Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 109

Thread: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

  1. #21

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Anson View Post
    A bit of correction, even though the FZ50 & FZ18 uses the same image-processing engine (Venus Engine III), but they don't share the same sensor size & lens (brand same, spec diff). And the handling of the two camera are very much difference (one offer full-manual dslr control & handing while the other is lacks some) ...

    Like I mention earlier a typical dslr win compared to a non-dslr in it's sensor size ( Better ISO, DoF ). While the latter excel in other control, often you have to perform a few test shots (correction of WB, Exposure, etc) before making your first "usable" photo. While a non-dslr (FZ50) adjustment can be view before the first shot is fired...

    For me, having a dslr does not make a person a better photographer. If a person is skilled with his PnS, his shots can be better than a dslr user...
    I totally agree DSLR doesn't make one a pro yea.. but strictly speaking terms of IQ with proper informed use... I don't think PNS can catch DSLR as you suggested in your first post. WB, AF point, DOF, exposure, somehow can be picked up & corrected pretty fast with digital.
    Even with PNS, although you can view without shooting, the only difference is you save shutter count right? =X No one said DSLR users cant reshoot and reshoot until they get it right. =)

    Curious, you still like your FZ50 after owning a 450D?


    Anyway where has TS gone?
    Looking for Canon 100mm F2 USM :)

  2. #22
    Senior Member Anson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ansonchew.com
    Posts
    8,209

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by ombre View Post
    I totally agree DSLR doesn't make one a pro yea.. but strictly speaking terms of IQ with proper informed use... I don't think PNS can catch DSLR as you suggested in your first post. WB, AF point, DOF, exposure, somehow can be picked up & corrected pretty fast with digital.
    Even with PNS, although you can view without shooting, the only difference is you save shutter count right? =X No one said DSLR users cant reshoot and reshoot until they get it right. =)

    Curious, you still like your FZ50 after owning a 450D?
    For IQ in high ISO, I agree that it would be quite hard for a non-dslr to match... But some PnS (eg: LX3) come close (shooting at ISO 400) to those found in some dslr (eg: those with 4/3 sensors). Personally I find that you need to spend abit more time on the post-processing when shooting with a dslr to adjust the curves than a non-dslr(FZ50)...

    As for "re-shooting". If you are covering an event, I don't think you always get a second chance to re-shoot your subject (that why sometime I also need shoot RAW on my FZ50).

    And Yes, I still like my FZ50.... As I mention earlier the FZ50 offered full-dslr handling which make the translation much earlier. Curious do you miss your FZ18?

  3. #23

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Anson View Post
    For IQ in high ISO, I agree that it would be quite hard for a non-dslr to match... But some PnS (eg: LX3) come close (shooting at ISO 400) to those found in some dslr (eg: those with 4/3 sensors). Personally I find that you need to spend abit more time on the post-processing when shooting with a dslr to adjust the curves than a non-dslr(FZ50)...

    As for "re-shooting". If you are covering an event, I don't think you always get a second chance to re-shoot your subject (that why sometime I also need shoot RAW on my FZ50).

    And Yes, I still like my FZ50.... As I mention earlier the FZ50 offered full-dslr handling which make the translation much earlier. Curious do you miss your FZ18?
    Haha we seem to be hogging the thread, but I shall continue since it seems a little in-line with the topic.

    I don't miss my FZ18, however neither do I regret buying it. It helped introduced me into the world of DSLR indirectly. Admittedly, I felt quite disappointed and screwed up with my DSLR when I first got it with the lousy old type of kit lens. None of the shots were usable.

    Nevertheless, I still recommend people FZ18 or 28 now if they ever ask me for a PNS recommendation. Versatile within limitations.

    Post-Processing... I think Lumix's system adds some color tone effects on the pictures in the iA modes. Nevertheless, I find my post-process time on FZ18 was much greater, noise issues etc. I practically resize every good photo to 1200 x 900 because any higher the flaws show... and I felt that the pictures look a bit 'flat'. But there are situations where it does well.

    Not sure if FZ50 is like that, but I think FZ18 and FZ28 (I highly suspect LX3 too), have pretty glaring contrast modifiers. Ie. if you put it to +2, they tweak the curves a lot, pre-process. Not as noticeable on my 350D.

    As for events, I feel that most events have predictable settings once you get a few shots correct. Usually its a matter of setting a +/- 1/3 EV as and when conditions changes? I'm not sure if you agree.

