Crop zoom: How viable is digital zooming on modern fixed-lens cameras?

The current crop of popular fixed lens wide-angle-lens cameras all feature variations of crop-to-zoom. You are positively encouraged to crop your Leica Q3 28mm frame to the equivalent of 90mm on a telephoto lens. And the new Q3 43 takes this to 150mm. Both Fujifilm and Ricoh offer similar enticements, complete with framelines, on the X100 and GR III models. One leading lens designer advocates cropping from some of today’s super-sharp optics. But is it worth doing?

Only ten or fifteen years ago, digital zoom was decried by anyone with any claim to proficiency in photography. Every little point-and-shoot camera with its unfeasibly small sensor had a massive zoom capability, running into the hundreds of millimetres.

It was all smoke and mirrors, of course. Massive crops from those teeny sensors would never stand up to scrutiny. But times have changed. Sensors are bigger and, more to the point, pixel density has grown like Topsy.

The man himself

I’ve attended several presentations by Peter Karbe, Leica’s renowned lens designer. Without doubt, they have opened my eyes to the fact that digital zooming can work. Of course, he is thinking of cropping images from his finest lenses, the 35mm and 50mm Apo-Summicron-SL and Apo-Summicron-M. And he is describing relatively modest crops, I suspect.

His 28mm Summilux f/1.7 on the Leica Q3, though, gives more support to the benefits of crop-to-zoom on a fixed lens compact. Already, on the Q2, users had the option of choosing the equivalent of a 75mm crop. Indeed, Q3 users are positively encouraged to crop to a 90mm equivalent because of the increased resolution from 47 to 60MP. New to the party, though, is the real showstopper: The Q3 43 with its superb 43mm f/2 Apo-Summicron ASPH. As Jonathan Slack has told us, this is one of the sharpest lenses on the market.

The days of teeny sensors and massive crops are over. But today’s high-performance sensors and tack-sharp lenses can get away with at least some cropping. And, in the case of the Q3 43, 150mm crops are now considered acceptable — it even boasts 150mm frame lines.

Test bed

The viability of crop-to-zoom came to the fore during my recent review of the Fujifilm X100VI, with its upgraded 35mm f/2 lens and high-resolution (for APS-C) 40MP sensor. Quite by chance, I took a shot of the famous Harrods Furniture Depository from across the Thames.

When I reviewed the image, I noticed the large sign on the building and decided to zoom in to see what it would look like. I was surprised. At what I subsequently discovered to be a 150mm equivalent, the crop from the Fujifilm was more than acceptable. It’s significant that Fujifilm recommends cropping to 70mm, but isn’t 150mm a crop too far?

It is also quite a coincidence that 150mm has been chosen as the maximum viable crop on the new Leica Q3 43, taking advantage of the 15mm head start in comparison with the wide-angle Q3. All these comparisons at 150mm had been done before the Q3 43 was announced, and we were just lucky in selecting this focal length. One-fifty seemed to be a suitable extreme crop to test the four compact cameras currently in the Macfilos cupboard (before the arrival of the Q3 43).

This led me back to the same spot on the riverbank with the other cameras I happened to have close to hand — the Leica Q3, the Ricoh GR III, and the Leica D-Lux 8. The comparison with the D-Lux isn’t quite fair, since it does possess a 75mm optical zoom, thus giving it a big advantage. But the disadvantage of the smaller four-thirds sensor and the miserly 17MP available, helps the handicap. Much later, I returned to the river with the latest Leica Q3 43.

To summarise, we have two 60MP full-frame cameras, a 40MP APS-C camera and a 24MP APS-C camera, all with fixed lenses. Plus a disadvantaged four-thirds snapper with an effective 17MP sensor. How would they fare?

It’s all a question of pixels

The gulf between the full-frame 60MP Q3 and the 17MP (effective) D-Lux 8 is vast. But the underpowered D-Lux fights back by employing its 75mm optical zoom, thus retaining full resolution right through to that focal length. Since pixel-count falls off dramatically as a sensor is cropped, the contest is looking a bit fairer. Every time you crop to double the apparent focal length, you lose half the pixels across the picture, and half the pixels from the height, thus leaving only one quarter of the previous pixels.

Studying the figures, however, brought up some surprises. Who would have thought that the 60 MP Q3 frame, viewed as a crop at 35mm would have the same number of pixels as the 40MP Fujifilm X100VI at its 35mm? Or that the Fuji would closely mirror the Q3 in terms of pixel count to the maximum 150mm crop.

