A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital ZLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The ZLRs I own



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 5th 05, 05:10 PM
All Things Mopar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

David J Taylor commented courteously ...

I must admit that the small built-in flash on these
cameras has its limitations. With my own photography,
when inside museums etc. I usually try and use the
natural lighting, even if that means having to prop
the camera on an object for support.


Hi, David.

I've had nothing but trouble shooting available light with
my 5700. I shoot mainly car pictures at places like The
Henry Ford Museum and The Walter P. Chrysler Museum. Both
are dim, the HF museum would make a bar look bright! I've
tried a small tripod, which works, but its cumbersome and
slow.

What's worse, though, is that in my experience, anything
over ISO 200, certainly 800, creates images that look like
the car was painted on beach sand. That's true even if I
turn on the 5700's Noise Reduction. The noise is so bad
that I cannot realistically eliminate it even using Paint
Shop Pro 9's outstanding Digital Camera Noise Reduction
Filter.

As to flash, you're clearly right about the Speedlight -
it's range is about 10', max. My Sunpak 433D has a guide
number of 120, so should have a range of up to about 30-
35', which is more than ample.

I only alluded to my problem in my previous post. I'd say
that about 1/3 of my flash pictures (either flash) are
excellent, another 1/3 are underexposed but can be easily
fixed in PSP 9, but the final 1/3 are 5-6 f/stops under
(which of course starts kicking up noise). I can sometimes
fix these in PSP also, but not always.

I have the 5700's feature to display the just-shot image
in the EVF for 3 seconds after each shot, so I can tell
right away if I've gotten an underexposure.

I've worked with Nikon Tech Support and sent the camera in
for service but no dice. I've "talked" to a couple of
other 5700 owners who also said they got inconsistent
exposures similar to mine.

I've tried to determine a root cause so I could avoid it,
but haven't found one yet. I have yet to get a bad picture
in smaller rooms, such as my house or a closed-in area of
a museum.

The biggest culprits a very dark ambient light, dark
cars (the bright cars work much better), and areas where
there's nothing around or over the car to reflect the
flash (museums selding have drop ceiling so your
suggestion to tilt the Sunpak's flash head up for bounce
doesn't help me).

Also, while not conclusive, I find that when I have to
stand back and use mild-to-moderate telephoto on the zoom
lens, I get more underexposures (can't always fix that,
though, because of barriers preventing me from getting
closer).

It seems to me anecdotally that the 5700's flash sensor is
biased to wide-angle and it is reading that even though
I've zoomed in. I changed from "matrix" to "spot" metering
in Setup which has helped, but only marginally.

When I know I've got an unacceptably bad exposure, I
switch to full manual mode (M), estimate the distance by
pacing it off, and use the Sunpak's GN. Works pretty well,
but it is much slower to do this. Also, even when I have a
pretty accurate distance, I find that the 5700 tends to
underexpose anyway, so I often have to take a series of
test shots once I have the so-called "correct" aperture.
And, it continues to **** me off that a Nikon is *so* much
worse than my previous Fuji 4900 even with its puny on-
board flash.

The flash I do use is restricted to objects at a
fairly constant distance, i.e. not with great range
between front and back like a car close-up. The fall
off of light with distance is rather rapid - although
you can use bounce flash if the ceiling is low enough.


Yep, light falls off as the square of the distance so
shooting a car picture at an angle, for example a front
3/4 view, creates problems. And, the foreground and
background get killed as well. Highlights often blow out
and shadows turn to ink.

So, I almost always have to spend a fair amount of time in
PSP selecting various parts of the picture and fixing the
underexposure areas individually. I'm still trying to
learn how to put a gradient fill on a layer at the angle
the car is and use that to linearly brighten the image,
knowing that the light fall-off isn't really linear.

I have found that you need to keep the front of the

camera
clear of obstructions. If the flash sensor or the lamp
itself is obstructed you can get odd exposures.


