Best Advanced Compact ? Three compacts compared August 2016
 |
| TZ80. The buildings in the foreground are 2 kilometers from the camera. Obviously you could make a better picture than this with a (much) larger (much) more expensive kit but I think that for a budget general purpose travel zoom compact the TZ80 does a pretty good job. |
One of the most frequently asked questions on user forums is ‘which camera should I buy’. This usually produces a flurry of different suggestions presumably guided by the respondents’ personal experience and preferences. Maybe this helps the original poster, maybe not.
I have a long history with compact cameras. I usually own one and am always on the lookout for that as-yet-elusive ultimate compact which will provide picture quality and a user experience equal to that of a larger camera.
I think the future of cameras for amateur and enthusiast users lies with high performance fixed lens models. The best of these have become very good indeed, somewhat tending to confirm my prediction and making any kind of interchangeable lens camera increasingly un-necessary for my requirements.
And, Like most people, I really hate having to change lenses…………….
 |
| The four cameras referred to in this post |
This post compares three compacts:
Sony RX100(4)
Panasonic TZ110 (a.k.a. ZS100, TZ100 and TX1)
Panasonic TZ80 (a.k.a. ZS60)
To keep things in perspective I added to the mix my favourite camera of the last 60 years, the Panasonic FZ1000. This is much larger so can’t be compared directly to the compacts but it does provide a benchmark for picture quality, features, specifications, performance and ergonomics against which the compacts can be evaluated.
What’s not here ?
* I will not buy anything without the ability to capture RAW files and an inbuilt EVF. I live in Sydney Australia where the sun shines brightly much of the time rendering the monitor useless as a device for framing and composition.
I was reminded of this recently while doing tests for this post. I had the cameras on a tripod with the sun over my shoulder shining onto the monitor. I could not preview my subject on any of the monitor screens at all.
If I had been using a camera without an EVF I would have needed a dark cloth like the old days of large format photography or some device like a Clear Viewer in order to see the monitor at all.
The only Canon compact with an EVF is the G5X but this model has some well reported deficiencies such as sluggish performance with RAW capture and a not-so-wonderful lens. If Canon fixes these and other deficiencies, a G5X Mk2 if such ever materialises, might find itself in contention for my camera drawer.
The situation at Nikon might have been described by Charles Dodgson’s Alice as ‘curiouser and curiouser’.
When I look at the Nikon Australia website I see that fixed lens cameras have been divided into a ‘Premium compact’ category and a ‘Digital compact’ category (are there any film compacts ???)
In the ‘premium’ category there is detailed description of three ‘DL’ series models which were announced in February but have failed to materialise. Neither of the two compacts in the DL series has a built in EVF anyway. The third model in this series is a hump top superzoom.
In the basic ‘digital compact’ category I see a miscellaneous collection of current, discontinued (or at least no longer available from vendors) and not-yet-materialised models (B700).
As far as I can tell none of the compacts has a built in EVF. The P7800 did but is no longer available.
The listed hump top superzooms do have an EVF but many of these models appear to be unavailable in shops.
Nikon’s product development and marketing departments appear to be completely out of touch with actual people who might want to buy a camera.
Listing cameras which are not available seems to me like a great way to lose supporters and encourage people to look elsewhere.
Olympus recently ceased production of the Stylus 1 model.
Fujifilm appears to have abandoned compacts altogether in favour of X series ILCs and Instax.
The Ricoh GR lacks a built in EVF.
Which leaves Sony and Panasonic as the only makers producing advanced compacts of interest to me.
The Sony HX90V missed inclusion in this comparison as it lacks RAW capture which is disappointing. I have found that processed RAW files can deliver better results than JPGs from the Panasonic TZ80 which has a very similar (possibly the same) sensor and the same zoom range.
I recently tested the Sony RX100(4) and Panasonic LX100 side by side and found the RX100(4) to have slightly but consistently better picture quality at all focal lengths and apertures. You can read thiscomparison here.
Concept and design
Camera design is like a zero sum game at any given stage of evolution of the relevant technology.
Thus if the designer wants to include a larger sensor in a package retaining the same overall size, something has to give way. This will usually be the lens aperture and/or zoom range.
Each of the cameras in this trio is in the same size range with the RX100(4) being a bit smaller than the other two. However they each carry nicely in a Lowe Pro Portland 20 pouch with space for several memory cards and one or two spare batteries.
The Panasonics have an always-ready EVF and a fixed monitor. The Sony has a pop-up EVF and a swing up-down monitor.
The RX100(4) lens has a 2.9x zoom range with a aperture range of f1.8-f2.8.
The TZ110 lens has a 10x zoom range but the aperture is considerably smaller at f2.8-f5.9.
The TZ80 has a 30x zoom range but a smaller sensor, with an area about one quarter of that in the RX100(4) and TZ110.
So there is no free lunch. For a designer to add some capability, something else must be reduced.
Specifications and Features
Each of the three compacts featured in this post comes absolutely loaded with features and capabilities for still and video recording (including 4K) or both together.
Indeed the specifications and features of each of these cameras read more like those of a current model prosumer DSLR or MILC than you might have expected to find in a compact just a few years ago.
Actually they are better than many prosumer DSLRs in some ways such as full time live view, provision of good quality auto panorama in camera and 4K video.
Picture quality
I base this evaluation on three information sources
* My own frequent use on a variety of subjects indoors and out.
* Lens test chart close to the camera (1-5 meters).
* A standard scene at a distance of 10-50 meters from the camera.
Outdoors in bright light:
In the (35mm equivalent) 24/25-70mm focal length range the FZ1000 and RX100(4) are clearly better than the other two, with nothing much between the FZ1000 and RX100(4) at around f4.
Either of these cameras can produce excellent results in this focal length range.
The TZ110 and TZ80 are not in the same class but are decently good cameras in their own right.
They are able to make good prints capable of substantial enlargement up to 500x400mm with good sharpness over most of the frame.
In the focal length range 70-250mm the FZ1000 is clearly better than the two TZ compacts although at 250mm the TZ80 is in the middle of its focal length range and can produce quite pleasing printed output.
At 400mm the FZ1000 is clearly better than the TZ80 but the compact is by no means disgraced, showing it can deliver good results.
At 720mm the FZ1000 (cropped from 400mm to720mm field of view) shows more imaging information and detail than the full frame of the TZ80 at 720mm.
So over the full range of focal lengths from 24/25mm to 720mm the FZ1000 has a clear advantage over any of the compacts.
Of the compacts the RX100(4) is clearly the best within its focal length range.
The TZ80 and TZ110 deliver closely similar levels of subject information and sharpness but the TZ110 has better highlight and shadow detail than the TZ80.
Low light capability
This is fairly straightforward with my rankings just as you would expect from the specifications.
The RX100(4) has the latest ‘One Inch’ sensor, an effective image stabiliser and the widest aperture (lowest f stop) lens so it wins the low light capability contest quite easily.
Next come the FZ1000, TZ110 and TZ80 in that order, as expected.
Neither the TZ110 or TZ80 is a camera I would select for regular indoor work but either can be pressed into indoor/low light service if one is prepared to explore the realm of slow shutter speeds to get ISO sensitivity settings down.
The TZ110 has a decently wide aperture of f2.8 at 25mm focal length, consistent with indoor use.
The TZ80 can produce acceptable results indoors if one is prepared to shoot RAW and work the sliders in Adobe Camera Raw.
Performance
The FZ1000 is way ahead of the compacts particularly if one wants to have predictive AF on moving subjects.
But for mostly still subjects the compacts perform well. Each achieves focus quickly and each has a high rate of correctly-in-focus frames, indoors or outdoors.
There is little between the compacts with respect to performance. Each is fast and responsive with RAW or JPG capture or both.
