Panasonic DMC-FZ30 Announced

July 20, 2005 | Mark Goldstein | Digital Compact Cameras | 361 Comments |

Panasonic DMC-FZ30Panasonic DMC-FZ30 is announced today. The Panasonic DMC-FZ30 is an 8 megapixel compact digital camera with a 12x Leica optical zoom lens equivalent to 35-420mm, optical image stabilizer, addition of a manual zoom ring and rotating LCD screen with 235,000 pixels. The DMC-FZ30 replaces the older and very popular Panasonic DMC-FZ20 model. The Panasonic DMC-FZ30 will be available in the UK in September in black priced £549.99.

Panasonic Europe Press Release

Panasonic is proud to introduce the 8-Megapixel, 12x optical zoom¡¡(equivalent to 35mm to 420mm on a 35mm film camera) LUMIX DMC-FZ30 inheriting MEGA O.I.S. (Optical Image Stabilizer) as an up-and-comer to its creative super zoom FZ double-digit line. The DMC-FZ20, released in 2004, has been internationally acclaimed for meeting the needs of the market by realizing the ideals of users.

The 12x optical zoom LEICA DC VARIO-ELMARIT Lens, which has been handed down since the first launch of the FZ series, underwent further development to provide even more superb picture rendering. The other key feature, the Optical Image Stabilizer, MEGA O.I.S. is deservedly continued as Panasonic advanced the theory that it should be standard in all digital still cameras. The newly incorporated Extra Optical Zoom extends the zoom ratio by using the center part of the high resolution CCD, to achieve 15.3x for 5-Megapixel and 19.1x for 3-Megapixel images with minimal deterioration.

Along with CCD size and total effective pixels, the FZ30 also has enhanced its excellence in other features: addition of a manual zoom ring to the manual focus ring, which was very popular in the FZ20; easy-to-see free-angle LCD; and adjustable dials for the aperture and shutter speed controls. Both the LCD and EVF have had their resolution increased by about 180%, offering a sharp, clear view. All these complete the FZ30 in the resulting picture quality and operationality.

The newly developed 8-Megapixel CCD is compatible with the 9-pixel mixed readout¡¡method, so now moving pictures with dramatically increased brightness can be recorded at 30 fps in VGA size, previously only recordable in QVGA. This technology is used for the LCD monitoring to provide a bright and clear view so subjects can be seen easily, even in low-light situations.

Taking advantage of these outstanding features, the LX1 incorporates the high speed, high quality image processing LSI the Venus Engine II. It boasts quick responsiveness that realizes the best-in-class level release time lag of 0.01 sec. Adopting a non-collapsible lens has substantially reduced startup time from about 5 sec to 0.97 sec. AF time in 1-point high-speed AF has been dramatically reduced to a quarter the level* of that of the previous DMC-FZ20.

Furthermore, by adopting a newly developed lithium-ion battery with a capacity increased from 680 mAh to 730 mAh, the FZ30 realizes the shooting of approx. 280** images for one charging.
The LUMIX DMC-FZ30 has the flawless basic specifications to fuel the spark of imagination in high-end users and is destined to join the Panasonic LUMIX high-end model lineup.
* Panasonic in-house comparison with DMC-FZ20 at the tele-end.
** Based on the CIPA standard.

1. 8-Megapixel CCD and 12x optical zoom LEICA DC Lens. The DMC-FZ30 includes an 8-Megapixel high resolution CCD and a newly developed LEICA DC VARIO-ELMARIT 12x optical zoom (equivalent to 35 mm to 420 mm with a 35 mm film camera) lens. The combination of 3 aspherical lenses and 1 ED lens generates high optical performance while preserving the compactness of the unit. The Extra Optical Zoom, made possible by using the center part of 8-megapixel high resolution CCD, further extends the powerful 12x optical zoom when less than 8-Megapixel resolution is selected. The zoom ratio can be extended to 15.3x for 5-Megapixel and 19.1x for the 3-Megapixel image recording. Zoom range can be extended in total to a remarkable 76.5x (equivalent to 35 mm to 2677 mm on a 35mm film camera) when combined with 4x digital zoom, even if the shooting range is as short as 2m.

2. Optical image stabilizing system MEGA O.I.S. and High-speed High quality Image Processing LSI Venus Engine II
What we strongly believe indispensable for every camera, especially for a high-magnification models susceptible to vibration, is MEGA O.I.S.(Optical Image Stabilizer). MEGA O.I.S. has been incorporated in all FZ series since its first launch and is now with all LUMIX lineup released in this year. Every slight hand-shake movement is detected accurately with the sampling frequency at 4,000 times per second and will be compensated to render clear, sharp images. This premier feature is subsumed with 2 selectable modes. In ¡°Mode 1¡±, the O.I.S. lens continuously compensates vibration, and ¡°Mode 2¡±,¡¡the O.I.S. lens suppresses hand-shake only at the moment the shutter button is pressed. In this mode, the lens can move in all directions at the moment to maximize its effect and higher-resolution image can be taken by capturing the image as close as to the center of the lens. Consequently, even without using a tripod, it allows you to reduce the shutter speed more than three steps compared to the conventional cameras without O.I.S., while assuring clear images. Its outstanding effects will be appreciated in all situations easily spoiled by hand-shake, especially telephoto, low light, and macro shots.

For the brain of the camera, high-speed high-quality image processing LSI Venus Engine II is incorporated to render clear images in detail, compensating the color aberration at the edges subject to occur especially in the telephoto shots. It also compensates for vignetting and generates bright image in every detail. This engine boast its high performance resulting in the best-in-class level release time lag of 0.01* sec helping to realize stress-free operation.
* Not including the time for AF.

3. Ring-operated manual focus and manual zoom Two exclusive rings on the lens barrel of the FZ30 provide manual control of zooming and focusing, allowing quick and fine control that cannot be achieved with button operation. This feature will be highly valued by high-end users not only for its precise controllability but also for the feeling of manual operation. MF, AF and Macro AF can be selectable with a switch located by the lens. Using MF you can zoom in the screen on the subject to focus easily. The magnified area is freely movable to realize unconfined framing, which is especially necessary when the camera is on a tripod.

Shutter speed and aperture controls are very easy and quick to adjust with the dials for them. The shutter speed can be selectable from 1/2000 to 60 sec, and the aperture from F2.8 to F11, to meet wider ranging shooting conditions. The AE lock button, a new control, is convenient for taking multiple shots at the same exposure setting regardless of the color of a subject.
¡¡
Panasonic DMC-FZ304. High resolution free style LCD and EVF
The free-angle LCD is angle-adjustable to support comfortable shooting even in high- and low-angle shooting positions. With resolution increased by 180% compared to the FZ20, both LCD and EVF boast 235 k pixels, which realizes more comfortable operation when checking points such as the focus of details. Also, real time histogram and composition guidelines are displayed over the image on both the LCD or EVF. The high-resolution LCD and EVF allow the display of images even in tiny thumbnail size. Playback of 9, 16 or 25 is possible on a multi-split screen in addition to the normal 1 frame playback. This helps you to search for the image you want out of a number stored on the SD Memory Card, even the images are in bulk. The swivel LCD can be stored with the LCD surface on the inside to prevent scratching and damage.

5. Faster AF and enhanced options
The AF method can be selected according to the shooting situation: 9-point, 3-point high speed, 1-point high speed, 1-point normal speed and Spot. In the newly incorporated 1-point high speed AF,¡¡AF time has been dramatically reduced to a quarter the level* of the previous DMC-FZ20 thanks to the increased sampling frequency. Although screen-freeze in high-speed AF is now minimized, to take pictures of fast-moving subjects you can select 1 point normal-speed AF, which does not have any screen-freeze while focusing.

While using 1-point AF, you can specify a point out of 9 AF points. You can thereby enjoy free framing shooting even with the subject not at the center.
*Panasonic in-house comparison with DMC-FZ20 at the tele-end.