    Then again, your 450D has liveview? (btw I find liveview useless, or at least not worth the money. =X but its personal opinion.)

    And there is weight and handling issues =)

    Then again, I've seen some of your shots, pretty good, I recall asking you about your settings for some shots on the lumix showgirls. =)

    All in all, there are good PNS out there, but whether the technology allows for the small sensor to overcome the big one... sounds like going against physics laws?
    Looking for Canon 100mm F2 USM :)

  4. #24
    Senior Member Anson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ansonchew.com
    Posts
    8,209

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by ombre View Post
    Haha we seem to be hogging the thread, but I shall continue since it seems a little in-line with the topic.

    I don't miss my FZ18, however neither do I regret buying it. It helped introduced me into the world of DSLR indirectly. Admittedly, I felt quite disappointed and screwed up with my DSLR when I first got it with the lousy old type of kit lens. None of the shots were usable.

    Nevertheless, I still recommend people FZ18 or 28 now if they ever ask me for a PNS recommendation. Versatile within limitations.

    Post-Processing... I think Lumix's system adds some color tone effects on the pictures in the iA modes. Nevertheless, I find my post-process time on FZ18 was much greater, noise issues etc. I practically resize every good photo to 1200 x 900 because any higher the flaws show... and I felt that the pictures look a bit 'flat'. But there are situations where it does well.

    Not sure if FZ50 is like that, but I think FZ18 and FZ28 (I highly suspect LX3 too), have pretty glaring contrast modifiers. Ie. if you put it to +2, they tweak the curves a lot, pre-process. Not as noticeable on my 350D.

    As for events, I feel that most events have predictable settings once you get a few shots correct. Usually its a matter of setting a +/- 1/3 EV as and when conditions changes? I'm not sure if you agree.

    Then again, your 450D has liveview? (btw I find liveview useless, or at least not worth the money. =X but its personal opinion.)

    And there is weight and handling issues =)

    Then again, I've seen some of your shots, pretty good, I recall asking you about your settings for some shots on the lumix showgirls. =)

    All in all, there are good PNS out there, but whether the technology allows for the small sensor to overcome the big one... sounds like going against physics laws?
    Haha.. true we are hogging the thread while waiting for the TS to make some comment...

    As the FZ50 don't have a iA mode, and I don't use the Auto Mode (mainly using PASM) so can't comment much on the color setting.. Strangely my 450D also have a similar feature call "Picture Style", which I have not explore yet...

    For wedding event, whereby the lighting condition does not change much,.. it is relatively easier to control the WB & exposure but for a "product launch" event with the light changing constantly... it is not a easy task... and you may not get a second chance if you miss the VIP shot...

    Sadly the LV in my 450D is not as good as the one found in my FZ50 (flip-LCD), but still it is still better than to carry a small ladder (if you are not the official photographer) if you are late when taking an event. That why when buying a dslr, the LV feature is very important to me and that the reason why I give the D90 a pass because of it slow LV's AF.

    True with the upcoming technology, even with an IQ improvement of a PnS, the typical DSLR's IQ would progress even further... But how many people actually needs to print a poster size image?

  5. #25

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by sweeshiwei View Post
    Hi All,

    I am facing some problem when taking the photos.
    it seem like the photo taken by dslr is not as good compare to my digital camera.

    is there any wrong setting to my dslr?
    [ my camera is Canon 400D IS 18~55mm ]

    and i find that the IS from the lens does not have much of the effect when compare normal digital camera.

    need some advise and feedback.
    Hi Hi ,

    I guess you are using the Auto mode on DSLR and is comparing it to PnS auto mode?

    Perhaps there is an expectations gap that more expensive cameras = taking better pictures.

    A PnS will render extremely sharp pictures due to tis small aperture , plus the image processing chip inbuilt to boost colors , the pictures are very nice to look at .

    To render an equivalent picture on the DSLR , you will need to understand how to tweak the various settings ( aperture , shutter speed, ISO, white balance , raw versus jpeg format etc).


    So end of the day like any other skills ( driving , golfing ) you need to keep doing it to understand and get better heh =)

    as for the IS , PNS is much lighter , hence , we definitely can hold it firmer than DSLR . IS only enables you to shoot at 2 stops slower shutter speed ( from your optimal non-blur point) , so like what some the bros has mentioned , its not God Mode .

