ5 just for the lower pixel density.

Can you explain the advantage of going with lower pixel density?

Seems like there's a lot of love for the Panny's. Never really new they were a big player in the digital camera biz. They seem to get good reviews, and look nice too. Maybe I'll make the switch from Canon this time around.

Can you explain the advantage of going with lower pixel density?

Seems like there's a lot of love for the Panny's. Never really new they were a big player in the digital camera biz. They seem to get good reviews, and look nice too. Maybe I'll make the switch from Canon this time around.

Lower pixel density generally means less digital noise at high ISO setting. But that depends on specific models.

Panasonic and Canon indeed are the leaders in compact digital cameras. Leica designs Panny's lenses, and their optical stabilization is also top notch. You generally can't go wrong with either brand.

we have a panasonic fz 18(18x). although lighter, it is about the same size as a canon ftbn 35 mm. the optics are supposed to be associated with leica. they do seem to be quite good, although i think the old canon lenses are better.

just got her a new canon t1i and 4 lenses. this canon definitely has superior lens to the panasonic.

also have a lot of underwater photos with an old nikonos. definitely superior to the panasonic(above water)

we have a panasonic fz 18(18x). although lighter, it is about the same size as a canon ftbn 35 mm. the optics are supposed to be associated with leica. they do seem to be quite good, although i think the old canon lenses are better.

just got her a new canon t1i and 4 lenses. this canon definitely has superior lens to the panasonic.

also have a lot of underwater photos with an old nikonos. definitely superior to the panasonic(above water)

You can't really compare "full-size" lenses that are either primes or moderate-zooms for SLR to a 18x "super-zoom" that is built into a fairly compact digital camera.

Lower pixel density generally means less digital noise at high ISO setting. But that depends on specific models.

Panasonic and Canon indeed are the leaders in compact digital cameras. Leica designs Panny's lenses, and their optical stabilization is also top notch. You generally can't go wrong with either brand.

Thanks. I'm gonna take a good look at the Panny's. Seems like the Canon's haven't really advanced much in the zoom department and I'd really like to jump up to 8/10/12x optical in a similar form factor. Going from a several year old 4mp elph I'm not really concerned about how many megapixels it has, as any new model will be at least 8mp and that's twice as much and more than sufficient for my needs.

Really, I'm most concerned about picture quality, image stabilization and zoom. I'd also like HD (1280x720) video recording with the ability to zoom while recording. Features like red eye detection/correction are nice but not as important to me.

I've had a couple of Panny's and liked them all. I have my eye on the new ZR1 given its size (shirt pocket) and 8x zoom (25-200).

I'm also eyeing the new Fuji F70EXR. I'd like to be able to handle both...and see some reviews on both. I've seem a lot of good reviews on other Fuji P&S models...for their color quality and sharpness...which interest me a lot. anyone see any good reviews on the F70? it's the only one out there that would likely get me to switch from the Panny...if it's as good as many expect.

The new Fuji F70 EXR. It has the EXR sensor technology plus a 10x zoom. It's even slimmer than the Casio H10 too!

Can you explain the advantage of going with lower pixel density? ...

Light sensitivity depends on the size of the photo cell on the sensor. Higher pixel density forces the individual cells to be smaller. Then they put amplification circuits on the sensor or the interface chip to boost the weak signal level. But these signal processing introduce undesirable effects on high contrast or low contrast adjacent shades.

Noise are really errors in sensing or processing images from the sensor.

Consider that DSLR have 1.5-5MP/CM2 and older compacts are in the range of 15MP/CM2, newer compacts are in 40MP/CM2+ range. That is why 10MP+ compact cameras just doesn't make sense and high ISO settings of these cameras give mostly poor images.

Small sensors are dictated by economics, cheaper sensor and cheaper lens. Megapixel race is driven by marketing and consumer buying habits. That is why some older cameras are still very desirable.

The DMC-TZ5 is a pretty good compromise as a modern camera.

I'm also eyeing the new Fuji F70EXR. I'd like to be able to handle both...and see some reviews on both. I've seem a lot of good reviews on other Fuji P&S models...for their color quality and sharpness...which interest me a lot. anyone see any good reviews on the F70? it's the only one out there that would likely get me to switch from the Panny...if it's as good as many expect.

The new Fuji F70 EXR. It has the EXR sensor technology plus a 10x zoom. It's even slimmer than the Casio H10 too!

The F70EXR looks pretty nice, but unless I'm mistaken I don't think it does HD video. While I don't expect the cameras in this class to rival camcorders in video performance, it is nice to be able to switch over to video and take a few clips. Especially since I don't have a dedicated video recorder.

Small sensors are dictated by economics, cheaper sensor and cheaper lens. Megapixel race is driven by marketing and consumer buying habits.

Agreed. That's also why some of the newer 'pocket' cameras with larger sensors have shorter zoom ranges. A 4mm-12mm zoom can be pretty small. The same range in a full size sensor might be several times that in focal length and make for a much chunkier lens.

The F70EXR looks pretty nice, but unless I'm mistaken I don't think it does HD video. While I don't expect the cameras in this class to rival camcorders in video performance, it is nice to be able to switch over to video and take a few clips. Especially since I don't have a dedicated video recorder.

I think you're right about HD...and it could be a deal breaker if that's a feature you want. For me, that's not important. What I'm after is the best possible color suturation and shaprness.

Can someone please provide a quick description of the advantage of the Fuji sensor vs. say the Panny? I've read a lot about how it's better...but it rarely really explains why.

thank you..

Light sensitivity depends on the size of the photo cell on the sensor. Higher pixel density forces the individual cells to be smaller. Then they put amplification circuits on the sensor or the interface chip to boost the weak signal level. But these signal processing introduce undesirable effects on high contrast or low contrast adjacent shades.