6. Quick and smart operationality
The startup time of the FZ30 has been substantially reduced to only 0.97 sec compared to the previous FZ20, which took about 5 sec.

Thanks to the multi-task image processing of the Venus Engine II, response has also been accelerated, resulting in the best-in-class level release time lag of approx. 0.01 sec for achieving more stress-free operation.

Consecutive shooting performance is also exceptional, providing shooting at 3 frames/second at full resolution. The Unlimited Consecutive Shooting function** allows limit-free consecutive shooting up to the capacity of the SD memory card. Burst shooting mode can be¡¡instantly activated with the independent button.
* Not including the time for AF.
** The speed of the consecutive shooting varies depending on the SD memory card.


7. Higher quality moving images
A newly incorporated CCD that adopts a 9-pixel mixed readout method makes it possible to record beautiful full-size movies at 30 fps in VGA size, only possible in QVGA size with the FZ20. The new CCD provides much more luminous signals, enhancing the picture quality not only in size but also in the brightness level, while also suppressing moir¨¦s.

Full advantage is taken of this by increasing the brightness of both the LCD and EVF when monitoring the taking of still images. This is especially effective in providing a clear view in low-light situations.

8. Easier and more comfortable operationality
By adopting a newly developed lithium-ion battery with a capacity increased from 680 mAh to 730 mAh, the FZ30 realizes the shooting of approx. 280* images for one charging.

In addition to the conventional ProgramAE, FZ30 is equipped with Auto mode, which caters for the entry level users. A total of 14 scene modes including 5 new modes Baby, Soft Skin, Food, Starry Sky and Candle, helps you to take beautiful images easily in wide-ranging situations. Still it is easy to select the one out of them thanks to the newly installed Scene Mode Help Screen that shows the description of each mode and the knack for shooting of each scene and helps users to take beautiful image easily.

Auto angle detection records whether an image was taken horizontally or vertically. This ensures that when playing back on the LCD monitor and displaying images on your TV or on a PC using included software, vertical images are automatically displayed vertically and horizontal images are automatically displayed horizontally. You can still view images in its full size by displaying conventionally.

The external design has also been reworked to move the doors of the battery and SD Memory Card so you can change either of them even when the camera is on a tripod.
*Based on the CIPA standard.

9. Expandability ¨C the proof of a true high end camera
The conversion lens newly developed for the FZ30 is dramatically reduced in both size and weight while enhancing its capability realizing 1.7x (714mm on a 35mm film camera) for a tele conversion lens and 0.7x (24.5mm on a 35mm film camera) for a wide conversion lens. Equipped with a hot shoe, an external flash can be fitted when necessary. The recordable image format is either RAW, TIFF, or JPEG (Fine or Standard). Expandability is the proof of a real high end camera, which is what the DMC-FZ30 also boasts.



Tracker Pixel for Entry

Your Comments

361 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#201 NightHawk

To me the FZ30 is not great as even PCmag says it has noise as its lowest setting - 80 ISO that is terrible to me!!!! They ruined the camera by using an poor eye!!!

7:27 am - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#202 suresh

NightHawk- Immensily thankfull for your reply.
your words
"I love the images produced by my sony 5mp - just tried of the slows." truly hits at the core issue.

by saying "tired of slows" are you implying that the camera is weak in action/sports photography ? Personaly I do not intend to use it for sports photography. Is it because of shutterLag ? . if so, Cannon seems to be slower than Sony (from reviews).

As you pointed out KM 200 might be good choise because of its excellent IS (as shown in this very site). But I am apprehencive about its consistant performance . we do not have Konica-Minolta service center here.

kindly provide your views

It would have been nice if somebody makes a camera with KM's IS + Sony's HAD CCD+LCD+ Canon's Features+ 12X Zoom + either lieca or Carl Ziess lens

Thanks
Regards
suresh

9:47 am - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#203 Simon S

Nighthawk - s9000 poor manual focus (compared to FZ30), weaker viewfinder (120K pixels compared to 230K pixels on the FZ30). The focus looks softer (almost blurred) and the colours not as sharp on the s9000 (see dpreview.com - side by side comparison).

Did your fiend get any shots of the grizzly - what camera did she use?
and approx. where in Canada?

So I reckon the only problem with the FZ30 is the noise - a big one for sure - so only one problem to fix - few more with the s9000. I do agree it aint right to pay that much for a camera and fix the images with software.

BTW, I would be no good as an assistant - I am sure I could run faster than you (smiles)

1:29 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#204 packley

I have watched comments from others about what to buy, what not to buy, hopes for noise correction, anticipation of the new full frame sensor, etc, etc.

All during this time, I have owned a FZ30 for two months, bought a spare battery, packed it with a 2GB 133x card, and have used it photographing a Santa Monica wedding, the Getty Museum, my sports car racing events and instructing events and have equalled my digital SLR friends in daylight photography and at night the Canon flash does wonders.

I have resigned myself to take action, buy the best now, which for my uses, includes an all-in-one solution, 30pfps video, big zoom, and quick processing. Some may prefer to continue to beat the noise drum,
wait for the FZ40 (a good option) but this camera performs every requirement for me. Great battery life, accurate focus, quick shoot capability, good lens

I can always find fault with the camera from a truly professional noise issue, when compared to $3,500 digital SLR's (I may buy the new full frame Canon EOS 5D for that feature in a year when prices come down).

I see it all the time with the horsepower folks: my car has more horsepower than yours! but I say: can you drive it faster on the track, where performance becomes a driver issue, or in this case a photographer issue.

Let's face it, these cameras are all a compromise and being such, they give something away to the specialized cameras.

I thoroughly researched and learned from the posts here, I saw the comparisons of Phil Askey of the 9000 and the FZ30 and neither was conclusively better than the other, except that the FZ30 may have some user-friendly advantages, OIS, but trade-offs exist between these two leaders. I had the Pro IS-90 (retired) and the S1-IS and am profoundly pleased with the FZ30.

I just did it. Have it, and enjoy using it. In 4 years, I will be forced in buying a new camera, as they will have improved significantly by then.

But...computers have reached that technical plateau, 1GB memory, 3Ghz processing speed, has been with me for 3 years now, and holding. There is always something better, but do we need it? Except for bragging rights. So I think the technology, lens, software integration and now full frame sensors will all catch up with themselves so we may have a package that is acceptable to the mainstream point and shooters, and also us who want professional quality "do everything" near-professional grade cameras.

The camera marketing gurus will not let this happen, there will always be a performance distinction.

So I am waiting for that perfect, yet-to-be made camera, but in the meantime, I will chase action shots, grizzlies, weddings for friends, and growing up kids with my trusty Fz30 and enjoy every shot I have captured with a slightly flawed to those techinical snobs, but highly versatile and capable camera.

Happy hunting!

2:46 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#205 NightHawk

Packley -- I understand your point but is the noise a problem? Does the better lens on the FZ30 make up for the better sensor on the s9000? I want and need better as neither camera is as good as a film 35mm in image quality. I want sharp useable pixels up to 23-25 mp - a 8 9 mp camera. I do not want the hipe of a 8 or 9 mp camera but the reallity that I would be better off with a good 5mp. There are eyes (sensors) that the FZ30 could have used and it would have been a great camera. The eye of a 8 mp camera should not have problems at 5mp as is the facts with the FZ30. I made my %4 year choice before the Sony F 707 and then last Feb my second 4 year choice -- the KM A200 it was stolen so know I need to replace my backup the Sony F707. I want a upgrade not to settle for different problems. The FZ30 has better futures lens, focus, etc. BUT the eye sucks!!!!!!!!! That is the facts.
Live with it but do not hide it!!!

3:44 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#206 NightHawk

Simon S and all others!! You cannot convince me to settle for the FZ30 so drop it. The only thing now is if the s9000 version 2 will make my cut. The s9000 version 1 seems to missed my cut. I want 8-9 mp useable pixels - noise free fresh out of the camera sharp and great color (as good as 35mm with pro slide film). Do your hear me now?