    But dont be discouraged by the results , like all good stuff , you will need to unravel the beauty slowly de :
    Alpha and Omega

  6. #26

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Anson View Post
    For IQ in high ISO, I agree that it would be quite hard for a non-dslr to match... But some PnS (eg: LX3) come close (shooting at ISO 400) to those found in some dslr (eg: those with 4/3 sensors). Personally I find that you need to spend abit more time on the post-processing when shooting with a dslr to adjust the curves than a non-dslr(FZ50)...

    As for "re-shooting". If you are covering an event, I don't think you always get a second chance to re-shoot your subject (that why sometime I also need shoot RAW on my FZ50).

    And Yes, I still like my FZ50.... As I mention earlier the FZ50 offered full-dslr handling which make the translation much earlier. Curious do you miss your FZ18?
    I owned both the LX3 and E3, the LX3 had a hard time catching up with the E3 in terms of noise control. I can't accept anything more than ISO200 from the LX3, probably too used to dslr IQ.
    I bought the LX3 for my wife cos its small and compact, for me i'm still faithful to my dslr, nothing less.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Anson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ansonchew.com
    Posts
    8,209

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by ellsworth View Post
    I owned both the LX3 and E3, the LX3 had a hard time catching up with the E3 in terms of noise control. I can't accept anything more than ISO200 from the LX3, probably too used to dslr IQ.
    I bought the LX3 for my wife cos its small and compact, for me i'm still faithful to my dslr, nothing less.
    I think I mention earlier... come close...

    The E3 is currently the top of the range professional camera from Olympus. If LX3's noise performance matches the E3, I think everyone would buy the LX3 instead.
    Last edited by Anson; 29th December 2008 at 08:43 AM.

  8. #28
    Senior Member azul123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Eastern Bloc
    Posts
    2,776

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by sweeshiwei View Post
    Hi All,

    I am facing some problem when taking the photos.
    it seem like the photo taken by dslr is not as good compare to my digital camera.

    is there any wrong setting to my dslr?
    [ my camera is Canon 400D IS 18~55mm ]

    and i find that the IS from the lens does not have much of the effect when compare normal digital camera.

    need some advise and feedback.
    Try this... set DSLR to Program Mode (P Mode) and then set it to Auto ISO. See if that improves it, if it does then slowly advanced by checking what the settings camera set when it was in Program Mode and Auto ISO for in-door day or in-door night, outdoors etc...

    Later progress by using the other modes (Av/Tv) with user setting on ISO etc.. happy trying.

    ../azul123

  9. #29

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by sweeshiwei View Post
    Hi All,

    I am facing some problem when taking the photos.
    it seem like the photo taken by dslr is not as good compare to my digital camera.

    is there any wrong setting to my dslr?
    [ my camera is Canon 400D IS 18~55mm ]

    and i find that the IS from the lens does not have much of the effect when compare normal digital camera.

    need some advise and feedback.
    What constitute a good picture?

    Another set of questions:
    Why do you think manufacturers like canon make 1Dseries, 5D series, x0D series, xx0D series and 1000series? If Canon slaps the same sensor across all DSLR models, can they make the marketing dollars? A 1 series sensor is a 1 series sensor. Likewise for the 1000 series. They cannot yield the exact same image quality. For lenses, it is the same marketing ploy.

    But again, can you achieve good images with just a 450D? I believe it is possible. You have to understand its shortcomings and work towards it.

    Search your soul what you want and if you are limited by budget, work around it, learn and understand your camera and set achievable targets.

    If you are still twirling round feeling disappointed on your investment after one year, it pretty much tells that google is not your friend. Go out and make some real friends (shooting buddies) and make your new discoveries.

  10. #30

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Raied View Post


    No pic no talk...sorry couldnt resist!

    but on a more serious note, we really do need to see a couple of comparison photos to help you out and solve/address your issues that you may encounter.

    Hi guys all,

    Sorry for late reply .. Don worry, you guys did not scare me off.
    I welcome all constructive advise and critics too.. ( this is only way to improve )
    yup you are right , i need to post 2 photos to compare.

    Pls wait a while i will get to photos to upload.
    TQ, Francis Swee Shiwei

  11. #31

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    here are some pics taken.
    [IMG]E:\Personal\Software data\Photos\Esplanade\Picture 011[/IMG]
    [IMG]E:\Personal\Software data\Photos\Esplanade\Picture 074[/IMG]

    you can see the first one the image is not sharp and the colour / EV are not bright and clear. for the 1st one.
    but the second is sharper using tripod .
    TQ, Francis Swee Shiwei

  12. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Singapore, east-ish
    Posts
    2,291

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by sweeshiwei View Post
    here are some pics taken.
    [IMG]E:\Personal\Software data\Photos\Esplanade\Picture 011[/IMG]
    [IMG]E:\Personal\Software data\Photos\Esplanade\Picture 074[/IMG]

    you can see the first one the image is not sharp and the colour / EV are not bright and clear. for the 1st one.
    but the second is sharper using tripod .
    We can't see it if it's your PC

    try uploading them onto some picture-hosting site

  13. #33

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by contaxable View Post
    What constitute a good picture?

