FZ 1 users

[doug3fflux]

hi to all

have been using my FZ1 for some time and it certainly has good mileage...just sometimes a little too lazy to post. really busy nowadays..

what I would like to ask to other FZ1 users or those who observe this:
when I use 2.8 constant, it provides me sharp and well-saturated images, coupled with the Lecia DC lens. it is at f2.8 that most of my keepers are produced.

when i stop up to, say, f/8, or f/4, instead of my usual f/2.8, the images are less colour saturated and more dull. although I seldom use higher f numbers on my fz1, i have to in certain situations like in bright noon day sun and 1/1000 is not fast enough.

however, i read from websites that stopping down( eg from f/5.6 to f/2) reduces image quality from edge to edge across horizon. so is that true only for Single Reflex Cameras and lenses, and they dont apply to DSC?

is that why this is the reverse for my DSC?

Regards
Douglas

 

[eow]

hi to all

have been using my FZ1 for some time and it certainly has good mileage...just sometimes a little too lazy to post. really busy nowadays..

what I would like to ask to other FZ1 users or those who observe this:
when I use 2.8 constant, it provides me sharp and well-saturated images, coupled with the Lecia DC lens. it is at f2.8 that most of my keepers are produced.

when i stop up to, say, f/8, or f/4, instead of my usual f/2.8, the images are less colour saturated and more dull. although I seldom use higher f numbers on my fz1, i have to in certain situations like in bright noon day sun and 1/1000 is not fast enough.

however, i read from websites that stopping down( eg from f/5.6 to f/2) reduces image quality from edge to edge across horizon. so is that true only for Single Reflex Cameras and lenses, and they dont apply to DSC?

is that why this is the reverse for my DSC?

Regards
Douglas

Hi Douglas,
by using smaller aperture..less light is coming thru
hence i conclude u been trying to take photos for the past few weeks but was dismayed to found that the camera did not performance up to standard...
fret not
The main culpirit..the weather had been quite dull for the past month
try using f5.6 or more at outdoor during sunny day

Believe it or not..this is all taken from a 2 meg Fz1
f4.6

f4

f5.6

f8

 

[doug3fflux]

dear Eow,
haha. you tah pai one! ur the guru of all the FZ1 queries!!!! :bsmilie:

okay for this instance I will give myself the benefit of the doubt that the weather has been rather dull...

however I do recall that there are several instances before this month..i dont shoot wide open..meaning I shoot at f/5.6 on a good sunny day..but pics turn out not as crisp and saturated as shooting at f/2.8....so how?

ill post two similar pictures using 2 different f numbers next time...


Douglas

 

[eow]

All the fz1 gurus already migrate to a 'better' cameras liao
i'm very poor one only get to toy around with fz1:sweat:

 

[doug3fflux]

hmm. no money? sama sama sama mama here.

you steady job income right? treat yourself to something new man! cheat time!
maybe can get to know u better in future. something about using the same old FZ1 just strikes soo much common ground, I feel.

oops. am I being gay.


Douglas

 

[unseen]

hmmmm LOL just a guess.. at F5.6 was the shutter like 1/40?
it's possible.. that' most prob mean u got handshake prob...

 

[eow]

hmm. no money? sama sama sama mama here.

you steady job income right? treat yourself to something new man! cheat time!
maybe can get to know u better in future. something about using the same old FZ1 just strikes soo much common ground, I feel.

oops. am I being gay.


Douglas

yes steady income but under-paid :bsmilie:
dun worry bro we can joined one of those outing one of these day

 

[doug3fflux]

hmmmm LOL just a guess.. at F5.6 was the shutter like 1/40?
it's possible.. that' most prob mean u got handshake prob...

nope nope. BRIGHT overhead noonday sun leh. that means at f/5.6 its still maintaining at 1/200 or faster..and shooting at iso50 on the fz1..
so is it really true that for DSC, if you stop up from f/2.8 to f/6 or more, the quality won't increase, but rather, DECREASE?
I often read many net articles about comparing a fast lens like 100/f1.8 as compared to a 100/f6 or simliar comparisons...and even though pros will want to get the faster lens to cater to their needs, they must compensate with the drop in image quality from edge to edge...because, in this eg, ( lets say that the lenses are of identical quality and brand etc...) f/1.8 will provide good bokeh but image quality is only excellent around centre..whereas compared to the f/6 lens, the f/6 lens will require maybe tripod, but the image quality is better and much more uniform from edge to edge..technically, I think its called curvilinear distortion or can use MSR chart..oops i cant remember the correct abbreviation..

must do more research....any CSers can enlighten me on this topic?


Douglas

 

[obewan]

I'm always amazed by what eow did with his FZ1, that I could never do with my previous FZ10 which is supposed to be a better camera. Especially, the sharpness.
I think is the user problem. :bsmilie:

The above pictures are very sharp and nice. :thumbsup:

 

[eow]

I'm always amazed by what eow did with his FZ1, that I could never do with my previous FZ10 which is supposed to be a better camera. Especially, the sharpness.
I think is the user problem. :bsmilie:

The above pictures are very sharp and nice. :thumbsup:

Thanks obewan
i'm not that good...it the camera that is good...had used a95,nikon 5400/5700 and olympus c-5050z to retake the whole scene again...but none came close to the fz1 in term of sharpness and resolution..it could be extremely good weather on that day

fyi..i done a bit of touch up thru picsa2..that why the pics look great :bsmilie:

One Canon cser whom i met up ever told me that my chinatown pics series could be pass off as a pic taken by a canon dslr with L lens..
T-T(move to tears liao)

 

[obewan]

Thanks obewan
i'm not that good...it the camera that is good...had used a95,nikon 5400/5700 and olympus c-5050z to retake the whole scene again...but none came close to the fz1 in term of sharpness and resolution..it could be extremely good weather on that day

fyi..i done a bit of touch up thru picsa2..that why the pics look great :bsmilie:

One Canon cser whom i met up ever told me that my chinatown pics series could be pass off as a pic taken by a canon dslr with L lens..
T-T(move to tears liao)

You are too modest. Actually, I won't mind picture that does some post process and touch up. Some people will call this cheating. But in my opinion it is not. As
long as the final product is good who cares. Just that if you shoot and the picture come
out right the first time, u will have less work to do.
Oops. A bit OT here :bsmilie:

 

[rhair78]

Hi Doug, a main reason for colors coming out dull, most of the time is due to incorrect white balance.

The edge to edge sharpness is due to the depth of field and explained by Shene to be an optical circle of confusion. Read a bit here. hehehehe.. although I dun really understand fully the technicalities.

Extracted from http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/User-Guide/950/depth-of-field.html

Suppose the lens focuses on the yellow dot as shown in the figure below. This subject generates a yellow dot on the image plane. Once focused, all subjects that have the same subject-lens distance as that of the yellow dot will appear sharp. Now, consider a white dot that is behind the yellow dot (i.e., with larger subject-lens distance). Since it is out of focus, it will not produce a sharp white dot image. Instead, its image is formed somewhere in front of the image plane. On the image plane, the image of this white dot is a circle as shown below. This circle is usually referred to as a circle of confusion. As the subject-lens distance increases, the size of this circle increases. The same holds true for a subject in front of the yellow dot (e.g., the green dot in the following figure). Since these circles of confusion are actually out of focus images of subjects, if we can reduce the size of circle of confusion, we can increase the sharpness of the resulting image. But, how?

It turns out to be very simple. Since circles of confusion are formed by light rays passing through the lens tube, the size of a circle of confusion is proportional to the amount of light that can pass through the lens tube. This means smaller (resp., larger) circles of confusion will be formed if less (resp., more) light can pass through. Restricting how much light can pass through the lens is the function of the diaphragm in the lens tube that sets the aperture values. Therefore, a smaller aperture means a smaller diaphragm opening, which, in turn, means allowing less light to strike the film/CCD plane. Thus, we have smaller circles of confusion and, as a result, a sharper image!

 

[eow]

You are too modest. Actually, I won't mind picture that does some post process and touch up. Some people will call this cheating. But in my opinion it is not. As
long as the final product is good who cares. Just that if you shoot and the picture come
out right the first time, u will have less work to do.
Oops. A bit OT here :bsmilie:

The Real Guru (Ricky) finally show up liao:cheergal:
yes :bsmilie: we had ot from douglas original thread
paiseh paiseh :sweat:

 

[Hong Jia]

Hi Doug, a main reason for colors coming out dull, most of the time is due to incorrect white balance.

The edge to edge sharpness is due to the depth of field and explained by Shene to be an optical circle of confusion. Read a bit here. hehehehe.. although I dun really understand fully the technicalities.

Extracted from http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/User-Guide/950/depth-of-field.html

Suppose the lens focuses on the yellow dot as shown in the figure below. This subject generates a yellow dot on the image plane. Once focused, all subjects that have the same subject-lens distance as that of the yellow dot will appear sharp. Now, consider a white dot that is behind the yellow dot (i.e., with larger subject-lens distance). Since it is out of focus, it will not produce a sharp white dot image. Instead, its image is formed somewhere in front of the image plane. On the image plane, the image of this white dot is a circle as shown below. This circle is usually referred to as a circle of confusion. As the subject-lens distance increases, the size of this circle increases. The same holds true for a subject in front of the yellow dot (e.g., the green dot in the following figure). Since these circles of confusion are actually out of focus images of subjects, if we can reduce the size of circle of confusion, we can increase the sharpness of the resulting image. But, how?

It turns out to be very simple. Since circles of confusion are formed by light rays passing through the lens tube, the size of a circle of confusion is proportional to the amount of light that can pass through the lens tube. This means smaller (resp., larger) circles of confusion will be formed if less (resp., more) light can pass through. Restricting how much light can pass through the lens is the function of the diaphragm in the lens tube that sets the aperture values. Therefore, a smaller aperture means a smaller diaphragm opening, which, in turn, means allowing less light to strike the film/CCD plane. Thus, we have smaller circles of confusion and, as a result, a sharper image!

The master have spoken...

Keke... :blah:

 

[rhair78]

Har???? You all win liao.. T_T

I am just a future Panasonic FX-9 user....
Dun like that leh...

 

[eow]

Har???? You all win liao.. T_T

I am just a future Panasonic FX-9 user....
Dun like that leh...

Ricky get the lx1....
it offer more versatilty for Guru level (you)

 

[rhair78]

Ricky get the lx1....
it offer more versatilty for Guru level (you)

I heard of that model too.. first to use the 16:9 aspect.
Larger CCD, and 8MP.. wah.. buy buy buy!

But I was considering a "super" compact.. aha ha ha ..

Saw the dimensions and the LX1 is not that compact.. ke ke ke ke
Anyways hor.. I am not GURU.. more like KUKU..


Sorry OT OT OT OT!!!

 

[eow]

I heard of that model too.. first to use the 16:9 aspect.
Larger CCD, and 8MP.. wah.. buy buy buy!

But I was considering a "super" compact.. aha ha ha ..

Saw the dimensions and the LX1 is not that compact.. ke ke ke ke
Anyways hor.. I am not GURU.. more like KUKU..


Sorry OT OT OT OT!!!

Dun worry the spec seem to show the lx to be larger than the fx
but once u touch and play with it...u will see how beautiful that camera is :bsmilie:
If only the price is reasonable...

..douglas...very very sorry keep crashing and ot in yr thread again:sweat:

 

[doug3fflux]

haha. np.

in response to what rhair said...
thanks alot for looking up the theory of the topic.. according to that theorethical explanation, ( last line in the long para) using smaller aperture will result in sharper image....because of lesser circles of confusion........yes?

then how come i stop up to f/6, images are still dull? according to that explanation, shouldnt stopping down to f/6 make sharper images?
the relationship between the two is really confusing!!
:cry:


oh and btw the Wb isnt off. yup.


Douglas

 

[rhair78]

haha. np.

in response to what rhair said...
thanks alot for looking up the theory of the topic.. according to that theorethical explanation, ( last line in the long para) using smaller aperture will result in sharper image....because of lesser circles of confusion........yes?

then how come i stop up to f/6, images are still dull? according to that explanation, shouldnt stopping down to f/6 make sharper images?
the relationship between the two is really confusing!!
:cry:


oh and btw the Wb isnt off. yup.


Douglas

Hmm.. color contrast, saturation, and sharpness are all different things. Not too sure now what you mean by dull..... perhaps you could show samples of wat you deem as dull?