She is a good photographer but did not get a framable pic (just an eye full - smiles). One of those moments - you say afterword - I wish!!!

Maybe we could team up and hunt Grizzly with a camera.

4:07 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#207 NightHawk

Suresh -- You are more than welcome! I cannot provide you reviews on cameras that I have not used. The sony slow was in reference to the Sony F707 ( a camera I have had for years and shot over 10,000 pics with - love the image quality) and the faster autofocus of the s9000 over the Sony R1.

I would relie on the imaging-resource article - to me what they said was the continuous mode did not have enough buffer. I use there reviews to buy all my digcams.

I did have a KM A200 and loved it but was to small for my medium sized hands. It produces excellent pics and the brightness and contrast is a fixable issue. I shot over a thousand images with it. I have not kept up with its long term perfomance so am no help for you there. Wish you had a Comp-USA and bought the camera with a free replacement guarantee -- if had a problem they would replace it on the spot.

thanks again

4:27 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#208 suresh

NightHawk - That was a quick responce. You might have guessed- that I am from India. Konica does not have a sales outlet here (to my knowledge), While Sony, Olympus, Nikon and Fuji are awailable. Dimage Z6 is awailable in Bombay but its looks like a coconut shell rather than a camera. After your comments I am presently leaning towards Sony DSC H1. I am also looking at Dimage Maximum 5D (If awailable) which seems to be good choise in terms of picture quality even at higher ISO and lower price.

a general problem is that one outgrows the capabilities of an eqipment very fast.

I shall come back latter.

Thanks
regards
suresh

5:05 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#209 NightHawk

Suresh

The sony does sound like a great 5mp camera better far better than the F707.

But it is not a 8 mp which I am waiting for a all in one digcam that produces images as good as highest useable quality scans of 35mm with pro slide film - some debate there but around 25mb).

I shall repeat Suresh's words
"a general problem is that one outgrows the capabilities of an eqipment very fast."

Not all do! I have! Others settle and love the one they are with - not all that bad!!! But to those like PCmag - do not tell me to do the same or hide or white wash the facts.

6:50 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#210 GARY POGODA

An 8 megapixel, 1/1.8" CCD is no better than a 5 megapixel, 1/2.5"
CCD when it comes to noise (with the exception of Fuji, which uses
a different technology). If you want low noise at 8 megapixels, you
have the following choices:

(1) go with a larger CCD, which currently means a DSLR or Sony R1
(2) go with the Fuji S9000, and live with the manual focus problem
(3) wait

If you wait, the greatest hope is that Fuji will fix their S9000 problems,
since such a fix is well within the state of current technology. Another
less feasible possibility is that a 1/1.8" CIS (CMOS Image Sensor) will
be developed, which will provide even higher noise immunity than the
Fuji CCD technology.

(No animals were harmed in the posting of this comment.)

8:19 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#211 NightHawk

Gary thanks but you are missing the point. The 8mp sensors are not better as they are old technology (one shelf) and many were developed for 5mp. Fuji and Sony did change that but both fail to develop a truely all in one camera to take advantage of the improved sensor. I hope a camera company jumps on that and finishes the job Sony, Fuji, and Panasonic fail at.
The manual focus is not a problem for me it is the reported lack of resolutioin -- seems the lens or sensor is a problem or the software waiting to see from imaging resources. Would love to see a Minota IS with a sony or ZF30 lens and and combination of the best features of s9000 and ZF30. So I hope a company can put that together and put the ZF30 and s9000 in the trash.
I have to wait anyway to come up with the money - I already spent my allowance on the KM A200 that was stolen. It is a great camerea just I know we can do better. We have the technology now just the parts are on different brands of cameras and not in one place.

9:36 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#212 GARY POGODA

I would not be so quick to put down old technology. There was really
nothing wrong with the 5 megapixel 1/1.8" CCDs of two years ago. It
has only been since they tried to cram 8 megapixels into 1/1.8" CCDs,
or 5 megapixels into 1/2.5" CCDs, that image noise has become such
a big problem.

But your point about new technology is right on the mark. Yes, we do
have the technology today to produce an all-in-one camera having the
image quality of a DSLR. The challenge comes in trying to produce it
at a marketable price point. By far, CMOS technology currently offers
the greatest hope of meeting that challenge.

11:31 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#213 NightHawk

I did not put down old technology. I put down the stupid use of it. Putting a 5mp sensor in a 8mp camera is plan stupid. How many times do they have to do it before they learn it does not work? Then they say 5mp is better da with a overloaded (5mp)sensor yes it is better to stick with 5mp.

You go to the race with a five workhorses and I will take a 5 racehorses and see who does better.

11:57 pm - Wednesday, November 16, 2005

#214 NightHawk

Gary - it is no longer about the price point - They can make an all in one comparable DSLR with one lens allready. But there are different markets and the the manufactures are scared about a switch to all in ones. They do not want to make a all in one camera that will compete with the DSLRs. Cannon and Nikon have to much money in lens that they need to sell. The silly thing is that DSLR can improve also and will so why worry. All in one should never surpass a Advanced DSLR as the all in one has stricter size and weight and price limits. So do not white wash the facts.

12:19 am - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#215 suresh

Nighthawk- True, You may be right for experience is the best teacher. I am only a beginer. what i meant was as i learn and gets a shot which i feel should be printed on 8x10 or above, i would have regretted not having a DSLR camera.

As you mentioned some of the reviews seems to be highly baised.


Thanks
regards
suresh

7:19 am - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#216 NightHawk

Suresh -- I have hundred of such slots that I took at full res on a 5mp camera and cannot go to poster size.

My comments were not directed at you but for those that say 5mp is good enough - it is not as good as a 35mm with pro slide film only a pro camera at about 12mp does that and I do not have the $5000 for the body and another $5000 for lens. But if Fuji would have had a good lens I think it would have came close enough for me.

8:46 am - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#217 suresh

NightHawk- from your experience what is maximum size we can get a descent print from sony h1 (5mp) and Km maxxum 5D? at say ISO 200 fro sony and Km ISO 400.

Cost is a big factor. unless one intends to get some returns from the investment I do not find any advantage in it (I am basicaly a business man).

you mentioned fuji. I am just curious. what advantage do you see in fuji? is it the price factor alone ?

fuji cameras are available in India and it is cheap also. while sony DSC-H1 sells for INR 20000/- fuji s5600 is available for as low as INR 15000/- ( one dollar = 45 INR approx).

Selling in India is funy. for ex: canon sells S2 Is at INR 33000/- through their dealers, while the same camera is available for INR 23000/-.these sellers also offer warranty from the company. The words like Waranty/guarantee cannot be relied much here. it is practically only on paper. Better still is to insure it.

thanks
regards
sureh

10:34 am - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#218 NightHawk

Can only talk for the Sony F707 and KM A200. Plus I do not use that high of ISO geneally stay at 100 to maximize usable pixels. But do not see that much change a 200 but kick myself if I use it - the game with me is to maximize usable pixels. Take that back did shoot the sony at 400 for this image and even thou I goofed at exposure and had to brighten it it and it came out good http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/23341273/. There is more noise at 400.

The 5mp Sony produces prints acceptable to deviantart standards (min 100 dpi if ther is no noise or shoftness) approching 18X24 (at 100 dpi) but in but generally falls short to say 9X12 or 11X14 or 12x16 (12X16 at 150 dpi). If you crop in the viewfinder!!!! If you crop much at all afterwords you loose a size!!! You must crop it tight in the viewfinder!!!! So take several versions to get the right crop and therefore get the biggest pic possible. The KM A200 8mp readily produces 18X24 prints if you crop in the viewfinder and do your part. I have uploaded over 400 pics from the Sony F-707 and KM A200 at http://nighthawkpm.deviantart.com/gallery and if you want to see full size files just ask.

