The reason I like to do controlled shootouts is that any camera or lens can be made in isolation to look good (or bad) under the right circumstances. When it comes to high ISO comparisons, it pains me to see a comparison where one camera given more light than another (ie, different shutter speeds with the same aperture). Some of the largest review sites around make this mistake, and it can significantly affect the results. The other day, I posted a couple ISO 800 samples from the EX1. Those were processed from RAW with no luminance noise reduction and moderate sharpening for a gritty look. More importantly, they were taken with a lowish shutter speed (1/45s) and slightly underexposed, which makes a major difference in the final impression. Here's an ISO 1600 Samsung EX1 / TL500 image taken under more favorable circumstances: enough light to allow for a faster (1/90s) shutter speed and a brighter exposure with a balanced light source (window light). I processed with a modest amount of noise reduction, and to me this looks pretty good for ISO 1600 from a small (1/1.7" sensor): Click here for a version at 50% of the original file resolution RAW file for download (zipped): View attachment 358 Why some camera review sites publish ISO series with the high ISO images taken at 1/2000s is beyond me. It gives an unrealistic expectation of how a camera will behave in low light, where high ISO is needed.