Want a new camera.... But....

NewsDroid wrote:
In article ,
"David J Taylor"
wrote:

I do agree about the swivel LCD and better EVF. I haven't found
speed and power as much of a problem.

One problem I have had with the FZ20 is the somewhat limited dynamic
range. Loss of shadow detail and blown highlights, often in the same
photo. Maybe it's the intense light we tend to get in New Zealand.
Certainly I'm forever having to hunt around for the right combination
of sun on the clouds or snow or something, half press the shutter to
lock the reading, then frame up for the shot.

Do other digicams have the same battle?

Digicams are nearer to slide film than print film in exposure tolerance -
need to get it right first time and ensure highlights aren't clipped!
DSLRs have a better dynamic range, and working in RAW can help. I tend to
use the FZ5 fixed at ISO 80 (except for some night shots), if that makes
any difference to the dynamic range issue. One trick I have used in the
past with film cameras is contrast reduction by stretching a few hairs
over the lens opening.

You may also want to check that your display is correctly calibrated:

http://www.jasc.com/support/kb/articles/monitor.asp

Cheers,
David

David J Taylor wrote:

Ed wrote:


I keep yearning for a new camera like the Panasonic FZ-20. I want IS
and that nice manual focus ring....but...seems like every time I go
out on a shoot with my Olympus C-750, I am so pleased with my shots
that it's hard to justify the next step up in technology. I think
I'll wait for the FZ-25 before making my move.
Ed



Well, it seems to me that the FZ5 is the next step following the FZ20, and
it has dropped the manual focus ring. Panasonic are supposedly entering
the DSLR market with the 4/3 system at some point in the future, to they
may not want to instrodfuce models which conflict with a low-end DSLR.
You would find the IS a big boon, so you have a choice of the heavier FZ20
with manual focus, or the lighter FZ5 with no maunal focu or hot shoe.
The rest of the specs are in the same class as your C-750, but adding the
IS greatly increases the usability of the longer end of the zoom. The
range (36 - 432mm) is slightly greater as well.

If you really must wait, I'd suggest that having a swivel LCD finder,
perhaps a bigger sensor than the 1/2.5 inches, and perhaps a better EVF
were worth having. Some might want better video as well.

Cheers,
David



Are we not getting near to the description of the Canon S2?

NewsDroid wrote:

In article ,
"David J Taylor"
wrote:



I do agree about the swivel LCD and better EVF. I haven't found speed and
power as much of a problem.



One problem I have had with the FZ20 is the somewhat limited dynamic
range. Loss of shadow detail and blown highlights, often in the same
photo. Maybe it's the intense light we tend to get in New Zealand.
Certainly I'm forever having to hunt around for the right combination of
sun on the clouds or snow or something, half press the shutter to lock
the reading, then frame up for the shot.

Do other digicams have the same battle?



If you shoot much at higher ISO ie 200 and 400 tell me how the noise
level looks in your enlargements.

David J Taylor wrote:

NewsDroid wrote:


In article ,
"David J Taylor"
wrote:



I do agree about the swivel LCD and better EVF. I haven't found
speed and power as much of a problem.


One problem I have had with the FZ20 is the somewhat limited dynamic
range. Loss of shadow detail and blown highlights, often in the same
photo. Maybe it's the intense light we tend to get in New Zealand.
Certainly I'm forever having to hunt around for the right combination
of sun on the clouds or snow or something, half press the shutter to
lock the reading, then frame up for the shot.

Do other digicams have the same battle?



Digicams are nearer to slide film than print film in exposure tolerance -
need to get it right first time and ensure highlights aren't clipped!
DSLRs have a better dynamic range, and working in RAW can help. I tend to
use the FZ5 fixed at ISO 80 (except for some night shots),


Is that because to the higher noise level above ISO80?

if that makes
any difference to the dynamic range issue. One trick I have used in the
past with film cameras is contrast reduction by stretching a few hairs
over the lens opening.

You may also want to check that your display is correctly calibrated:

http://www.jasc.com/support/kb/articles/monitor.asp

Cheers,
David

measekite wrote:
[]
Digicams are nearer to slide film than print film in exposure
tolerance - need to get it right first time and ensure highlights
aren't clipped! DSLRs have a better dynamic range, and working in
RAW can help. I tend to use the FZ5 fixed at ISO 80 (except for
some night shots),

Is that because to the higher noise level above ISO80?

Partially, yes. It's also because, compared to the Nikon 8400 the
Panasonic FZ5 changes to a higher ISO earlier than I would prefer.

David

measekite wrote:
[]
If you shoot much at higher ISO ie 200 and 400 tell me how the noise
level looks in your enlargements.

It looks noisier, but acceptable to me for the type of shot! It's a
subjective thing, I suggest you look at the sample shots on the various
review sites.

David

Bill Spanger wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2005 12:26:33 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

measekite wrote:
[]
If you shoot much at higher ISO ie 200 and 400 tell me how the noise
level looks in your enlargements.

It looks noisier, but acceptable to me for the type of shot! It's a
subjective thing, I suggest you look at the sample shots on the
various review sites.

Now that the OP has beaten this noise horse to death maybe we should
tell him/her that there's software that removes noise very nicely in
most cases. :-)

Indeed, yes. I use Paint Shop Pro 9 which can also remove geometric
distortions and reduce so-called "chromatic aberration".

The OP could also try out the cameras for him/herself to determine what
is, or is not, acceptable.

Cheers,
David

David J Taylor wrote:

measekite wrote:
[]


If you shoot much at higher ISO ie 200 and 400 tell me how the noise
level looks in your enlargements.



It looks noisier, but acceptable to me for the type of shot! It's a
subjective thing, I suggest you look at the sample shots on the various
review sites.

David



All of the sample shots I find are ISO80. I would like to see the same
shot at ISO 80,200,400.

Bill Spanger wrote:

On Sat, 21 May 2005 12:26:33 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:



measekite wrote:
[]


If you shoot much at higher ISO ie 200 and 400 tell me how the noise
level looks in your enlargements.


It looks noisier, but acceptable to me for the type of shot! It's a
subjective thing, I suggest you look at the sample shots on the various
review sites.



Now that the OP has beaten this noise horse to death maybe we should tell
him/her that there's software that removes noise very nicely in most cases. :-)



Photoshop is supposed to be the best but I find that while it reduces
(not eliminates) noise is does compromise other things in the picture
like sharpness.

measekite wrote:
[]
All of the sample shots I find are ISO80. I would like to see the
same shot at ISO 80,200,400.

I suggest you borrow a camera from a photo store and take pictures for
yourself, as we seem to have established that the camera is basically OK
for you. Also be aware that as already mentioned you can reduce the
effect of noise in an image with programs like Neat Image, Paint Shop Pro
etc.

I really wouldn't get hung up on this - if you want low noise from a small
sensor camera stick with low ISO, and if you need low noise and high ISO,
buy a DSLR.

Cheers,
David