The advantage to Fuji is a true wide angle 28mm and a good telo 300mm and a newly designed 9mp eye that has little noise till 1600 IS0. There are problems and I am waiting on the review from imaging resources hopefully soon. I would compare the H1 and s5600 on the same site - you can compare the images side by side. http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

12:37 pm - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#219 suresh

NightHawk- Thanks for the reply. It will take me some time for fully understing what you have written like croping in viewfinder to get optimum performance. i shall get back to this after buying a good camera. I may need your help.

by the way the link is great. That was truely proffessional work out there. Particulary my wife and friends enjoied the lady lion picture very much. that was an excellent shot. the colors are beautifull. personaly I feel the facial expresion is lacking in mood.

I could'nt watch other images sincce something is wrong with the website. I shall watch them latter.

thanks
regards
suresh

5:45 pm - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#220 GARY POGODA

There's currently no all-in-one that can compete with a DSLR in terms
of image quality, the main reason being, to utilize a reasonably priced
and sized, all-in-one lens, a 1/1.8" (or smaller) CCD must be utilized in
conjunction. Marketing considerations and costs aside, it would be no
problem at all to produce a DSLR quality all-in-one by using an APS-C
image sensor (like Sony's DSC-R1, but with a higher range zoom lens,
which would make the R1 even more humongous than it already is).

So, the challenge is to produce a 1/1.8" sensor with approximately the
same noise levels as an APS-C size image sensor. Currently, only Fuji
sensor technology offers anywhere near this capability; however, CMOS
certainly has the potential to offer (or even exceed) that capability.

If you cannot live with 5 megapixel resolution, and you definitely prefer
the all-in-one to the DSLR, then your best bet is to wait for Fuji to work
out its (relatively) minor flaws, or wait for the next generation of CMOS
image sensors.

But I think you already knew that. :)

7:52 pm - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#221 NightHawk

Thanks for the kind comments and taking the time to view my gallery. The lady Lion was taken with old technology a 5mp Sony F-707. ( Yes -(to Gary) I value old technology but understand its limits).
I love the images the Sony F707 produces and when I bought it to my eyes produced better images than the $5000 Nikon Pro DSLR 4mp at that time. Yes, I compared the images and cameras at imaging-resources.com. But sony is slow!!!!

What I mean is when you take a picture take care to frame it in the viewfinder. What you see should be very close to what you want to print - nothing extra to trim off. So zoom in and out and take several shots per scene. Take care to frame the picture while taking the image so you do not have to crop or trim the image later. My advice is shot far tighter than you do normally - and then zoom out some and shoot like you normally do. I regret not taking more close-ups. Have thousands of geneal view that the subject is a dot in the picture. If you trim away pixels your printable size decreases. Say you take a 9x12 image but only want a 4X6 section out of the image -- the largest you will be able to print it is 4x6. But it you shot it like you wanted the 4x6 to appear (the 4x6 in the viewfinder) you could enlage the resulting image to at least 8x12 and maybe to 16x24.

To look at adult images -- artistic nudes you have to join - it is free http://www.deviantart.com/join/ I have over 100 more images that you can view then.

8:10 pm - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#222 NightHawk

Gary your article was very informative -- thanks. I agree with most of what you say and did not know some of it before. I still have lots to learn. But we need to stop comparing apples and oranges -- a all in one camera eye should never be as good as a larger DSLR pro eye.

So lets set a goal to shoot for that is not moving -- say 18X24 images at 150 pixels per inch producing 27.9 Mb. files say a 10 mp camera without noise and a great lens. (To set it as a DSLR is meaningless as that is a moving target years ago - Plus when Sony's F 707 5mp sensor came out it bet most DSLRs at that time in my opion.)

When do you think Fuji
sensor technology or CMOS
can reach the 10mp goal?

8:55 pm - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#223 GARY POGODA

I agree, DSLR is a moving target, but it does not have much further
to go before it reaches its ultimate goal of 35mm film quality.

So even though a full-frame DSLR has better quality than an APS-C
DSLR, the difference would hardly be noticeable except for the most
extreme circumstances (i.e., extremely narrow DOF, extremely long
exposure, extremely high ISO, you get the picture).

Based on previous history, I would 'guess' Fuji will announce their 10
megapixel 1/1.8" CCD S-series model on Thursday, July 27, 2006, at
8 AM local time.

As for a CMOS 1/1.8" image sensor, that timeframe is anyone's guess.

11:11 pm - Thursday, November 17, 2005

#224 suresh

NightHawk- That was very imformative. I think I can learn much by talking to you. By the way I hope I am not boring you. My elder brother was an excellent photographer (an engineer by proffession). He stopped. may be because of the cost. Photography used be one of the costliest hobby. I used to be in very hightech electronics field. I have moved to much better business + software technology. Currently exploring Imaging area also with Java & .Net two of the most powerfull in Imaging.

There is a lot of truth in what Garry has mentioned. Sony understands Electronics/consumer far better. May be it is trying to compensate its weakness in lens technology. one cannot say that it is a failure. Only that its is not having much lineups in the prosumer and DSLR range. I read that Sony and KM is moving towards a tieup for DSLR cameras. Let us hope this brings out some good products. Moreover Sony is facing serious problems due lower sales/profits (international). Hence there will be a natural tendency to bring new products. Christmas and new year may be the just right time. Sony has been lowering their price during each festival seasons. This could also be due to above mentioned reasons, A normal marketting strategy.

I have been checking images from sony/Canon/Olympus/Nikon etc. I have seen that the Compression differs from comany to company
Canon - 3 bits/pixel
Sony - 8 bits/pixel

does this have any affect on the picture quality ? How ?

Gary, pls contribute your views also in this regard.

Thanks
regards
suresh

12:26 am - Friday, November 18, 2005

#225 NightHawk

Gary "I agree, DSLR is a moving target, but it does not have much further
to go before it reaches its ultimate goal of 35mm film quality." 35mm film quality is a moving target also but lots slower -- ultimate ??? No such thing. Next would be medium format.

4:07 am - Friday, November 18, 2005

#226 NightHawk

You are not boring me -- Gary just thinks different than me! We razz each other quite a bit, he definately knows the technical side better than me. I am more creative and open minded at times - smiles.

4:19 am - Friday, November 18, 2005

#227 suresh

NightHawk, Gary - This is best discussions I have seen on the net for digital camera. I learn a lot from your "razz".

Thanks
regards
suresh

7:06 am - Friday, November 18, 2005

#228 nick in japan

For NightHawk.. Just a comment about the F-707. I use the F-505k, that produces GREAT Black and Whites! and my F-707 does images that are really spectacular when printed at poster size. Printers employ all kinds of software that reduce noise and stuff. I was reminded of all this with your comments, thanks, I think I'll go find it, and use it again! I've stayed with the F- series, and use the 828 daily. I hope Sony gets its good ideas together soon, IMHO.
Semper Fi

7:12 am - Friday, November 18, 2005

#229 NightHawk

Nick -- define poster size and do you have examples - I guess I am conservative - but 100 pixel per inch is on the low side when may say 300 is print quality.

8:09 am - Friday, November 18, 2005

#230 nick in japan

The camera shop I deal with here got a huge printer a few years ago and did a few prints that a customer wanted, taken with the F-707, I couldnt believe the quality; the printer was a Canon W6200, the size of the print was, A1, 841mm X 594mm, and it was printed at 150dpi, the manager told me that there was "Trimming" involved. I dont know anything about pictures that size, I'm assuming they are considered "Posters". I DO know that I was blown away by the image quality, color and sharpness, and ,never realized that a 4.9 mp camera could do that good of a job.
I had alot of fun with that camera, a trick I used to do was do a resize from a 3X2 to 4X3 in the camera, the image produced has a neat black border attached, printed nicely...IR was fun too, still do that with the 828, and, if you ever get an 828, a wonderful tool can be had by taking a CF card that has an image from a different camera, insert into the 828 and zoom, crop and resize that alien shot to 8mp! I discovered that function this past summer with a 880mm zoomed shot (Canon 10D and Sigma 170-500, which is really a 168-550 in Canon mount according to Popular Photography's test). I was able to zoom in on the zoomed image and get an awesome image....Sorry, got carried away.... Semper Fi

9:19 am - Friday, November 18, 2005

#231 GARY POGODA

I am not sure where you got those compression numbers from, and
without knowing which compression format and quality level you are
talking about, the numbers are meaningless. JPEG for example, has
several different quality levels which can be selected, each utilizing a
different number of bits/pixel.

The reason JPEG can utilize so few bits/pixel is because it assumes
that an image will have very gradual changes in color, and captures
only those color "differences" between adjacent pixels, which can be
represented with fewer bits than the actual pixel color.

With any "normal" picture, there will always be color changes that do
not fall within this constriction of gradual change, hence the infamous
JPEG artifacts. In general, the more bits/pixel, the fewer the artifacts,
but the larger the resulting file size.

JPEG does not work well on cartoon or text images, because those
images are typically constant areas of color, with larger differences
between adjacent areas. TIFF works much better with such images
because it utilizes a short hand notation for capturing those areas of
constant color, rather than having to capture the color of each pixel in
the constant color area.

All this, of course, is an oversimplification. :)

7:43 pm - Saturday, November 19, 2005

#232 suresh

Gary-I have been checking images from various models, samples downloaded from sites like steve's, dpreview, image-resource etc.
In the process I also downloaded Neat Image for checking the effect of noise reduction. All the images are jpeg and the Exif imformation as shown by Neat Image is given below.

Device maker: Canon
Device model: Canon PowerShot S2 IS
Compression: 5 bits/pixel
Exposure time: 1/1000 sec

Device maker: SONY
Device model: DSC-H1
ISO level: 64
Compression: 8 bits/pixel
Sharpness: Normal
Exposure time: 0.25 sec
White balance: Default

Device maker: KONICA MINOLTA
Device model: MAXXUM 5D
Software: MAXXUM 5D v1.00
ISO level: 400
Sharpness: Normal
Exposure time: 1/400 sec
White balance: Default

Device maker: KONICA MINOLTA
Device model: DiMAGE A200
Software: DiMAGE A200 Ver1.00
ISO level: 50
Compression: 6 bits/pixel
Sharpness: Normal
Exposure time: 1/60 sec
White balance: Default

as you can see the compression differs. I don't think this is because of jpeg standerds. sony file size is slightly lower than others. This could be because of the compression ratio. more over the canon images have a resolution of 180 (size-2592X1944) while others have resolution of 72 and same size. but the physical size differs. canons are smaler images of (14.4 X 10.8) while that of sony are (36 X 27) inches

sony images are more Vibrant than others and displays lower noise. what I am trying to understand is , whether this is because of the image conversion process or only because of the ccd/lense or both.

I am sure the ccd/lense plays a large part, as pointed out by you earlier.

I actualy printed a few images dowloaded from these sites, but all were horrible.I assume these might have been tweeked slightly for the web. Unlike the sellers in America, We the sellers in India will not take back a product if unsatifactory. Hence once I buy a camera, I cannot return it. More over we see a lot of outdated/discontinued models sold by authorised dealers at high price.

Most of you elsewere is more lucky in sense that if you don't like a product you can return it. so it becomes more important to understand a product before paying money.

In India, there are very few people who have explored the digital world. Even today I attended a function where all the photographers were using film cameras, at the same time, I know two persons in our city who have purchased camera body worth 25000 dollars (I believe the brand is leef-made in switserland)

I hope you understood my question.

thanks & regards
suresh

3:34 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#233 Suresh

Gary, NightHawk - again some of the images show n in the review links (Side by side comparison for example), Sony images show higher bluish tint(which I find difficult to change in photoshop) particularly taken in broad day light than canon images, which doesnt seem natural. But the images shown in the nighthawks gallery does not such a problem (sony pictures). So I am forced to wonder whether it is the camera problem or photographers (if at all it is a problem).

thanks & regards
suresh

3:56 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#234 NightHawk

you can get a blueish tint with the Sony F707 at times but for the most part it is fine.You just need to adjust your white balance. Sony went to a new sensor and I know nothing about it.

4:25 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#235 suresh

nightHawk - Thanks. That means it is just a case of getting used to and with experience it could be overcome. May be test shots were taken in auto mode.

I was at the verge of discarding sony from my list.


Thanks & regards
suresh

10:14 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#236 nick in japan

Fringing is the term, Sony had a bigger problem with the F-828, and, trashed the sensor. Funny too, because Sony made all the sensors for the 8mb cameras in RGB design, and kept one for the F-828 with an emerald , 4th color... Disaster!... I have learned to live with mine. Fringing will creep in in high contast situations, liking certain combinations of high contrast more than others. Canon solved the problem, as did Nikon with the CMOS evolution.

10:25 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#237 Suresh

By the way anybody knows what happend to yashica. Once I had a minolta automatic 33mm film camera. the pictures so bad i sold it and baught a yashica(35mm manual). the pictures were simply great. everybody at home loved it. unfortunately somebody stole it during home renovation. i just remembered it. but couldnt get much info from the web. I have a doubt that it merged /changed to kyocera

Any info regarding this ?

thanks & regards
suresh

10:27 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#238 Suresh

nick - I was not refering to fringing, rather the whole image with a bluish tint. pls look at sony images at http://www.dcviews.com/reviews/Sony-H1-Canon-S2/Sony-H1-Canon-S2-review.htm

i think nighthawk's comment explains it. In fact some reviews made a passing reference to it. Only I did not understand the real effect.

But I am curious. You mentioned 4th color. Can you explain it further ?. Are you by any way refering to cmyk format ?

thanks & regards
suresh

3:17 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#239 NightHawk

Gary can explain it better but instead of a sensor that used 3 colors sony had one that used 4 colors to make all other colors.
Like printers used to use 3 colors to make all colors but now may use 6 - 8 colors. HP has a 3 color grey ink cartridge for black and white pics. As black is not a color and water soluable inks have trouble making black.

8:49 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#240 NightHawk

3 primary colors make all colors -- other colors are just mixes of primary colors. Sensors try to emulate primary colors to make all the rest of the colors. Some do it better than others some are bluer others redder etc. Black is tough as it is a prefect mix of all colors.

8:58 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#241 GARY POGODA

Resolution is determined mainly by the CCD and lens combination.
JPEG compression becomes significant only for low quality settings
(i.e., high compression settings). For any given camera, its highest
quality JPEG setting will be indistinguishable from its uncompressed
TIFF or RAW setting, in terms of resolution.

For the most part, while their names may differ, JPEG compression
levels for the different quality settings are pretty much standardized
throughout the industry, so I would guess that the different bits/pixel
in your data are due to different quality settings being used. Without
knowing more about the data, that's about the best I can do.

For specific issues with the different cameras, I would rely on what
NightHawk and others have to say.

NightHawk, I think you are referring to a four color filter array, like the
R-G-B-E(merald) array of the Sony DSC-F828. There is an excellent
discussion of CFAs at DPReview.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=color filter array

[You need to copy the entire link "http ... array" into your browser.]

9:20 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#242 NightHawk

Thanks Gary -- I knew I did not know enough about the four color filter array to comment - actually thought is was to do with the sensor array -- so thanks for the info. I did not keep up on it as the Sony F828 after it did not make my cut about 9 months ago but will read the article - thanks.
Please suggest a good article on upcoming CMOS technology - I am in the dark.
Thanks Kevin

Like you said most 8mp cameras did adopt the Sony Sensor including KM A200 and others right? Funny that Sony used the dud in its own camera to start with - they must have not tested well enough. Do you Know which cameras have the same sensor? Suresh may be interested in that.

10:05 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#243 NightHawk

Suresh you said "I actualy printed a few images dowloaded from these sites, but all were horrible. I assume these might have been tweeked slightly for the web."

To this I ask -- what size was the file you downloaded when uncompressed? A 5mp camera produces a 14.1 mb file uncompressed. On the web I generally only upload 1.2 mb files so if you try to print them they should suck, that is why I do that - smiles. I would chat with you directly regarding these things and send you full size files if you wish. Sometimes the images are not shot a full res either. I never have understood that logic as what if you shoot a image that you love a sucky resolution?

10:46 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#244 GARY POGODA

Canon has an excellent discussion about CMOS technology at their
website.

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/cmos/index-e.html

It's always difficult to tell which cameras use the same sensor. I rely
on the DPReview camera spec sheets for that information, and even
DPReview sometimes does not have a clue.

10:46 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#245 NightHawk

Trade secrets? It may be difficult to tell which cameras use the same sensor but any authorized repair person should know and the camera maker might -- teasing - but do they shot you if you ask - smiles.

Ok seems APS is the new wave as it is cheaper, more power efficient, and uses current chip plants. But within that Cannon is going CMOS and Nikon is going JFET. I just wonder which if either road will be the best or if another road using new technolgy will be the best. I assume the latter.

2:07 am - Monday, November 21, 2005

#246 Suresh

Thanks to ALL- That was lots of information!

The images I test printed were of 2mb size(average).

from the discussion and the link provided by Gary (great-buried, thanks for churning it up) I understand canon produces pretty lossless compression compared to sony. that is sony images are much more compressed than canons. that could be the reason for its file being slightly larger than sony's.

Though I haven't gone deep into various senser technology's, I believe cmos could handle wider spectrum of frequencies than jFET.

As an analogy in audio industry - 20 years back there were valves , then came transisters, after these IC were launched along with mosefets and jfets.

when ICs were launched it started a new wave in widest range of frequency spectrum and compactnes BUT lacked in punch. Mosefets & jfets solved the problem slighly. NOW valves are comming back - offcourse costing as much as three times that of ic based system.

to explain further
A 10 watt Amp based on IC will provide a smooth crystal clear. the same amplifier made of valve will rattle your windows but will may not produce all the audio frequencies (low to high )in the same way as Ic's. Mosefets /jfets could be termed as a bargain but tend to get damaged at the slightest change in power settings.

Actualy a color could be termed as a frequency.

we have to dwelve deep into this to understand it further. Trade secrets a seldom revealed but when something goes wrong, cat should out. Like recently sony ccd had a problem and several manufactureres were affected. I saw a link were all the manufactureres were and their models were listed.

to produce the link here I will have to for search it.

thanks to all
regards
suresh

6:44 am - Monday, November 21, 2005

#247 NightHawk

suresh I am still not sure what you downloaded as a 14mb file uncompressed is full size for a 5mp camera and it compresses to about 2m - so if you could have the full size file. But if uncompressed it was only 2mb you only can make a good 5x7.

9:21 am - Monday, November 21, 2005

#248 Suresh

NightHawk - I downloaded the images from Image-resource, dpreview etc which are mostly 2mb files and took test prints at 4 X 6 size, just to see how it would look actualy on paper (photo paper). I got it printed at a proffessional digital studio. it is unlikely that they could have made a mistake. but it is possible that the image is highly compressed for the web. I had a doubt about this. that was the main reason I asked your openion. Now I am convinced from what you have said (5mp picture will be 14MB size-approx).

Another point- if digital cameras produce outstanding images why are proffessional still using film cameras.

Today there was an article on Marcus Wilson Smith of conde Nast Traveller, House & Garden, Travel and Leisure And Cathey Pacific inflight Magazine. He is in our town and his photograph holding a camera was printed in the daily newpaper(todays). The camera is Nikon (film camera).

what is still lacking in digital ?

thanks
regards
suresh

10:35 am - Monday, November 21, 2005

#249 bazza

Suresh, your earlier query about Yashica... yes they eventually dropped the Yashica name and used their Kyocera brand name, along with the Contax brand name they had bought from Zeiss. Under the Contax name Kyocera produced some great cameras, and also manufactured Zeiss *T lenses under Zeiss Foundation control. Now they have discontinued all camera manufacture (film and digital) in favour of cell phones. The rumour on the street is that Zeiss will buy back the Contax brand name and start making Contax cameras again.

3:02 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#250 suresh

bazza - thanks for the info. Yashica was a very popular name in India and probably elsewere. I doubt contax had and will ever have the same popularity. so far i have only seen mainly point and shoot types.

It is a pity that kyocera did not make up even with zeiss backup. May be it is the name. who knows ?

thanks & regards
suresh

3:31 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#251 NightHawk

Suresh -

To answer your question "Another point- if digital cameras produce outstanding images why are proffessional still using film cameras."

1. The best $5000 Digitals are not as good as 35 mm pro slide film yet -- a great 35mm body sells for a fraction of that! Plus the 35 mm film camera speed is unmatched. Light hits film at speed of light - no lag time to record the image. Digitals do not record images to there "film" at the speed of light - major lag times - means missed pictures the other guy got the pic I could have but my camera was recording an image - smiles.
2. 35mm is small format - and film in that format is just getting good enough for poster size prints and proffessional acceptance. Many pros do not use 35mm but instead use medium format. No mass produced portable digital approches medium format. A relative low res scan (1600)of medium format say 6X7cm or 120 film produces 120 mb files - I know I have one. The funny part is these cameras in SLRs are slower to use and bulky -- so sports, wildlife, and press photographers prefer 35mm for speed and ease of use - and settle for less image quality -- 35mm film is not the ultimate but a compromise! Many pros that use small format -35mm- scan there images to a min of 50mb files - up to 400mb to archive them. 4000 res is the standard for film scanners. Some stock photo places require a min of 50mb files. Most DSLR do not make that grade and there images must be enlarged by software to 50mb.
3. Many photographers are very traditionalist will not switch
4. the cost to switch is great and they are comfortable with film
5. Digital pics do not have the same authority and are not accepted for some uses -- silly because most film is now converted to digital by scanning.
6. ...


you still have not told me if the 2mb referes to the compressed or the uncompressed size. A compressed jpg 14mb pic is about 2mb - and uncompresses to 2559 X 1919 at 72 pixel/in. So is that what you had printed or did you print a 3mb uncompressed file say 972x729 at 72 pixel/in.?
That what I have to assume that you are talkiing about.

5:10 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#252 NightHawk

Suresh Please just tell me what size the 2mb file you are talking about is when saved as a tiff. It is bugging me to no end - smiles.

5:14 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#253 suresh

nightHawk - I printed the 2mb jpeg file which show 2592 X 1944 pixel dimention in Photoshop. This file when saved as tiff with no compression produces 14.4mb size.

thanks & regards
suresh

7:17 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#254 NightHawk

Suresh You state "I downloaded the images from Image-resource, dpreview etc which are mostly 2mb files and took test prints at 4 X 6 size, just to see how it would look actualy on paper (photo paper). I got it printed at a proffessional digital studio. it is unlikely that they could have made a mistake. but it is possible that the image is highly compressed for the web. I had a doubt about this. that was the main reason I asked your openion. Now I am convinced from what you have said (5mp picture will be 14MB size-approx)."

So what was wrong with the prints? A 14mb tiff should produce crisp 8x10s for 4x6 they should be awesome!! Was it the color?
Basically it is unlikely that the problem was the compression for the web but the file may have been corrupted in the downloading. If it was the color (does not look the same as on the monitor) then it was the lab. If it was the sharpness (not at least as sharp as on the monitor) it was probably the lab also or the file was corrupted in the downloading process -- not uncommon.

