Clever capture modes
Review It doesn’t seem five minutes since we looked at the CX1 – well, back in April actually – so it’s quite surprise to find that Ricoh has already launched its successor, the CX2. Again, this is a super-zoom compact seemingly aimed at the enthusiast or the DSLR user who occasionally wants to pack something simpler and smaller. That said, there are a few surprising omissions for a top-end compact.
Ricoh's CX2 offers a more powerful zoom and some image processing tweaks
At first glance, there’s little difference between the CX1 and CX2 – both have the same box-shaped metal body with relatively few buttons and a 3in LCD screen composed of 920,000 dots. The most obvious design change has been the addition of a textured hand grip on the right hand side of the CX2’s body.
The cameras are also a similar size and weight, with the CX2 measuring 102 x 58 x 29mm and weighing around 200g with battery and card. Although the CX2 is highly portable, you will need deep pockets to carry it around comfortably. Both models use SD/SDHC cards and include 88MB of internal memory.
Even below the skin both cameras have some similar features including a 1/2.3in CMOS sensor with 9.20Mp and Smooth Imaging Engine IV image processor. So, is the CX2 simply a case of the same chocolates in a slightly different box? No, but that said, if you were one of those who rushed out and purchased the CX1 a few months ago, you shouldn’t feel too bad about missing out on the CX2.
One of the biggest differences is that the CX2 has a 10.7x optical zoom compared with the CX1’s 7.1x zoom. The CX2’s offers an f/3-5-5 6 4.9-52.5mm optical zoom, equivalent to 28-300mm on a 35mm camera. Other features include an ISO range of 80-1600 and a shutter speed range of 8-1/1000sec.
Crisp LCD panel, but no viewfinder
As with the CX1, you get Ricoh’s Dynamic Range Double Shot system (DR), which takes two consecutive frames at different exposures and then combines the exposure information from both to produce a frame with an expanded dynamic range. A new addition is an automatic version of this feature.
No, it's all very complicated this sensor size lark. The quoted dimensions are historically based on TV camera tube sizes, and the sensor itself is typically about two-thirds that size - no wonder they continue to use a more flattering measure than reality.
DPReview attempts to explain all at http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/sensor_sizes_01.htm
what happened the blue door???
It might just be my opinion or it could have been the poor autumn light, but those test shots looked a bit under-saturated and cold to me.
The CX2 might not be optimal for consumer slow motion video, but 120fps sounds like it could be an option if you were so inclined.
I was dubious...
about the miniature mode, but I quite like the look of that!
BTW, I hope Mr Cole has reported himself to the relevant authorities for the suspicious activity of recording traffic AND a CCTV camera in the video!
is 1/2.3in 0.43478?
Yeah, as the article says that is pretty bad for a long lens. I was struggling with my Canon (10x zoom, no VF) today to get sharp images, and even when using flash the only way to do it was to get closer to the subject and use less magnification -- might sound like no problem, but the wider the angle, the more distortion in the image. Not to mention that I feel stupid holding the camera like that with my arms extended, but that might be just me... :-)
Re: miniature mode, it does not just blur the periphery of the picture. If my manual fake-tilt-shift adventures are any indication, it also over-saturates the colors and increases the contrast (to look like a painted model). The shot shown in the article does show a bit of increase in the saturation, but not as much as I would apply if doing it manually. Contrast does not look changed though.