Bear in mind, however, that we are dealing here with three different sensor sizes. And the starting point, 28mm in the case of the Q3 and Ricoh, and 24mm for the D-Lux 8, has a big bearing on the outcome. The Q3 43 gets the biggest starter boost with 60MP at 43mm, allowing it to better every other camera in this bunch, at least on paper.

Pixel peeping

Focal length (FF EQ)Leica Q3Fuji X100VILeica D-Lux 8Ricoh GRIII
24mm16.8
28mm60.316.824.3
35mm38.640.216.815.6
50mm18.919.716.87.6
75mm8.48.816.83.4
90mm5.86.111.62.4
150mm2.12.24.20.8

The above crop resolutions in bold are as quoted by manufacturers, except for those in standard type, which are calculated from the available data. Fujifilm quotes for 70mm and not 75mm, and Fuji does not quote a 90mm figure. The 150mm crop on the D-Lux 8 is based on the full-resolution 75mm frame

Surprisingly, if pixel count were the only criterion, the little D-Lux 8 has 4.2 million of them at 150mm, twice as many as the muscled Leica Q3 and the Fuji. But is this enough to tip the balance?

The outstanding aspect of the D-Lux 8 is in the extent to which it performs up to its maximum optical zoom focal length of 75mm. What you get at 24mm is what you get at 75mm. So the digital crop to 150 mm still provides 25% of the maximum available pixels. And, despite the zoom lens, it still compares with the other cameras in size.

The Leica Q3 43 offers a new set of crops, 60, 75, 90, 120 and 150, although the same rules apply. I tried to incorporate the Q3 43 into the above table, but decided it was confusing because we didn’t have equivalent figures for the other cameras. However, the 150mm pixel count of 5MP is what is important for the purposes of this review. And the resolution of the Q3 43’s crop is over twice as great as that from the 28mm Q3, despite having the identical sensor.

Here are Leica’s official crop figures for the Q3 43:

Focal lengthMegapixels
43mm60.3
60mm31.0
90mm13.7
120mm7.7
150mm5.0

Real-world

These figures are all very well, but how do the cameras stack up against each other in practice? The Harrods Furniture Depository building offers a chance to see what these massive digital crops look like.

We enlisted the help of our long-standing author and prolific commentator, David Babsky, in assessing the results of the exercise. He also very kindly adjusted the images to remove the problems caused by different lighting conditions on different days. He then encouraged me to return to the site with the Fujifilm X100VI since the original picture was taken at too steep an angle.

Let’s look at the results in more detail:

Leica Q3

The Q3 maximum crop looks great, perfect in fact. Good exposure, very fine detail (…ladders on the domes), plenty of contrast with the dark ‘Harrods’ lettering contrasting with pale background tiles.

As with the Fuji, when cropped in Graphic Converter 7, so that just the two domes are in the shot, there’s very fine detail showing of the plant growing just to the left of the decorative ‘bowl’ above the word ‘Harrods’. With a bit of final tweaking in Mac Preview (Contrast, Exposure, Sharpness) it just about matches the Fuji X100VI. The weather was slightly different between the Leica and Fuji shots, so the skies look different.

Fujifilm X100VI

This 150mm-equivalent crop from the Fujifilm X100VI has a resolution of 2.2MP, almost identical to that of the Q3, despite the Leica’s higher 60MP resolution. This is because the Fuji starts with 40MP at 35mm, so the result at distance is very similar.

When cropped in Graphic Converter 7, so that just the two domes are in the shot, and the top two floors’ windows. Very fine detail shows of the plant growing just to the left of the decorative bowl above the word ‘Harrods’. That’s a great lens on the Fuji X100VI. However, we think the Q3 just has the edge in this very specific test.

Leica D-Lux 8

With the D-Lux 8, the smaller sensor and lower pixel count is offset to a large extent by this starting point of 75mm. The surprising fact is that this crop, below, has nominally twice the resolution of the Q3 and X100VI crops.

The 150mm crop is remarkably good considering the camera’s low pixel count and this extreme digital zoom. All the lenses in this test are excellent and well regarded, and the f/1.7 Summilux 24-75mm lens of the D-Lux is no exception. However, this sensor dates back to the launch of the D-Lux 7 in June 2020, so it is disadvantaged in the company of the two Qs and the Fuji, all of which have more recent designs.

