Huss
Mentor
Godfrey
somewhat colored
High pixel count isn't everything. It's easy to be simplistic and feel that 12mpixel is too little given the stratospheric pixel counts now common, but I did a heck of a lot of very good photography for clients and exhibitions with cameras that had half this resolution, and those photos still hold up today.
For instance, my ancient 5Mpixel Olympus E-1 still makes photos that are terrific, and I've won recognition on some photos I made with that camera even with 20x24 inch prints.
Stephen's first set of test exposures with the Pixii were encouraging. I'd like to see more that stressed the dynamic range of the sensor as well as different ISO settings to understand the noise behavior and dynamic range qualities.
G
For instance, my ancient 5Mpixel Olympus E-1 still makes photos that are terrific, and I've won recognition on some photos I made with that camera even with 20x24 inch prints.
Stephen's first set of test exposures with the Pixii were encouraging. I'd like to see more that stressed the dynamic range of the sensor as well as different ISO settings to understand the noise behavior and dynamic range qualities.
G
BillBingham2
Registered User
For me how the camera feels in my hands is very important. While it doesn't stop me, I prefer if the camera allows me to focus on the image not the tool.
B2 (;->
osullic
Newbie
I didn't see anyone mention it in this thread, but on the pixii.fr website, if you scroll to the bottom and click on 'Press kit', it brings you to a Google Drive location where you can download various files. There are some sample images there - actually, I think they are the same as those available on DPReview, but maybe more will be added in the coming weeks/months.
Toastybunzz
Member
I really dig this camera, and it's seriously impressive to see what they've pulled off on the hardware side. I never thought we'd see another new coupled rangefinder from anyone but Leica... Not to mention having a global shutter. I already bought an expensive niche camera (M10) but if I had the extra cash I would love to try one of these. Image quality looks fine to me, coming from a mainly film shooter the first couple ones really look like Portra 400. I quite like it.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I have posted more images from Canon RP I have for two weeks now.
This pixii is very lethargic.
Huss
Mentor
Yeah, it's really weird how it's in the hands of some people but we don't see images.
Goes against the grain of it being amazing to use.
Larry Cloetta
Mentor
Somebody needs to do an, as yet undone, legitimate, meaningful test of this camera. Not “user impressions”. Meaning measuring color depth, and dynamic range of the sensor, in addition to testing out the actual capabilities of the “global shutter”, and comparing those to the problematic global shutter iterations as seen in the past. Someone like DxO. DxO might not be perfect, but are a 100 times more useful than what we have to go on, to date, regarding this camera. Facts as to who designed the sensor and who fabbed it, as well as where the global shutter is sourced from would be more than somewhat helpful.
There is almost no camera you can name, past or present, whereby one might not correctly say, “I like the pictures it makes”. Pointless. Even more pointless when they are pictures seen on the internet.
Maybe it’s a good camera, maybe it’s not, though the admitted sensor noise and ISO limitations seem, ah....puzzling. Other than that, I don’t know, but would like to. Someone needs to do a real test on it, however, before anyone will know anything more substantial than advertising copy/user impressions.
There is almost no camera you can name, past or present, whereby one might not correctly say, “I like the pictures it makes”. Pointless. Even more pointless when they are pictures seen on the internet.
Maybe it’s a good camera, maybe it’s not, though the admitted sensor noise and ISO limitations seem, ah....puzzling. Other than that, I don’t know, but would like to. Someone needs to do a real test on it, however, before anyone will know anything more substantial than advertising copy/user impressions.
Huss
Mentor
ISO 320 Voigtlander 35mm f/2 mostly f/2.8 to f/5.6
1600x1100 pixel images. I had a 4mb Fuji back in the day that could do that.
Post a full Rez image. The ones from the mfg looked terrible at full Rez.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
But what is the purpose of this camera? I see no purpose for it to deliver murals. It is mobile, web oriented niche product. Even size you quoted is not very common these days. Most views are on Instagram. Which is total dumpster in terms of technical representation of image, but crowds are totally not into it. Think of Pixii as of digital alternative to your film cameras. Your 1:1 crops from negatives never impressed me. Mine either, because technically 135 film scans never meant murals. Yet, we all like film scans posted at RFF even at smaller size than in your quote.
And this is what bugs me too. If camera is so awesome in feel and mobile connected, it should simulate one who possesses it to bang-bang-bang and hundreds of pictures uploaded instantly on the web. It could be like true lomography with funky LC A. Shot, don't think and don't worry about resolution.
Instead we have "back to another projects" reaction
I have a feeling it is nicer to hold and to look at than the output, but nobody testing it wants to say it and hurt this company. I mean it is a new digital rangefinder camera and that is rare.
Huss
Mentor
Back to Pixii, this is a low resolution $3000 camera that - at the moment - has poor ISO and poor noise even at base level. As can be seen at the few full Rez images shown.
If the intention of it is just to post straight to the web, then that is a very very expensive way to do it.
If the intention of it is just to post straight to the web, then that is a very very expensive way to do it.
maigo
Well-known
Maybe Stephen has a loaner for review and feedback and is bound by NDA that limits what he can disclose.
Anyways, I do not see the sense in endless body-slamming or sensor-shaming the camera or haranguing Stephen.
