Z2000 should score higher and some other suggestions

Edit Subject

This is not a gripe, just an FYI. I recently replaced my aging Casio EX-S10 with the Casio EX-Z2000. I really liked the form-factor of the S10 and am used to the Casio brand. The S200 was the only current camera that comes close to the thin-ness of the S10.

In viewing the ranking of the Z2000 I noticed that some key camera features are listed as "unknown" and this seems to undeservedly lower the Z2000 rankings.

For the Z2000, I see omissions in these features:

Continuous Shutter: The Z2000 is listed as "None" whereas in fact it supports multiple modes for CS - with and without flash, with and without re-focussing, up to 20fps, depending on choices.

Macro Focusing: the Z2000 supports both a Macro and a Super Macro (fixed zoom) which both allows objects to be as close as 5cm (2").

And I suggest adding these features:

Picture Quality: The Casio AS feature does prevent blurring of pictures by small camera movement using sensor shift - this performs better than some lens-shift in other cameras. For a small point-and-shoot camera this is a key point.

AutoFocus Control: Many new cameras include anti-shake (lens/sensor shift), but with it they also have enhancements to AutoFocus features. I suggest to highlight things as dynamic tracking, speed of focusing, selection of image style. The Z2000 has its regular AutoFocus mode - which allows many selectable bias - but it also has the Premium AutoFocus mode - which really solves a great many items. For a point-and-shoot camera this is a great feature, and should score some bonus points.

Unique Features: this is a category that should be added to each camera - many manufacturers are making great strides here, think of features such as Panorama Sweep, 3D rendering, and so on. The Z2000 has features such as Landscape and Make-up mode, Dynamic Picture, Best Shot and several choices of AutoFocus and AntiShake controls. Additionally, it allows ISO, aperture or speed control, and has great battery life (580 pictures).

Lastly, Picture Quality: Aside the DXO Raw comparisons, each camera has certain quality quirks in the pictures: warmness, noise, true color, true detail, and so on. I used to exclusively own Sony cameras because of camera-size/picture quality tradeoff, but nowadays this is a very competitive area. For many users, the number of pixels mean less than the fact that the average picture is in focus, without blur, of good color depth and great contrast ratios. I would like to see some thought in this area - e.g. compare "default" settings, with "best" settings with some sample shots (or refer to reviews). Not all cameras that rank high in snapsort score high in this sense.

I think that the Z2000 is underrated - it performs really well for its smaller (thinner) size.

(On a slightly different note - I have noticed errrors for many cameras where the snapsort specification data does not match the manufacturer's data for that specific camera model. I suggest some sort of quality control here).

Other than that, I wish to thank you for the snapsort site - it is very well organized and very helpful in quickly sorting through (comparing) the many different vendor offerings. You have done a great job here!

Merry Christmas!