Reasons to choose Compactline 81
Released in 2010, Compactline 81 has about 25 mm² of sensor area, 8 MP effective resolution, and a 82 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.
Side-by-side comparison
Rollei Compactline 81
vs Rollei Powerflex 3D
VS
Sensor area
25 mm²
Compactline 8128 mm²
Powerflex 3D- Area ratio
- 1.12:1
- Absolute difference
- 3 mm²
- Relative difference
- 11.6%
The Powerflex 3D has the larger sensor area. More area usually means greater light-gathering potential, though real image quality still depends on sensor architecture and generation.
Key specification differences
Compactline 81MetricPowerflex 3D
8 MPEffective pixels5.2 MP
5.75 × 4.32Sensor6.08 × 4.56
1.76 µmPixel pitch2.31 µm
3.11 µm²Pixel area5.33 µm²
32.21 MP/cm²Pixel density18.76 MP/cm²
6.02Crop factor5.69
—Maximum video—
82 gWeight127 g
SDHC, Secure DigitalStoragemicroSD, microSDHC
2x AAABatteryLi-Ion Li-ion battery
Amber marks the value that is generally preferable in this comparison context. It is not an overall camera score.
How to choose between these cameras
The Powerflex 3D has the larger sensor area. The Compactline 81 has the lighter body. The Compactline 81 has the higher effective resolution. The Compactline 81 and Powerflex 3D were both released in 2010. Also consider the lens system and subjects you shoot.
Reasons to choose Powerflex 3D
Released in 2010, Powerflex 3D has about 28 mm² of sensor area, 5.2 MP effective resolution, and a 127 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.