Document View

Most digital cameras today have megapixels galore, a large LCD, and fairly long battery life, and take fine pictures in good light.

Most digital cameras today have megapixels galore, a large LCD, and fairly long battery life, and take fine pictures in good light. Still, there are significant performance differences among models in our tests.

To stand out, new models are adding features and style and are trying to improve performance in more difficult photography. These cameras claim to conquer such challenges as shooting that birthday cake with only the light from its candles, capturing the detail in a face photographed in front of a bright window, and freezing the winning swing in the baseball game.

We've upgraded our tests to address those more ambitious claims and higher expectations. The results reveal a wider range of performance than in past reports, with some models that rise to the challenges and a number that fall short.

Our tests also reveal a blurring in performance between point-and-shoots - comprising subcompact, compact, and superzoom cameras-and SLRs, the bigger and pricier cameras that use interchangeable lenses.

Some point-and-shoots excelled at producing images free of graininess in dim conditions, traditionally an SLR strength, while a few SLRs faltered. Many of the new point-and-shoots responded fairly quickly when their shutter was pressed, though none had the almost instantaneous response of most SLRs. (See the box on the facing page for more about camera speed.) More SLRs are borrowing niceties from point-andshoots, such as "live view" on their LCD.

KEY FINDINGS

Standouts among the 56 models in our Ratings include the Nikon D300, $1,800, the top-scoring advanced SLR, and the Canon PowerShot A650 IS, $350, the top-scoring compact camera. Both are shown above.

Here are some performance attributes we consider important and details about our new tests:

Image quality. Our new imagequality scores combine the judgments of our experts with software analysis for sharpness; color accuracy in a variety of conditions, such as daylight and artificial light; and other attributes, including those covered below.

Because the new tests are more rigorous overall, no point-and-shoot camera received an excellent score for image quality, and only two SLRs did. And some of the older cameras in our Ratings received image-quality scores that are lower than their picture-quality judgments in previous reports.

A new measure: dynamic range. A camera's prowess at capturing gradations of light and dark can determine the success of shots that include widely varying light conditions. A new performance score, dynamic range, reflects that capability. The best performers in our range tests are capable of rendering detail well in very dim as well as very bright areas of the image. The worst all but obliterated those finer points at both extremes.

Shooting in low light. Many pointand- shoots now rival SLRs for maximum ISO setting, a performance specification that helps you gauge how well the camera can shoot indoors or at dusk. We now measure how high an ISO setting you can use on the camera without images becoming overly grainy, fuzzy, or speckled.

At ISO settings above a fairly modest 400, many point-and-shoots produced images that had flaws. Most SLRs produced images at 800 ISO that were good enough to yield a satisfying 8x10 print; one, the Nikon D300, even held that quality level at an impressive 3200 ISO. But two SLRs showed flaws at ISO 400.

How versatile? Among other attributes, this judgment considers such useful features as the presence of an optical viewfinder, exposure compensation, and a movable LCD, and the range of ISO and other settings.