Right on, David! My fat fingers often get in the way. What
Nikon Service did was clean the camera, guess they thought
the sensor was dirty or maybe something inside the camera
was dirty. I sent those guys 30+ pictures on a CD with
documentation of things like shotting conditions and focus
distance. Of course, they could examine the EXIF data to
find out quite a bit (but distance isn't in EXIF but
aperture is).

While on the subject of "fat fingers", I'm *always*
accidently putting my finger on the litte button on the
side of the camera that controls the JPEG compression.
Sometimes I don't spot that I've accidently switched from
"fine" to "normal" or "basic" until I've taken a bunch of
ruined shots, so I have to scurry back and try again. I
wish that this feature was either in Setup or needed a 2nd
button to make it work. Bad ergonomic design IMHO.

Thanks for your help. If you have any other suggestions
for me after reading my clarification, I'd be
appreciative.

--
ATM, aka Jerry
  #12  
Old February 5th 05, 06:36 PM
J.S.Pitanga
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

[Ken:]
I own a Panasonic DMC FZ-20 5mp 12x zoom
digital ZLR camera and because of that I
can post to this group and talk about it
as much as I like.


Of course. It is the inalienable right of every idiot to display his
idiocy for everyone to see, and this newsgroup is here to provide you with
a space to do so.

I really enjoy using this type of ZLR camera.


I'm sure you do, some people have strange habits indeed. They cannot see a
Zooming-Long-Retroflex device without almost fainting in bliss.

It's the best in its class.


It is the longest, it is the thickest and it zooms in and out very fastly
and forcefully. What else someone in love with retroflex devices might
wish?

What type of ZLR camera do you own?


Sorry, but since my natural inclination is for penian rather than anal
pleasure I have never owned any retroflex device!

The best,

Julio
  #13  
Old February 5th 05, 07:22 PM
J.S.Pitanga
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

[Ken:]What type of ZLR camera do you own?

[Leo:]
I would suspect he doesn't Ken, at least
not by his definition.


As just explained in my previous message, I indeed do not own any
retroflex device, such as ZLRs (Zooming-Long-Retroflex) devices and dildos
in general. But please feel free to discuss them on this newsgroup if this
is your pleasure!

All he is intent on is destroying this NG.


Why should I? I deeply respect the right of users of retroflex devices to
discuss about how long and thick and protruding and enjoyable are their
beloved toys. I aso respect their right to masturbate while thinking and
saying that they have a reflex camera.

The ZLR I own is a Nikon CP8800


Although very thick, your retroflex device (10x) is not as long as Ken's
(12x). This is because of different anatomies and personal preferences.
Anyway it is very protruding and your pleasure can always be increased
digitally (that is, with the help of the fingers).

and BTW it also has an EVF.


Who cares. What is important for the people this newsgroup is intended to
is that it will always be a long, thick, protruding, enjoyable
Zooming-Long-Retroflex.

The best,

Julio.
  #14  
Old February 5th 05, 07:44 PM
Ken
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"J.S.Pitanga" wrote in message news


I own a Panasonic DMC FZ-20 5mp 12x zoom digital ZLR camera and because of that I can post
to this group and talk about it as much as I like. I really enjoy using this type of ZLR camera. It's the
best in its class. I should also mention that it takes pretty pictures and I can display them on my
computer monitor. I can also print those pretty pictures with my Canon printer so I can share them
with my friends. My friends really like to see the pretty pictures I take. I won't share them with
you though. I don't think you want to be my friend. I can't imagine that you have any friends and if
you did they are probably not very nice people. It must miserable being you.


  #15  
Old February 5th 05, 07:52 PM
David J Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

All Things Mopar wrote:
[]
While on the subject of "fat fingers", I'm *always*
accidently putting my finger on the litte button on the
side of the camera that controls the JPEG compression.
Sometimes I don't spot that I've accidently switched from
"fine" to "normal" or "basic" until I've taken a bunch of
ruined shots, so I have to scurry back and try again. I
wish that this feature was either in Setup or needed a 2nd
button to make it work. Bad ergonomic design IMHO.

Thanks for your help. If you have any other suggestions
for me after reading my clarification, I'd be
appreciative.


I wish I did, Jerry, but I think I'm at the limit of my knowledge.
Perhaps if you can get a loaner of another camera to compare, you could
consider selling the 5700. Not a very positive thing to say, but if the
design is faulty (and as your Fuji 4900 proved) then you aren't going to
get very far.

You'll know that whilst I've kept the 5700 for now, I've tried the 8400,
and if you can manage with 85mm maximum focal length that may be a
possibility (there are no easy to press compression level buttons, I know
just what you mean!). I know it's a bit late to ask now, but why did you
move from the Fuji 4900?

Cheers,
David


  #16  
Old February 5th 05, 10:16 PM
Charles
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , J.S.Pitanga
wrote:

Of course. It is the inalienable right of every idiot to display his
idiocy for everyone to see


And you sure are doing a fine job of displaying it!!!

--
Charles
  #17  
Old February 16th 05, 07:28 PM
Roland Karlsson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ken" wrote in
:

"J.S.Pitanga" wrote in message
news


I own a Panasonic DMC FZ-20 5mp 12x zoom digital ZLR camera and
because of that I can post to this group and talk about it as much as
I like. I really enjoy using this type of ZLR camera. It's the best in
its class. What type of ZLR camera do you own?


Personally I own a Canon G2. I also own a computer and have
a news account. And I can post in any group I wish. As long
I stay within the charter of the group I am also more than
welcome to do so.

The meaning of the acronym ZLR is within the charter of this
group with a broad margin as this group is called ZLR. The
fact that the charter for this group discribes cameras that
shall really not be called ZLR is a valid topic.

The making of this group was a mistake as it is spreading
misinformation. I understand that you that post here need
a group to discuss your somewhat more advanced compact digital
cameras. But I don't understand why you insist that your cameras
are called ZLR. They are mostly EVF and sometimes only
normal digital cameras with more zoom.


/Roland
  #18  
Old February 16th 05, 09:13 PM
David J Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Roland Karlsson wrote:
[]
The making of this group was a mistake as it is spreading
misinformation. I understand that you that post here need
a group to discuss your somewhat more advanced compact digital
cameras. But I don't understand why you insist that your cameras
are called ZLR. They are mostly EVF and sometimes only
normal digital cameras with more zoom.


No, a majority people voted /for/ rather than /against/ this group - as a
place for discussing high-end SLR-like cameras. "ZLR" was the best name
that anyone could come up with, so now let's get on and talk about the
cameras!

Thanks,
David


  #19  
Old February 16th 05, 11:04 PM
Roland Karlsson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"David J Taylor"
wrote in
.uk:

No, a majority people voted /for/ rather than /against/ this group -
as a place for discussing high-end SLR-like cameras. "ZLR" was the
best name that anyone could come up with, so now let's get on and talk
about the cameras!


Ye - I know the history behind it. And - of course -
you can discuss higher ended low end digital cameras
here or whatever how much you like.

But - I don't think it is OK to jump at anyone
that comes here and is surprised over the faulty
name.

You have to get over that a mistake was made and that
it will repeatedely be questioned why this group is
called ZLR. It will happen over and over again as long
as this group is active.

It is wrong - and you know it. And some here gets very edgy
when someone says so.



/Roland
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CHARTER: rec.photo.digital.zlr David J Taylor Digital ZLR Cameras 73 March 17th 05 07:32 AM
what is ZLR? WD me Digital ZLR Cameras 38 February 16th 05 07:17 PM
poll - did you miss the voting about dividing r.p.d? Roland Karlsson Digital Photography 271 October 27th 04 01:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.