    Another set of questions:
    Why do you think manufacturers like canon make 1Dseries, 5D series, x0D series, xx0D series and 1000series? If Canon slaps the same sensor across all DSLR models, can they make the marketing dollars? A 1 series sensor is a 1 series sensor. Likewise for the 1000 series. They cannot yield the exact same image quality. For lenses, it is the same marketing ploy.
    But again, can you achieve good images with just a 450D? I believe it is possible. You have to understand its shortcomings and work towards it.
    Search your soul what you want and if you are limited by budget, work around it, learn and understand your camera and set achievable targets.
    If you are still twirling round feeling disappointed on your investment after one year, it pretty much tells that google is not your friend. Go out and make some real friends (shooting buddies) and make your new discoveries.


    Hi There, yup.
    I agreed that having a dslr does not make me a pro.
    For me i likes to use the function, instead of the simple auto mode.
    You find the interesting point of taking photos at a different cam.setting that will
    project a different type of output view.
    Its the arts of your own work at the time when taking photos.
    I do not need very high end cam cos to me i believe i am not that level yet.
    ( a step a time. ) So i am working to strengthen my foundation techique.
    getting use to all setting of my cam. and to know what setting for what type of lighting conditions etc

    Going out with group of friends with camera in one of the best way to share and learn.
    Last edited by sweeshiwei; 29th December 2008 at 01:09 PM.
    TQ, Francis Swee Shiwei

  14. #34
    Senior Member Anson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ansonchew.com
    Posts
    8,209

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Daedalus Trent View Post
    We can't see it if it's your PC

    try uploading them onto some picture-hosting site
    Haha... reminder me of the myself when I learn HTML (14 years ago)....

  15. #35

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Daedalus Trent View Post
    We can't see it if it's your PC

    try uploading them onto some picture-hosting site

    so sorry,,

    ok, i will update the link once i upload the pics to the site
    TQ, Francis Swee Shiwei

  16. #36

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Anson View Post
    Sadly the LV in my 450D is not as good as the one found in my FZ50 (flip-LCD), but still it is still better than to carry a small ladder (if you are not the official photographer) if you are late when taking an event. That why when buying a dslr, the LV feature is very important to me and that the reason why I give the D90 a pass because of it slow LV's AF.

    True with the upcoming technology, even with an IQ improvement of a PnS, the typical DSLR's IQ would progress even further... But how many people actually needs to print a poster size image?
    Agree with the 450D LV not as versatile, I tried one at sitex and I found it really laggy though, and AF takes 2 buttons?

    Anyway, regarding the size thing, I hardly print, but I guess it shows even on the screen... a sharp image, even when cropped down is very much more pleasing than a normal quality image. Around 1024 x 768 its quite visible in my opinion.
    Looking for Canon 100mm F2 USM :)

  17. #37
    Senior Member Anson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ansonchew.com
    Posts
    8,209

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by ombre View Post
    Agree with the 450D LV not as versatile, I tried one at sitex and I found it really laggy though, and AF takes 2 buttons?

    Anyway, regarding the size thing, I hardly print, but I guess it shows even on the screen... a sharp image, even when cropped down is very much more pleasing than a normal quality image. Around 1024 x 768 its quite visible in my opinion.
    Yes you have 1 button to focus & the other for shutter. In my option, in term of focus speed only the LV in the Panasonic G1 & the Sony 300/350 (a bit limited by the angle), is as usable as the LV in FZ50.

    Abit curious, beside using LV, stairs (including chairs) & a long expensive lens is there other method to take a picture if you are standing at the back? Coz there was a time that stairs are very "popular" in event shooting, but I am seeing these lesser nowadays, and there is not much people using LV for shooting.....

    If view in 1024 x768, to me the noise issue ( at ISO 400 & 800) are not much of a issue.

  18. #38

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Anson View Post
    Yes you have 1 button to focus & the other for shutter. In my option, in term of focus speed only the LV in the Panasonic G1 & the Sony 300/350 (a bit limited by the angle), is as usable as the LV in FZ50.