Anyways, I do not see the sense in endless body-slamming or sensor-shaming the camera or haranguing Stephen.
Huss
Mentor
No sensor shaming, I just want to see 'real' samples! Full size. Can't judge anything from tiny web images, unless that is all one cares about.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
The B&W photos have a very film like quality to them from that Pixii camera, very nice indeed.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
You folks are pretty demanding. It's not like Stephen has nothing else to do other than provide you with test images for a camera that most of you have already signed off on as being too expensive, too low on pixel resolution, etc etc.
???
I found Hamish Gill's comments on the Pixii interesting and satisfying, and the couple of photos he posted of high quality (like Stephen's set). And the Pixii.fr website's press kit has some decent sample photos in it too, although they're all JPEGs.
I await some sample photos from a final release version of the camera and its firmware.
G
???
I found Hamish Gill's comments on the Pixii interesting and satisfying, and the couple of photos he posted of high quality (like Stephen's set). And the Pixii.fr website's press kit has some decent sample photos in it too, although they're all JPEGs.
I await some sample photos from a final release version of the camera and its firmware.
G
James Evidon
Member
boojum
Mentor
I just finished reading this whole thread. Whew. I remember a time when a group of us guys would go from dealer to dealer in late September and early October to see the "next year" cars. It was a big deal. Sometime only one model would show up, and maybe that was under a thin canvas cover. All over town in the afternoons to see what was new and BS about them. I remember one fellow likening that year's Plymouths to Czechoslovakian oil burners. We all found that funny.
And we would discuss the merits, the pros and cons of these new cars. What was wrong with them mechanically, in style, fabrication, fit and finish, choice of color, choice of options and cost of options and on and on. Usually the cars got negative reviews. We scorned them. Sounds a lot like this thread. We were 15 or 16 and not a chance would we be buying one. We had never driven any or even sat it one. But we knew everything wrong with them and why they would not sell.
For those confused re-watch the Mattias Burling preview review where he sets it straight right away. "This is a camera and it is for taking pictures." And then he shows some pictures. Good color. Really nice color. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hI9lspknmcM&t=323s
And we would discuss the merits, the pros and cons of these new cars. What was wrong with them mechanically, in style, fabrication, fit and finish, choice of color, choice of options and cost of options and on and on. Usually the cars got negative reviews. We scorned them. Sounds a lot like this thread. We were 15 or 16 and not a chance would we be buying one. We had never driven any or even sat it one. But we knew everything wrong with them and why they would not sell.
For those confused re-watch the Mattias Burling preview review where he sets it straight right away. "This is a camera and it is for taking pictures." And then he shows some pictures. Good color. Really nice color. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hI9lspknmcM&t=323s
olakiril
Well-known
Don't know why I reply to this old point, but since you will be getting one soon here it is...
There are multiple advantages in having a color profile applied in camera.
It is true that raw data from any modern sensor contain so much information that you can manipulate the colors and recreate any look you want.
First one is being able to have a unique look with a SOOC jpeg ready to be shared. One of the advantages of Fuji digital cameras is their unique color profiles. Same applies to any "film look" that people are after when shooting different film stocks.
People often complain about "color science" which is nothing more that a pre-applied color profile from the camera maker.
So having the ability to change that, aka the "color science", is not only great when you don't want to process the data at all afterwards, but also when you don't want to spend significant amount of time getting the look you want. Of course you can apply ICC profiles and manipulations when importing the pictures in your favorite color editing program, but again not everyone wants to do this.
Another advantage is that the restrictions when shooting film for example can increase the pleasure and immersiveness. Or shooting jpeg only. The B&W mode of the pixii does exactly that. Restricts you. I won't be doing that with my Sony because the preapplied looks, aka "color science", are not to my liking. That makes shooting experience with my Sony, less enjoyable and it is an advantage of the Pixii camera.
Is it more clear now?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
;D
I've known all of that for a decade at least. And I suppose there are many people who use JPEG files straight out of the camera... But I'm not one of them. With every camera I've owned since raw capture became available, I set the camera to record raw only and process my photos afterwards. Even my iPhone and iPad now have raw image processing facilities and I use them—although those are the only cameras I use where I do normally leave the capture mode to JPEG or HEIF format. I am only rarely trying to do serious photography with them, I'm usually just recording stuff that I need to remember.
I certainly would never share JPEG images straight out of camera with a camera that did not have a review facility on-camera to check my results before sharing. I know with the Pixii I can use the iPhone for that efficiently and quickly, that is new, but it's just so easy to move a raw file into Photos or Snapseed and make it what I am sure I want it to be, I don't see the point of bothering with in-camera profiles. I've never liked the in-camera "film simulations" that any manufacturer provides very much, nor found them useful.
Oh yes: There is one camera that I can set to JPEG+raw mode and trust how the in-camera JPEG engine will handle it, occasionally. That's my Hasselblad 907x/CFVII 50c. Whatever 'color science' Hasselblad is doing, it is shockingly consistent and fits almost exactly what I do with their raw files...
We all have our notions. Nothing wrong with yours, nothing wrong with mine. Just different. The proof is in what we produce with our cameras ... I like what I see in your Pixii raw file examples, for the most part.
G
"It would be so boring if we all thought the same way."