8:17 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#255 suresh

nightHawk - since I downloaded identical images of sony h1 , canon s2 and fz5 , i edited the images and marked them in photoshop before printing. the printed images looked as if saved in low resolution (maybe highly compressed ). I couldnt believe that these cameras will produce such a lousy image. So something must have gone wrong at my/printers end.

I shall take a printout once again to make sure. Any way my close friend just called me and said he is going to by Sony H1. I shall try it out and let you know. I think it is better to see a print from the camera than downloading from the web. we also can tryout the various setings.

By the way thank you for highlighting the difference between the film and digital cameras. That was remarkable.

thanks & regards
suresh

7:03 am - Tuesday, November 22, 2005

#256 NightHawk

Suresh -- the quality is not due to the compression in itself-- but did you save and resave over the original downloaded lots of times? When working with jpg files you treat them as originals and never save to an original. The number of times you compress and uncompress and recompress an image effects quality of jpg files so if you need to save resave to the same image use tiff or pdf or psd ... file format not jpg. The problem is on your end but I cannot pinpoint it - it could be your editting process - or the lab. What res file did they print it at? I would get your own printer if you want to make prints a HP, or EPSon photoprinter will make amazing prints and take the quess work out of what the lab does.

3:42 pm - Tuesday, November 22, 2005

#257 NightHawk

I understand the sacrifies you go through when going digital, but I will never go back to film - I just love the instant gratification of seeing your images and knowing you captured it! That is at a price. 35mm film is by no means the Ultimate it has only recently been good enough for pro photographers outside the photojournalizim. Most photographers think you need to go to larger formats to get high quality poster size prints. 35mm is small for film it is a lot like the comparison between 5mp all in one and a hypothetical poorly designed 12mp with a major shutter lag problem and requiring wide angle and telo converters. The 5mp all in one is (like the 35mm camera not format) is just easier to use and only recently has the quality been exceptable for poster prints.

The problem with film going digital was the low quality scans for a long time NOT the lack of quality of the film. For example Kodak PhotoCD offers several resolutions of scans for 35mm film -- 192x128, 384x256, 768x512, 1536x1024, and 3072x2048 resolutions. As for the 3072x2048 scan few photo CD approach this and therefore most photo CDs suck they make 35mm film look poor compared to a even a 2mp camera because of their low res scans. Kodak believes that 3072x2048 is all that the 35mm film can really offer. But offer a Pro PhotoCD, 4096x6144 image, at additional cost for pro 35mm and larger formats. So Kodak sets the 35mm film equal to a 7mp camera but Pros hate to settle for that and want at least a 50mb file. So in NO means is 35mm the ULTIMATE.

4:22 pm - Tuesday, November 22, 2005

#258 NightHawk

By saying that 35mm film is equal to 7mp camera I overly simplified it. Resolution is only a small part of the story - color trueness, color range, contrast, tonal quality, grain/pixel size .... lens quality are big things. Noise is something that some digital followers can live with but I would prefer a 5mp camera over a 8mp with a noise problem. For the Ultimate camera it is a moving target and in the Pro eyes IT NOW is somewhere around a 20mp camera producing 50mb plus files AS fAST AS LIGHT.

4:38 pm - Tuesday, November 22, 2005

#259 suresh

NoghtHawk - You are right, I thnk its is either my editing or the lab. Today i again downloaded a few images and printed(w/o editing) on my new epson c45 printer. it is a printer with photo printing capabilities , but no means a true photo printer. the images came out well. it didnt had the problems i saw in the first instance.

As you mentioned about sacrifice , well it becomes so only in the present contest. Since both technologies are still available. But if after a few years films/film cameras mey become extinct due to numerous reasons and only digital shall exist. at that point of time we will have to use them at whatever cost/quality. people will slowely forget the films and their advantage. 20 years back a Bass drum was 3ft heart thumping beuty which needed a big truck to carry around. now it is 1 ft plastic with electronics needing only a small suv as transportation. But does it produce the true bass? only those who have heard the old bass will remember it.

is digital camera any different ? i dont think so.

Presently a change is taking place, with new technologies evolving , mergers, takeovers, coilitions etc and we are in the middle of it. That probably is the cause for this concern/confusion.

Back to digitals, I think as far as a hobbyist is concerned it is better to buy the cheapest in any category . it will be less painfull when he can throw it away and buy the latest.

this is purely my view point. Today I visited the sony, but DSC-H1 was out off stock. it will arrive only next month, may be during christmas. most probably the price also may fall down or a new update (I hope H2 with better features ) will be launched.

what do you do when taking night shot and needing high iso (like 400). or how many times have you felt this setting is neccessary? i am asking only to asess the need for high iso setting, since noise a major problem for any thing less than dslr.

throughout this discussion we were only considering sony, Km , fuji, nikon and canon. Surprisingly nobody mentions kodak.

what do think of 7950, and the new p850 & p880 ?.

I feel the images are good but looses a bit on details.

thanks & regards
suresh

11:20 pm - Tuesday, November 22, 2005

#260 bazza

I see that Steves Digicams have at long last posted their review of the Lumix FZ30

They like it. "Great image, awesome performance...etc" No mention, though, of noise above ISO100 and only one sample image at ISO400.

12:30 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#261 NightHawk

bazza -- I will wait for the reviews by imaging resouces on the s9000 - since even PCmag said the FZ30 had noise at 80 ISO

5:51 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#262 Mikey

I have had the FZ30 for about a week now - I bought it and have been evaluating furiously before the refund period expires. I have only been able to take indoor evening shots - ones which require flash and stress the noise issue the most. Here is my feedback so far.

1. Noise is a problem, but it is THE ONLY problem. The camera is fast and comfortable to operate, and images are amazingly sharp compared to my retiring 3 MP Fuji S602.

2. I have yet to foil the AF on this camera - it focuses in low light, on running kids, you name it. I was so used to losing shots on my S602 because it would not lock in half-decent light that this performance alone is worth the upgrade.

3. The built-in flash is pretty good - I have been able to stay at ISO100 for as far away as 3 m from the subject, and at ISO100 noise is quite tolerable.

4. The RAW handling on the camera is amazingly fast, in fact saving a RAW file is quicker than the flash recharge time, so there is no reason to not use RAW with flash. RAW preserves A TON more detail than the JPEG, and I found free tools for converting the raw images into JPEG such that more sophisticated algorithms on the PC can be used for noise reduction (NeatImage or NoiseNinja). The only reason to not use RAW is if you need exposure bracketing or continuous drive mode. NOTE: I have only done preliminary experiments in the area of raw conversion and host-side noise reduction and hope to get more seat time on this over the weekend.

5. Noise is certainly a problem, particularly at ISO400. However, the head-to-head review at http://www.videozona.ru seems to indicate that when shooting RAW the difference between FZ30 and S9000 is not nearly as stark as in JPEG. I will not have a chance to compare with S9000, but I certainly plan to evaluate various NR tools very shortly. The very quick evaluation that I have done with PictureCooler seems to indicate that noise can be dealt with reasonably well, though not at all perfectly.

So far I am leaning towards keeping the camera, even though the review sorta leaned towards the S9000 in the end, at least considered it "more capable as a professional and artist tool". I keep referring to this russian language review, but I would encourage everyone interested to look at the great multitude of the head-to-head comparison shots that are labeled with enough English words to understand the comparison.

9:47 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#263 GARY POGODA

If waiting for the next generation of all-in-ones is NOT an option for
you, which appears to be the case, then I think you should keep the
FZ30. It's a great camera, and you seem to be comfortable with the
fact that you will need to do some noise post-processing.

Just be prepared for the following:

1. June 2006 --- Samsung announces their Pro915 (with OIS)
2. July 2006 --- Fuji announces their S9200Z (with OIS)
3. July 2006 --- Panasonic announces their (low noise) FZ40

Of course, this is purely speculation on my part, but then again, not
too far from reality. So, if your heart sank when you read it, maybe
you should return the FZ30, because after July 2006, it may well be
worthless.