Ergonomics
Again the FZ1000 is way ahead of the compacts. As I was working with each camera in preparation for this post I was reminded just how much the FZ1000 is a photographer’s camera and the compacts are utilitarian devices which are much less efficient and less enjoyable to use.
Of the compacts the TZ80 provides the most user friendly holding, viewing and operating experience.
On my ergonomics scoring schedule we have
FZ1000 83
TZ80 65
TZ110 59
RX100(4) 52
In use the RX100(4) is not quite as bad as this score might indicate as once set up the menus do not need to be accessed very often.
In addition the RX100(4) has a more sophisticated auto ISO algorithm than the Panasonics which allows the user to leave the camera in P Mode quite often with good auto selection of aperture, shutter speed and ISO settings.
However the pop-up EVF on the RX100(4) is fiddly to operate and interferes with the position of the left hand and fingers.
From my own experience and reading it appears to me that the RX100(4) is an example of the Sony approach to camera design and implementation. There is plenty of clever engineering but less than optimal ergonomics.
While I am complaining about the Sony EVF I would also just mention that the camera data (aperture, shutter speed, ISO, exposure compensation) and level gauge are much easier to see clearly in the Panasonic EVFs than the Sony one, particularly when ambient light is bright, causing stray light to find its way into the viewfinder.
So which is the best camera of this group ?
That’s easy: The FZ1000 has better specifications, picture quality, performance and ergonomics than the compacts.
But the FZ1000 is larger than all three of the compacts together and this post is supposed to be about the compacts so which is the best of the three compacts ?
The answer to this question depends on the user’s priorities.
The RX100(4) is best if the priorities are small size and low light capability with no need for a superzoom lens and no concerns about spending more on a compact than many combinations of entry level DSLR/MILC with basic kit lens. ( By the way I think I can get better pictures with an RX100(4) than with an entry level ILC and kit lens).
The TZ80 is best if a 30x zoom range is required at a low price point mainly for outdoors use.
I rate the TZ80 as likely the most robust of the compacts as neither the EVF or flash have to pop up for use.
The TZ80 has the highest ergonomic score and in my assessment is the most user friendly of the compacts.
The TZ110 offers a level of specifications between the RX100(4) and the TZ80.
The 10x zoom is enough zoom for many users but not as much as the TZ80.
The lens aperture is wide enough for many occasions, mainly outdoors but not as wide as the RX100(4).
The sensor is the same size and has almost the same DXO Mark score as that in the RX100 (4).
The price point is between the other two.
So you pays your money and makes your choice.
 |
| TZ80 and RX100(4) together in a Think Tank Mirrorless Mover 5 bag. |
What about a kit with two compacts ?
I can easily fit both an RX100(4) and a TZ80 into a Think Tank Mirrorless Mover 5 bag with plenty of room in the front section for spare batteries and cards. The TTMM5 is smaller than the Lowe Pro Apex 110 which houses the FZ1000.
I can use the RX100(4) indoors in low light or outdoors when the zoom range is appropriate for my subject and switch to the TZ80 when I want a longer zoom range outdoors.
The last word (for now)
In their 2015 review of the RX100(4) Digital Photography Review made the following comments (edited)
“Something worth calling out is that the built-in stabilization and electronic/leaf shutters of these small compacts shouldn't be taken for granted, as they allow for slow shutter speeds that keep the ISO down and image quality high. It's this facet of the RX100 that allows it sometimes to even catch up to bigger sensor DSLR levels of image quality with respect to image noise in low light scenes, especially since the sensor is paired with a bright lens……..
The take-home here being I often find myself getting equally as good results from certain premium compacts as larger sensor DSLRs for still scenes in low light because of the additional exposure I can give these cameras due to their high efficiency sensors, bright built-in lenses, and IS. In other words: don't underestimate the image quality you can get out of these compacts, especially if you take the time to apply some best-practice techniques to shooting and exposure.”
These observations are in line with my own experience and identify one of the reasons I think that fixed zoom cameras will become preferred over ILCs (DSLR or MILC) by enthusiast amateur and some professional photographers in the years to come.