    Abit curious, beside using LV, stairs (including chairs) & a long expensive lens is there other method to take a picture if you are standing at the back? Coz there was a time that stairs are very "popular" in event shooting, but I am seeing these lesser nowadays, and there is not much people using LV for shooting.....

    If view in 1024 x768, to me the noise issue ( at ISO 400 & 800) are not much of a issue.
    Seems like you're very happy with your FZ50 then. But even at 1024x768, I was not happy with the noise at 800, 400... acceptable if properly exposed, but if any correction was needed then no room for it. And no room for cropping!

    I was at a wedding 2 days ago... the main photog spent 50% of the night holding his camera up high with 1 hand and clicking away with flash. Without LV, without even reviewing... he was just snapping away with his 35L + big huge body and flash, couldn't ID. And that was all he brought too, 1 body 1 lens. And he hardly even shot anything else besides table group shots and the 'ceremony'. No interest in the other on-going events? =/

    Perhaps thats why you won't need stairs? Haha. You could try a long monopod + angle finder. and turn it downwards... of course, you have reason to give in to BBB for the big long lens.. is that why you stick to FZ50?
    Looking for Canon 100mm F2 USM :)

  19. #39
    Senior Member Anson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ansonchew.com
    Posts
    8,209

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by ombre View Post
    Seems like you're very happy with your FZ50 then. But even at 1024x768, I was not happy with the noise at 800, 400... acceptable if properly exposed, but if any correction was needed then no room for it. And no room for cropping!

    I was at a wedding 2 days ago... the main photog spent 50% of the night holding his camera up high with 1 hand and clicking away with flash. Without LV, without even reviewing... he was just snapping away with his 35L + big huge body and flash, couldn't ID. And that was all he brought too, 1 body 1 lens. And he hardly even shot anything else besides table group shots and the 'ceremony'. No interest in the other on-going events? =/

    Perhaps thats why you won't need stairs? Haha. You could try a long monopod + angle finder. and turn it downwards... of course, you have reason to give in to BBB for the big long lens.. is that why you stick to FZ50?

    I normally don't crop my photo coz I can get 100% view from the EVF during image composition. But I don't think I would have have problem with cropping as the biggest size on a FZ50 is more than 12 times of the 1024 x 768 resolution.

    Sound like the wedding photographer that night have very good "功夫"... if he is shooting at only 35mm where there is a lot of guest per tables and the space are very cramp...

    Unfortunately I don't own a car, so carrying a small ladder/stairs with me around on an event shooting is a bit inconvenient for me. Your monopod method I have not try before, but it seem I also need shutter release cable & I also have no way of zooming (since 1 hand is holding the monopod & the other the shutter release cable)....

    I am using the Canon 18-200mm IS lens (range: 28.8 ~ 320mm) as my "walkabout" kit, so far it have serve it purpose but I still like the Leica lens (range: 35~420mm) on my FZ50 better...

  20. #40

    Default Re: Why my DLSR camera image taken is not as good compare to a digital Camera

    Quote Originally Posted by Anson View Post
    I normally don't crop my photo coz I can get 100% view from the EVF during image composition. But I don't think I would have have problem with cropping as the biggest size on a FZ50 is more than 12 times of the 1024 x 768 resolution.

    Sound like the wedding photographer that night have very good "功夫"... if he is shooting at only 35mm where there is a lot of guest per tables and the space are very cramp...

    Unfortunately I don't own a car, so carrying a small ladder/stairs with me around on an event shooting is a bit inconvenient for me. Your monopod method I have not try before, but it seem I also need shutter release cable & I also have no way of zooming (since 1 hand is holding the monopod & the other the shutter release cable)....

    I am using the Canon 18-200mm IS lens (range: 28.8 ~ 320mm) as my "walkabout" kit, so far it have serve it purpose but I still like the Leica lens (range: 35~420mm) on my FZ50 better...
    No wonder... I dare say the FZ50 output beats the 18-200. The lens on FZ50 should win it hands down, even though the sensor on 450D is better, theres nothing to resolve. Even some expensive lens, I once used a 20mm Sigma F1.8, I didn't dare crop beyond 33%. Consider a better lens and maybe you'll stop bringing the FZ50 out. =)

    Hm I think its best to gain a vantage point at events, maybe go to the 2nd floor with a 70-200 F2.8 or something. Are you a professional/freelance event shooter or some sort? You sound like one.
    Looking for Canon 100mm F2 USM :)

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •