| Introduction | Measurement | Comparisons | Conclusion |
The adoption of a new sensor out-performs the older version of this camera, the XZ1, by a substantial margin equating to a 15-point difference in our DxOMark scores up from 34 to 49. The XZ-2 also outperforms other Raw-capable compact cameras from the firm in our database but the sample is quite small still.
While that is promising, it doesn’t put the XZ-2 way above rivals however it does put it ahead slightly of the recent Canon PowerShot S110 and very close to the older and yet highly regarded S100.
|
|
Added by peevee |
February 19
Silly to present Nikon P7700 as better
It has the same sensor, so your "advantages/disadvantages in tests" are just your own measurement errors, well within your margin of error (see your comparison of Fuji X10 and Fuji X-S1, Oly E-M5 and Oly E-PM2 - sensors and processors are the same, your ISO scores differ by 10-20%).
But P7700 has slower lens, chosen to be slower to provide longer zoom range. So the choice is do you want better 28-112 (XZ-2) or better 130-200 (P7700) for which you don't need to crop (113-120 or even more I guess as good or better on Oly even with a little crop due to faster lens at 112). Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by Emilie_DxOMark |
February 20
Re: Silly to present Nikon P7700 as better
Hello,
Thanks for your comment. It pretty much corresponds to our conclusion. Nikon takes the lead thanks to a wider ISO latitude but basically differences in IQ should not be noticeable on your final images (as noted in our comparison review). It is worth noting that DxOMark sensor score only takes into account sensor quality. Best regards, Reply |
To provide photographers with a broader perspective about mobiles, lenses and cameras, here are links to articles, reviews, and analyses of photographic equipment produced by DxOMark, renown websites, magazines or blogs.