Noise are really errors in sensing or processing images from the sensor.

Consider that DSLR have 1.5-5MP/CM2 and older compacts are in the range of 15MP/CM2, newer compacts are in 40MP/CM2+ range. That is why 10MP+ compact cameras just doesn't make sense and high ISO settings of these cameras give mostly poor images.

Small sensors are dictated by economics, cheaper sensor and cheaper lens. Megapixel race is driven by marketing and consumer buying habits. That is why some older cameras are still very desirable.

The DMC-TZ5 is a pretty good compromise as a modern camera.

Thanks. So where in the specs do I find the sensor size...am I just looking for an entry for "sensor"? Also, is the pixel density inversely proportional to the number of megapixels? I'm guessing they can only fit a certain size sensor in these compact devices...so if that's the case it would seem like more less MP is actually better.

It looks like the zoom range also effects the overall performance. If so, is it a better idea to go with a bit less zoom? How would the Panny ZR1 (http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/compact/zr1_zx1/index.html) compare to the TZ5? It has less zoom but more megapixels...does that make it a wash?

Thanks for all the info. I usually only buy a camera every 2 or 3 years so I like to get one that will hold me over for as long as possible.

I love my DMC-TZ4, I got that one because of the smaller display size (I break things) and its excellent, it does for most occasions, I think I saw a TZ7 in the USA that had 12x zoom and zillions of other features

Thanks. So where in the specs do I find the sensor size...am I just looking for an entry for "sensor"? Also, is the pixel density inversely proportional to the number of megapixels? I'm guessing they can only fit a certain size sensor in these compact devices...so if that's the case it would seem like more less MP is actually better.

It looks like the zoom range also effects the overall performance. If so, is it a better idea to go with a bit less zoom? How would the Panny ZR1 (http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/compact/zr1_zx1/index.html) compare to the TZ5? It has less zoom but more megapixels...does that make it a wash?

Thanks for all the info. I usually only buy a camera every 2 or 3 years so I like to get one that will hold me over for as long as possible.

Go to dpreview.com's camera data page, and they have calculated the pixel density for you already. It is simply the number of pixels divided by sensor size. Compact cameras use various sensor sizes, and almost all of them significantly smaller than those on a dSLR.

For example, the Panasonic ZR1 uses a 1/2.33" sensor, which is 6.13 x 4.60 mm, for 0.28cm². Since it is 12.1MP, the pixel density is 43MP/cm².

The older TZ5 also has the same sensor size, but crams fewer pixels. But you also need to consider technology advances. The ZR1 is also 2 years newer than the TZ5, so its high ISO noise performance may not really be worse than TZ5.

But look at the highly praised and highly sort-after and expensive LX3. It uses the larger 1/1.63" sensor, which is about 8.3mm x 5.8mm, for 0.48cm². Other cameras in this class - like the Canon G series, Nikon's P6000 - also use sensors of this size. That is closer to double the area of a 1/2.33" sensor, giving them significant better high ISO noise performance.

But with the larger sensor, you need a larger camera, larger lens, etc. Which is why you won't see a 8x or 10x zoom in such camera.

For comparison, a 35mm film or full-frame dSLR has 24mm x 36mm sensors, for 8.64cm², or 30x the area of those in the ZR1 or TZ5. Even a Canon 1.6x crop dSLR (Rebel XTi/T1i, 50D, 7D) has 3.29cm².

Everything is a compromise in photography. There is no free lunch. You can have basically 2 of the 3 items - big zoom range, compact size, good high ISO noise performance - but you can't have all 3. As for megapixel, 10MP is basically what's needed to get good enough resolution for fairly large prints or for cropping.

...

Can someone please provide a quick description of the advantage of the Fuji sensor vs. say the Panny? I've read a lot about how it's better...but it rarely really explains why.

thank you..

Here is a Fuji micro-site for the F200EXR which also explains the EXR sensor technology.

http://www.fujifilmexr.com/

Thanks. So where in the specs do I find the sensor size...am I just looking for an entry for "sensor"? Also, is the pixel density inversely proportional to the number of megapixels? I'm guessing they can only fit a certain size sensor in these compact devices...so if that's the case it would seem like more less MP is actually better.

It looks like the zoom range also effects the overall performance. If so, is it a better idea to go with a bit less zoom? How would the Panny ZR1 (http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/compact/zr1_zx1/index.html) compare to the TZ5? It has less zoom but more megapixels...does that make it a wash?

Thanks for all the info. I usually only buy a camera every 2 or 3 years so I like to get one that will hold me over for as long as possible.

You can find the sensor size and pixel density in dpreviews camera database. Most of these compact cameras today use a tiny 1/2.3 size sensors.

10X lens should be ok if the model has VR/IS.

I think 9MP in the TZ5 is plenty. There is really no reason to trade more pixels with potentially worse lowlight performance.

ANRKITEC, are you out there? I've seen a number of posts from you re: Fuji equipment and good insights...care to weight in on this?

Rambuster, thank you...very impressive features.


Here is a Fuji micro-site for the F200EXR which also explains the EXR sensor technology.

http://www.fujifilmexr.com/

Can thoroughly recommend the Panasonic DMC-TZ7. Got fed up with lugging a Nikon digital SLR and a variety of lenses around on holiday and am very impressed with the practicality and quality, including a very good magnification range, offered by this compact camera.

which one would you choose and why...I'm MOST interested in sharpness, color, color saturation?

based on what I've read here and elsewhere, they are both good options, comparable prices, either one's zoom range is fine with me, I don't care about video, both are comparable size/weight, etc. I've owned other Lumix P&S...never a Fuji.

let the voting begin...thank you