Ricoh GR III

The Ricoh is disadvantaged in comparison with the Leica and Fuji because of its wide 28mm lens and long-in-the-tooth 24MP sensor (dating back to 2019). It has the same focal length as the Q3, but with 36MP fewer megapixels to play with. However, it performs reasonably well, and the detail in this crop is good for such a small pixel count. It is, however, slightly less sharp.

Undoubtedly, the Ricoh has to work hard in this company. It has an excellent lens, as we know, but the old 24MP sensor and 28mm focal length work against it at such an extreme crop. Nevertheless, this is a very creditable outcome, especially bearing in mind the Ricoh’s diminutive size, its ability to fit in a pocket and the old 24MP sensor, and the resolution of this crop at under one megapixel.

Bonus — Leica Q3 43

This article was written and the photographs taken in the late summer, well before the launch of the 43mm Leica Q3 43 on September 27. I couldn’t resist confronting Harrods again with this shiny new toy with its smart grey coat.

Not only do we have a higher starting focal length (which enables better results at steeper crops; indeed, Leica positively encourage a 150mm crop), but the new 43mm f/2 Apo-Summicron ASPH is a step up from the ten-year-old 28mm f/1.7 Summilux in the Q3 28. There would be something wrong if the results were not superior to any of those above. And there isn’t anything wrong.

The 150mm crop from the Q3 43 is obviously the best of the lot, exceeding the already good results of the Q3 28 and the Fujifilm X100VI. Sharpness and clarity is outstanding, and I suspect the Q3 43 could even stretch a little further in a real emergency. The take from this is that cropping Q3 43 shots up to 75mm or even 90mm is entirely viable. With the quality of this sensor and lens, do you really need a bulky 24-70mm zoom?

Differential focus

While the crop results from all these cameras are impressive, there is no substitute for a large sensor and an excellent 150mm prime or zoom lens. Quite apart from maximising your pixels, a longer lens brings a degree of differential focus that is impossible with a crop, where the characteristics of the original wider lens are preserved.

As David points out, all those shots were taken at approximately infinity focus on the cameras, and when what you’re looking at is this far away, there’s little to no differential focus between foreground, middle distance and far distance. So these big 150mm-equivalent crops don’t look much different from the same photos taken with an actual 150mm lens.

But when taking pictures of anything nearer than infinity, and with other things in the shot — both nearer and further than what you’re focusing on — then there’s a real difference between cropped-to-90mm-equivalent shots taken with, say, a 28mm or 35mm lens, and the same shot taken with a genuine 90mm lens.

In the above examples, Arnie is cropped to a 90mm equivalent from a 28mm photo taken at f/2.8 (left). On the right, using a real 90mm shot, again at f/2.8, we see how using optical zoom or a prime is often preferable to any crop zoom.

As David says, a crop doesn’t have the same focus differentiation. So for distances closer than infinity, a crop — or an in-camera digital zoom — does little more than approximate to what you’d get if you used a longer focal length lens at a similar aperture.

Everything in focus

Shooting everything with a wide-angle lens, for example the 28mm on a Leica Q3, means that, after a while, all your photos begin to look the same, with pretty much everything in sharp focus. Without much of the differential focus or targeted focus which you can get when shooting middle-distance subjects with a long-focus lens.

Furthermore, as David points out, you are in essence throwing away many of those expensive pixels which you paid good money for every time you crop, or ‘digitally zoom’, the basic 28mm photo.

What’s more, there are many pocket cameras with 24mm or 25mm to 200mm zoom lenses, where you get your full complement of pixels at every focal length.

Instead of buying-and-chucking pixels, says David, with a zoom lens on a camera, you use all available pixels with every shot. You also have the increased opportunity to blur away unwanted backgrounds too — if you want that — as you zoom in.

David is right, of course. But this article is concentrating on fixed-lens compact cameras, except for the D-Lux with its zoom lens. The Leica Q3, Ricoh GR III and Fuji X100VI are all cult cameras, the sort of cameras that many photographers want to use as a second-string to a larger ILC device with multiple lenses. So size is of the essence.

Decisions

Within the narrow terms of this comparison, all five cameras perform well. This is despite the extremity of the crop to 150mm, something which few would normally think viable. It’s probably something you would never seriously consider doing, but the results can give you confidence in more modest crops, such as those recommended by the camera manufacturers.

But digital cropping is no substitute for optical zoom. It is useful in emergencies, or to highlight particular subjects when you have only a wide-angle lens to play with. These extreme examples at a 150mm equivalent are academic, but provide a guide to what you can expect at shorter focal-length crops.

