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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
P-P. Henneken wrote:
"Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise (also at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially for a camera at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good, the sensor is obviously too small for this number of megapixels. Don't get me wrong, not trying to start a flame here (hey, I just ordered an H1, which can't be described as a noiseless digicam as well...), just being objective. I also think that they should have used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose some resolution but you gain a lot in the image quality department. But alas, to satisfy the market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad. The rest of the camera I truly adore though. Very nice lens, manual zoom and focus, big tiltable screen, great! P-P. The ability of noise to destroy any particular image is dependant on the exact image viewing contidions. Whilst you can see the noise on the sample images when viewed at 1:1 zoom on the screen (hence my describing it as "some noise"), can you see the noise on these images when printed out or viewed at normal size? I don't mean taking a magnifying glass to an 10 x 8 inch print either! Vieweing at 1:1 on my screen corresponds to a print width of 37 inches, not a size I have ever used. Personally, I cannot agree with "extremely bad". I do agree that there are lower noise sensors available (at least to some manufacturers), and I do agree that for many purposes 5MP would be adequate. 8MP is indeed market-driven. At a rough estimate, the sensitive area per pixel is the same on the FZ20 and FZ30, so actually having a larger total sensitive area should produce a net improvement for images under normal viewing conditions. Cheers, David |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Sill schrieb:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05...sonic_fz30.asp http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/ From the press release: Hi - thanks for the information. The camera has all features (besides the "some noise") I would like if the lens would have more wide angle. The 0.7 adapter could serve the purpose but I do not know how it works: 1) Is then the full zoom working (equivalent 24mm to 300mm) or is the adapter only working when the lens position is wide angle? 2) Is there a remarkable reduction of the aperture? Regards Udo |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
As mentioned I ordered an H1, beforehand I downloaded some DPReview sample
images to be printed as a photo. The ISO400 pictures coming out of the H1 I also consider "very bad". So I ordered some 6x4 inch photo's with ISO400 and ISO200 shots. The noise of the ISO400 shots was very obvious, even on the 6x4 photo's. ISO200, on the other hand, was fine, while on screen it's also quite bad. So what you're saying sure makes sense. A bit of noise on screen will not be seen on the actual photo. But some pictures of the FZ30 contain that much noise that I find it hard to believe (considering the tests I just did) that it will not show on the actual photo. Let alone an enlargement! Okay, it's an 8mp image so the actual "noise-pixels" will be smaller but still. That being said, it's the result of the less-than-perfect 8mp sensor. I really do believe that the 7mp sensor would have been a better choice. I wonder what Fuji will release soon, the F10 images are really, really outstanding in this respect (actually wanted that camera before the H1 but the total lack of manual controls bothered me). If they can bring out an image stabilized 6 (or 8, or 9...) megapixel camera with the same low-noise as the F10 and with comparable specs/options as the S2 IS, H1, FZ5/20/30 it will be quite some camera! Greets, P-P. (anxiously awaiting the iso400 noisebomb H1) ;-) "David J Taylor" wrote in message . uk... P-P. Henneken wrote: "Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise (also at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially for a camera at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good, the sensor is obviously too small for this number of megapixels. Don't get me wrong, not trying to start a flame here (hey, I just ordered an H1, which can't be described as a noiseless digicam as well...), just being objective. I also think that they should have used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose some resolution but you gain a lot in the image quality department. But alas, to satisfy the market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad. The rest of the camera I truly adore though. Very nice lens, manual zoom and focus, big tiltable screen, great! P-P. The ability of noise to destroy any particular image is dependant on the exact image viewing contidions. Whilst you can see the noise on the sample images when viewed at 1:1 zoom on the screen (hence my describing it as "some noise"), can you see the noise on these images when printed out or viewed at normal size? I don't mean taking a magnifying glass to an 10 x 8 inch print either! Vieweing at 1:1 on my screen corresponds to a print width of 37 inches, not a size I have ever used. Personally, I cannot agree with "extremely bad". I do agree that there are lower noise sensors available (at least to some manufacturers), and I do agree that for many purposes 5MP would be adequate. 8MP is indeed market-driven. At a rough estimate, the sensitive area per pixel is the same on the FZ20 and FZ30, so actually having a larger total sensitive area should produce a net improvement for images under normal viewing conditions. Cheers, David |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Udo Huebner wrote:
[] The camera has all features (besides the "some noise") I would like if the lens would have more wide angle. The 0.7 adapter could serve the purpose but I do not know how it works: 1) Is then the full zoom working (equivalent 24mm to 300mm) or is the adapter only working when the lens position is wide angle? Probably, the full range. It is teleconvertors which tend to have vignetting problems. 2) Is there a remarkable reduction of the aperture? I don't know, but I don't think so. Cheers, David |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
P-P. Henneken wrote:
As mentioned I ordered an H1, beforehand I downloaded some DPReview sample images to be printed as a photo. The ISO400 pictures coming out of the H1 I also consider "very bad". So I ordered some 6x4 inch photo's with ISO400 and ISO200 shots. The noise of the ISO400 shots was very obvious, even on the 6x4 photo's. ISO200, on the other hand, was fine, while on screen it's also quite bad. So what you're saying sure makes sense. A bit of noise on screen will not be seen on the actual photo. But some pictures of the FZ30 contain that much noise that I find it hard to believe (considering the tests I just did) that it will not show on the actual photo. Let alone an enlargement! Okay, it's an 8mp image so the actual "noise-pixels" will be smaller but still. That being said, it's the result of the less-than-perfect 8mp sensor. My own take with these cameras is to stick with the minimum ISO, unless the "atmosphere" of a grainy photo would add to the image - a candid or night shot for example. I really do believe that the 7mp sensor would have been a better choice. I wonder what Fuji will release soon, the F10 images are really, really outstanding in this respect (actually wanted that camera before the H1 but the total lack of manual controls bothered me). If they can bring out an image stabilized 6 (or 8, or 9...) megapixel camera with the same low-noise as the F10 and with comparable specs/options as the S2 IS, H1, FZ5/20/30 it will be quite some camera! If their camera/sensor is truely as good as the reviews have reported, and the lower noise is not simply achieved by image processing, then it would indeed be a stunning combination. Why some manufacturers don't have image stabilisation escapes me - it is such an advantage if you need a long telephoto. It would be great to have ISO 400 as a usable setting rather than a "high-grain scene" mode! Cheers, David |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"David J Taylor"
wrote in message . uk... My own take with these cameras is to stick with the minimum ISO, unless the "atmosphere" of a grainy photo would add to the image - a candid or night shot for example. True. Stick with the low(er) ISO settings. One additional advantage of the image stabilization is ofcourse the fact that you can also use this to decrease the shutter speed to have enough light hit the small sensor. Also one of the reason why I wanted an IS camera. If their camera/sensor is truely as good as the reviews have reported, and the lower noise is not simply achieved by image processing, then it would indeed be a stunning combination. I find this http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/fuj...s/dscf0461.jpg an incredible achievement for such a tiny P&S camera! Okay, there is some noise, but for an ISO400 shot it's very very good! Why some manufacturers don't have image stabilisation escapes me - it is such an advantage if you need a long telephoto. It would be great to have ISO 400 as a usable setting rather than a "high-grain scene" mode! Exactly. A reason why I wanted to wait for an IS Fuji camera but alas, patience is not a word in my vocabulary... ;-) P-P. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken"
wrote: One additional advantage of the image stabilization is ofcourse the fact that you can also use this to decrease the shutter speed to have enough light hit the small sensor. Also one of the reason why I wanted an IS camera. Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help with moving subjects. KS |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"King Sardon" wrote in message
... On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken" wrote: Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help with moving subjects. KS Obviously! But the first affordable image stabilized point and shoot superzoom with f1.4 through the whole zoomrange I have yet to find! ;-) P-P. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"P-P. Henneken" wrote in
.nl... "Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise (also at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially for a camera at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good, the sensor is obviously too small for this number of megapixels. Don't get me wrong, not trying to start a flame here (hey, I just ordered an H1, which can't be described as a noiseless digicam as well...), just being objective. I also think that they should have used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose some resolution but you gain a lot in the image quality department. But alas, to satisfy the market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad. The 7 Mpix cameras, like Sony DSC-P200 and Canon SD500 are now better regarding noise than most 5 Mpix cameras. Maybe the manufacturers will learn to handle the challenges of an 8 Mpix sensor eventually, but evidently not yet... The noise grain is so much larger and more noticeable than the pix resolution even at 100 ISO. /per |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 10:06:33 +0200, "P-P. Henneken"
wrote: "King Sardon" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken" wrote: Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help with moving subjects. KS Obviously! But the first affordable image stabilized point and shoot superzoom with f1.4 through the whole zoomrange I have yet to find! ;-) How useful would f1.4 be at the tele end? Other than to impress your friends with the bulk of the glass, I mean. To go forward, we need more sensitive sensors. KS |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|