Home » Cameras » Camera » Ricoh CX3 » Test Shots - ISO Performance

Ricoh CX3 - Test Shots - ISO Performance

By Cliff Smith


Our Score


Review Price free/subscription

Over the next few pages we show a range of test shots. On this page the full size image at the minimum and maximum ISO settings have been reduced to let you see the full image, and a series of full resolution crops have taken from original images at a range of ISO settings to show the overall image quality. These pictures were taken indoors using shaded natural light.


This is the full frame at 80 ISO.


At the minimum ISO setting the image quality is excellent.


Image quality is still very high at 100 ISO.


There is a trace of noise at200 ISO but overall quality is still very good.


Noise reduction is starting to to creep in at 400 ISO, but the image is still usable.


Quality is much reduced at 800 ISO.


Noise is very visible at 1600 ISO, and colour saturation and smoothness is severely compromised.


3200 ISO is pretty terrible and should be avoided.

This is the full frame at 3200 ISO.


Previous page
Next page

Billy Rubin

February 23, 2010, 1:06 pm

I'm very tempted to upgrade from my Ricoh R10 to the CX3, if only it had RAW I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

Ed 3

February 23, 2010, 2:03 pm

Noise at 400 ISO but still gets 9/10 for image quality?


February 23, 2010, 4:00 pm

@Ed: Noise at 400

Yeah, to be honest I was expecting a really good ISO with what is meant to be a new super low light CCD. Surely the biggest problems with compacts is bad ISO, not getting this right really makes the camera stink, OK for outdoor shots but useless for party's etc.

Compare the ISO shots to the Fuji, it's a world apart.


Cliff Smith

February 23, 2010, 4:27 pm

Almost all compact cameras show image noise at 400 ISO. It's how well that noise is controlled, and its effect on overall image quality that counts. Also there's more to image quality than noise.

Ray Hopper

February 23, 2010, 5:49 pm

As an ex-Sony HX1 owner, eagerly looking for a lens-capless alternative, the big downside of the HX1's 10fps was the 17 seconds it took to write to memory. How long is the write-time for the CX3


February 23, 2010, 8:32 pm

HD video on a cmos sensor, i cant stand the jelly effect. what a pointless add-on


February 23, 2010, 10:55 pm

Interesting... pretty much down to this Camera and the incoming Panasonic TZ10. Looking forward to it's review.


February 24, 2010, 8:37 pm

First reviews of TZ10 are worse than TZ7.Still a CCD, CX3 is CMOS, whitnest the difference in speed, it's like using a pentium 3 vs a Icore...

I'm interested in Sony HX5 and Casio FH100, the latter one has very promissing specs, but never have seen a Casio life.

Ray Hopper

February 28, 2010, 6:42 am

BG - I too am interested in the TZ10 (and 8), HX5 and FH100, also the Fuji F80. The Samsung TL350 also has an interesting spec., although only a 5x zoom. Then there's rumours of an LX3 replacement. One of these will be my next carry-round so please Cliff get busy whizzing round Exeter with all of these. (What are you doing down there - thought you were a Brighton man like me !)


March 3, 2010, 11:09 pm

Dodger - I am beginning to think that the CX3 is closing in on the Panasonic TZ series in terms of quality. Especially after the slightly disappointing TZ10 review.

comments powered by Disqus