It’s significant, though, that the new Leica Q3 43 with the identical 60MP sensor as the Q3, can offer a genuine 150mm crop that is actually useful. Again, this is a result of the longer standard focal length of the 43mm lens — just as the Fuji X100VI with its 35mm and 40MP sensor can match the Q3 at longer focal lengths because of the higher starting point.

If you normally carry a fixed-lens compact and anticipate using large crops, then the results here are pretty clear:

Best for large crop zooms

  1. Leica Q3 43 (43mm), £5,900
  2. Leica Q3 (28mm), £5,500
  3. Fujifilm X100VI (35mm), £1,599
  4. Leica D-Lux 8 (24-75mm), £1,450
  5. Ricoh GRIII (28mm), £1,099

There is nothing surprising here. The results are in line with maximum pixel count and the widest available aperture (from 24MP to 43MP). It is remarkable, however, that the Fuji with its 40MP sensor is nearer to the 60MP Q3 in terms of image quality at such a large crop. The Ricoh has the same APS-C size sensor as the Fuji and, despite the extreme crop, the output is still acceptable. Bear in mind that the Ricoh crop is under one-megapixel in size, whereas the D-Lux 8 offers a rather surprising 4.3MP thanks to its zoom, which means that the full-pixel starting point is 16.8MP.

Bear in mind, also, that this article is predicated on the use of compact cameras with fixed lenses, the sort of camera you want to carry around instead of your large interchangeable-lens rig. The genre, led currently by the X100, is highly popular, as demonstrated by the scarcity of both the Fuji and the Ricoh. Therefore, the argument that you are better off with a prime or zoom to achieve 150mm is specious in this context.

Affordable excellence

Fujifilm X100VI

At the same time, if we add the considerations of weight, size, and cost to the above arguments on cropablility, the choice is less clear. As an all-rounder, the Fujifilm X100VI comes nearest to the ideal. It is relatively light and compact (at least compared with Q models), not too expensive and produces superb results, even up to 150mm as demonstrated here.

Even the little Ricoh, which fares worst because of its low pixel count, is still a formidable tool when used at 28-50mm. If you never wish to crop to a longer focal length, the Ricoh is an exceptional camera, ideal for discreet street photography, and it is the cheapest by far.

Conclusion

Nevertheless, there is little doubt that the Q3 43 takes the laurels here. But it isn’t to imply that the wider lens cameras, particularly the Q3 28 and Fujifilm X100VI, don’t acquit themselves well. After all, these are extreme crops for the little compacts. It is only the Q3 43 where you would seriously consider cropping images to an equivalent of 150mm.

My thanks to David Babsky for all the support he has given on this article (which has been several months in gestation). I’m particularly grateful to him for assessing the results, and helping with rating the cameras. But if David is the judge, you are the jury. What do you think? Are our arguments fair? And what are your thoughts on cropping in general?




28 COMMENTS

  1. Hello Mike. Enjoyable insights, literally. Thank you.
    Hoping that I don’t raise the ire of the tribe I will declare my intent – You’ve convinced me to head in the direction of the D Lux 8, and to do so when Leica fix the firmware as you have indicated in recent Macfilos articles.
    Why? Well, very good image quality is there across the range. Further, it undeniably scores on cost-benefit analysis, weight (approx half) and volume (LxWxH approx half). Form factor and design seal the deal for me, for the new “mini Q”.
    It’s the travel camera that I’ll enjoy carrying around all day.

    • …….and Michael, that “Anonymous” comment was from me.
      Even tho I have clicked the Save my name, email etc previously it seems that Macfilos doesn’t want to remember me. Oh well, I guess anonymity could be an advantage, given the view that I expressed 😎.

        • Hi There Mike
          it never seems to remember my name and email either – not such a hassle, but still better if it did!

          • I have looked into this and have even asked help from the WordPress forums. But no help. It’s strange that it happens often with Wayne and sometimes with you. But I don’t see any other anonymous comments. We are in he process of upgrading the site, so let’s see if anything changes as a result of this.

          • Hi Mike
            I’ve never seen myself as anonymous (but then I always reenter my name!). I’ve never not had to re-enter my name though (not really a problem).

    • Glad to hear the article has helped reach a decision. The D-Lux is a good choice although I do not have strong hopes that the zoom controls will be reinstated. But Leica does take not of press comment. The withdrawal of the Q3 multifunction protector following our view is evidence of that.

  2. This is a fascinating comparison, but I can’t help thinking of the 4×5 hand held press cameras which used the big negative as a starting point for cropping for paparazzi purposes. After decades of massive zoom lenses is that where we are going back to with these cameras?

    • I have not thought of this as a replacement for zoom lenses, particularly from a press photo point of view. It’s simply a way to show that modesty cropping is a good solution if you choose to use a fixed-lens camera. They have become to popular that I think it is a legitimate subject.

  3. Excellent article Mike enjoyable and lots of interesting discussion. Was the Ricoh GR IIIx mentioned?
    I’ve also spent some time with Topaz AI which is clever and good up to a point, but I don’t like the sharpening much (it has a strange look about it) But the real point is having the time to fiddle about like that. I already take too many pictures that don’t need rescuing! I have just got back from Crete with over 300 ‘picks’ out of nearly 1000 snaps with the Q3 43!
    What I am going to do is try an A3 (17”) print with the Q3 43 I’ll report back!

    • Thanks, Jonathan. The Ricoh GRIIIx was at the back of my mind, but I didn’t have one. Jörg-Peter has one, however. It would be good to try, especially against the Q3 43 and the 28mm Ricoh. Looking forward to seeing your pictures from Crete. Mike

    • Hi Jono, looking forward to your next review with their evocative images. Mike can provide my email when you are testing the Monochrom version of the Q 43. 😀 By the way, how did Leica manage to not have any leaks on this camera? This is the first product that I had no clue was coming before announcement. Amazing secrecy!!! I would sure love a Mono Q3 43 to complement my Fuji X100 VI.

      Please treat us with more articles. You have a hungry audience wanting to see more images.

      I agree that the Topaz sharpen AI is excessive sharpness on normal images. However, it has been incredible in creating normal looking images where I somehow missed focus or had movement during capture. I use their denoise which also sharpens during my standard processing workflow and find it superior to anything else.

  4. While you were conducting this experiment with 150mm equivalent crops. I can’t help wondering if you could hear the theme from Mission Impossible playing in your head. Anyway the results prove conclusively that cropping works just fine if you choose to accept it. 🙂 I think I will limit myself to a 120mm crop on the new Q3 43 but will use the feature all the time.I had not initially thought I would need anything like a 60MP sensor but now I see the possibilities.Leica is leading the way here. I’m still good with 24MP on SL cameras where I can change a lens or use a zoom for cropping.

    • I have to admit that I was surprised by the results. If we limit ourselves to the 75mm or 90mm, the opportunities from fixed-lens cameras are impressive. Of course the same principles apply to an ILC sign a suitable choice of Len’s (as Peter Karbe envisages) but here we we were considering the Hobson’s choice of a fixed-lens camera.

  5. Just the kind of in-depth 🙂 thoughtful survey I believe many of us wanted. Now I want to spend the morning at my computer, instead of raking leaves.

    Perhaps I’m deceiving myself, but I think that these crops showcase the APO in the new Leica — say, in comparison to the Fuji.

    • Thanks, Kathy! While the Fuji lens is excellent, it can’t really compete with the new APO-Summicron. And that extra 8mm of reach as standard in the Q3 43 lens, plus, of course, the 60MP sensor, just adds to the equation.

  6. Mike, an excellent article if I may say. It got me thinking about cropping versus zooming.
    Cropping, as you mention affects depth of field compared with zooming, but I now realize cropping has no effect on perspective.

    You write:
    “What’s more, there are many pocket cameras with 24mm or 25mm to 200mm zoom lenses, where you get your full complement of pixels at every focal length.”

    Six years on from your exhaustive Macfilos review of the Sony RX100 Mk 6, I wonder how you would rate it now against the Fuji X100VI and other modern compacts? To me the Sony’s small pocket size and its 24 – 200 mm lens is still a winning combination. As you know, I have recently complemented it with a Sony A7C with 40mm F2.5 G lens and I am also enjoying using it with vintage Minolta lenses. I was out using my old polarising filter today.

    • If I had had a Sony RX100, I would definitely have tried it. David Babsky does have one, and if I can persuade him to come out for a coffee in Hammersmith, we can train the lens on the Harrods building. At 150mm, I suspect it will do very well, despite the smaller sensor. It could outgun the D-Lux and, certainly, the Ricoh. But would it equal the Q3 and X100VI? Not so sure on that. And I would be very surprised if it is better than the Q3 43.

      • Adding a bit of fuel to this smoldering ember…,

        There’s also the Sony RX1rii–the original RX1 a beautiful predecessor to the Leica Q’s and to my mind the inspiration for the Leica Q’s…, 35mm and 40 mp w/ f2 Zeiss Sonnar…, AND…,

        my preference, the Sony A7CR w/ 60 mp and any of a number of lenses. My choice is the Sony 20-70 G lens, enabling me to carry nothing else and have an effective focal range from 20-150 (easily) 20-200 (in a minor stretch)…, and, of course, using the mentioned above RX-100vi or vii as 24-200 backup.

        And…, maybe…, if necessary, dare I suggest, a touch of Topaz or ON1 AI enhancement to enable even larger printing and, God forbid, noise control.

        Cheers!

  7. Mike, excellent article, illustrating the quality of the sensors and lenses available today. I recently did an extreme crop of an M11-P image with a 90mm Elmarit M (at f/5.6) hand held and used Topaz Gigapixel Ai to double the pixel count and enhance the image. The result is almost a 500mm equivalent image that looks nice and sharp even with a non ASPH/non-APO lens. The AI software out there (Topaz being one of the leading ones) is already available so I would suggest that a Q3 43 could comfortably reach 210 – 250mm equivalent (or higher) now. Happy to provide a sample or two!

    • Hi Bill, I use the Topaz software and it is all brilliant. The jpeg software is great for conversion of images to make them more processable. The Gigapixel software is incredible for 2x images with no artifacts. The denoise software is my standard software for sharpening and removing noise. The sharpening software is great of softer images but I find it seems to over sharpen for generally sharp images. Also, I do not think you should process with both denoise and sharpen AI. Matt K also says this.
      The only problem with the Topaz software is one needs a powerful computer and video card. I would invest in a computer before I purchased more expensive camera equipment.
      With Topaz I am even more delighted with my new OM systems camera system for shooting in lower light.

      Topaz has reduced the need for a lot of glass for me!

      Thanks David for the heads up. I am going to stick with my amazing economical and more compact Fujifilm X100VI.

      • “Thanks… for the heads-up. I am going to stick with my amazing, economical and more compact Fujifilm X100VI.”

        As I made clear in the review, I am extremely impressed with the results from the X100VI. That red dress image from Mykonos (muscling in on someone else’s photoshoot, naughty me) is a good example of the results available from what was just a quick street snapshot. The fact that a Q3 28 at 35mm has just 38.6MP left to play with, less than the Fuji (although full-frame v APS-C must have some effect), is even more surprising. How to lose 22MP in just 7mm of focal length! And at a third of the price… This, more than anything, demonstrates the handicap of wider lenses. While the D-Lux 8 is immune because of the optical zoom, the 28mm Ricoh really suffers in this company because of the low-resolution sensor and wide-angle lens. The GRIIIx will be a much better tool for crop performance.

    • Dear Bill, Yes, if the performance of the other cameras in this review is anything to go by, the Q3 43 has only just started at 150mm! I am sure our readers would be interested to see some examples. Why don’t you jot down the bones of a little article and send us the illustrations? Mike

  8. Very interesting article, Mike. I think it will be only the blink of an eye before post processing with AI will give us the differential-focus-appearing-look which is currently lacking in digital zooming. My iPhone 15 Pro with the Leica LUX App almost does this already in-camera. It is a brave new world out there!

    With Peter Karbe’s APO Summicrons ASPH, I routinely do not care about exact framing, even to a zoom-crop, because it is so easy to get superb results. But my iPhone is closing in on this.

    Ed

    • Many thanks, Ed. I agree that computational assistance is moving at a terrific pace. The purpose of this article was, of course, to examine how good fixed-lens (usually wide angle) cameras are at replacing a bagful of cameras and zooms. At one time they were clearly inferior. But now, apart from the differential focus which David highlights, cropping allows the average Ricoh, X100 or Q to replicate (at least) a 24-70 standard zoom. With bonuses, of course. Mike

  9. A superb article! You were blessed to have David’s competent input on this assessment. i fully agree with the article and the aspect of the background in cropped 28mm images is a major reason I do not want a 28mm fixed lens compact camera – 50mm is my most used focal length.

    This the most useful article I have seen in a long time. Thanks!

    • Thank you, Brian. It is certainly the article that has occupied more time than any other — at least in my recollection. David had me up and down the River Thames on endless treks to photograph that warehouse. If I had been more organised, I could have gone just once, with the bagful of cameras, and done the lot in one session. Anyway, glad you liked it, and thanks for your invaluable support. Mike

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here