Hope that helps. :)

8:08 pm - Saturday, December 3, 2005

#264 Suresh

Do you know sony DSC-H1 has disappeared from the world market. whatever is available (rare) is old stock. No body is sure when it will be available or why there is short supply.

I have searched at many places including singapore, gulf, usa etc through friends.

I found a few pieces but was reluctant to buy because of the phenomina.

I wonder what is happening ?

does anyone has got any idea or information ?

regards
suresh

9:21 am - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#265 Mikey

Right Gary, so I wait till Dec. 2006 to evaluate the Pro915 (which, while with OIS, still is humongous and is noisier than the FZ30 by a mile), the Fuji S9200Z (which now has OIS but the sensor size is now 11 MP, so the storage performance is worse than the 9000 and there is slightly more noise - what the heck, being so far ahead of the competition they may as well give up some on the noise to beat Sony in MP, the marketing dept. assures them it's a winner), and the FZ40 (which had to go to the 2/3 sensor to clean up the noise AND bump the resolution to 10 MP - their marketing dept. is certain they won't sell a single camera if they don't keep up with the MP race - so now the camera is just a bit slower in media performance and the lens had to be slowed further to accommodate the 2/3 sensor). And I am again at a dilemma - settle for the deficiencies of the current crop or wait for FZ45, S9800 and Pro1115 that will certainly be announced in 2007. Meanwhile, for a whole year I am taking pictures with the S602 that misses shot after shot because it takes so long to focus or won't focus in insufficient light. Everyone has to make their own decision on what the sufficient functionality is and live with the knowledge that the next generation, probably better overall but certainly with a new set of tradeoffs, is just around the corner.

I am not really trying to convert anyone - least of all NightHawk :) - to my tradeoffs. I just figure my considerations and my opinions may be useful to someone, so I laid out what I like and what I am not sure about, and what leads me to my choice.

More importantly, I think the writing is on the wall for the prosumer cameras. Olympus, Pentax, KM one by one announce their intention to focus on higher-margin dSLR business.As Exhibit A, neither Nikon nor Canon are fielding a serious prosumer camera this year, and the KM A200 is getting long in the tooth. On the other hand, everyone and their brother is selling a budget DSLR and those who are not (Panasonic and Samsung come to mind) are planning to. I think that P&S cameras will be further and further dumbed down to the point where they will become a cell phone accessory.

And I think as the budget DSLR field heats up, solutions will be found to address the common grievances of the people like me who defect to the prosumer market. I can't speak for others, but for me the one reason keeping me from a D50 was the movie mode. I bet there will be a DSLR with VGA movie mode on the market in 2-3 years. And sensor dust may be addressed by things like the Olympus ultrasonic sensor, or some other innovative solution. And as 10+ MP APS-C sensors come down in price, lots of people will be able to live with, say 18-200 35mm lenses with in-camera cropping for maybe over 400mm 35mm equivalent at maybe 5-6 MP. So I suspect in 3-4 years we may be debating quite hotly whether Nikon D150 is better than Canon XLT or maybe the Fuji S12 Pro's extra dynamic range is worth the deficiencies in other areas, and - think of the possibilities - which lenses are best with any of these.

10:37 pm - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#266 GARY POGODA

It appears that your crystal ball is even better than mine, so whatever
your decision, I know it will be an educated one, and not one made on
impulse.

Regarding the megapixel wars, if we give in to that, it will only serve to
perpetuate those wars, but if we can hold back, maybe manufacturers
will finally get the message.

"Make love, not war. I know, you've heard it before." --- John Lennon,
the 25th anniversary of his death is Thursday, December 8.

7:07 pm - Monday, December 5, 2005

#267 bazza

Guys, my head hurts !
I've been vacillating between FZ30, S9000, R1 and E500 for weeks now, looking at specifications, samples, opinions and costs.
Now you've introduced speculation about the likely next generation in 6 months time....and the generation after that in another year!

I've also looked at depreciation... £2000 invested in a 35mm Leica or a MF Rollei will still be worth £1700 in five years time. Can we say the same about any of the digitals, I guess technology is moving just too fast and it's unlikely to stabilise much in the next five years.

My wife just added a bit of common sense to the debate. She asked me to count-up the photographs I have taken over the last 6 months with each camera available to me. The score was interesting. Rollei MF 1%; Contax 35mm 1%; Nikon Coolpix 8%; Sony K750i Cameraphone (2MP) 90%...!

Without realising it I have sacrified quality for convenience. Even worse, the damn phone was a freebie from the O2 service supplier!

Perhaps I should just accept that I don't qualify as a photographer any more - just a happy snapper - and that I should simply wait for the next generation of camera phones with 5MP and a Zeiss lens!

Only joking...I'll try harder!

11:32 am - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#268 GARY POGODA

If you are worried about obsolescence and depreciation, the Sony R1
is the all-in-one that's most ahead of its time, comes closest to a dSLR,
and has no serious flaws (like the FZ30's noise, and the S9000's lack
of OIS). So, if you can live with its humongous size, and its limited 5x
zoom (albeit, starting at a more useful 24mm), that might be your best
bet.

Then your biggest worry will be that Sony will announce an R2 that will
fit in your pocket and have a built-in cell phone. :)

7:25 pm - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#269 bazza

Guys, I see that Steve (Digicams) has updated his FZ30 review and commented on the much-reported "horrible noise" problem. He thinks it's much exaggerated and only an issue at ISO400. The new samples he now includes seem to bear this out.

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/fz30.html

11:43 am - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#270 Mikey

I would tend to agree with Steve's Digicams conclusion from personal experience. Additionally, there are a lot of complaints about the unsophisticated in-camera NR that really blurs high-ISO jpegs.

What I do is always shoot RAW unless I need bracketing or continuous drive capabilities. I don't use the supplied RAW conversion as many people said it sucked worse than the in-camera software (didn't try it myself but no reason to doubt the many reviewers that agree on this). I found a free utility that does a very good job converting RAW, and since it works from the command line it is suitable for batch processing. If you don't like messing with command line setup, there are paid solutions like Adobe Camera RAW (works with Elements) or RawShooter that support FZ30 RAW. I get a lot more detail this way than from the in-camera high-ISO JPEGs, but NR post-processing is a MUST for JPEGs created from high-ISO RAW images.

2:53 pm - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#271 GARY POGODA

As much as I enjoy reading reviews from Steve's Digicams, I would
hardly consider their FZ30 review to be an authority on its noise. The
fact that their noise comment was added as an afterthought, and that
there were no noise charts offered in support of the comment, I would
tend to rely more on the FZ30 noise analysis from DPReview.

According to DPReview, the FZ30 image sensor is very noisy, even
at ISO 80 (which was verified by shooting RAW), and requires some
heavy-handed noise reduction to mask the noise at that ISO.

This cannot be considered good. :)

7:36 pm - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#272 NightHawk

Gary Sony R1 is a long way from being ahead of its time. It does have a larger sensor but that causes problems -- weight and size. Plus Sony is still SLoooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwww
The 2x teloconverter weighs about as much as two all in one cameras. So it took a road the I hope dead ends. I would rather see others follow the Fuji way -- better smaller sensor and add a lens that goes from 24mm - 300mm or so.

I seldom use 400 Iso as I try to maximize pixel quality with my old Sony F-707.

1:44 am - Sunday, December 11, 2005

#273 GARY POGODA

As usual, excellent points, so let me clarify. The Sony R1 is ahead of
its time in one respect only; namely, it is the first non-DSLR camera to
utilize an APS size image sensor, and a CMOS one at that.

I do agree that higher quality small sensors would be a better way to
go. Since I doubt that Fuji will be licensing its technology to any other
manufacturer, CMOS technology would be the best way to achieve a
small, low noise image sensor for a compact, high zoom, all-in-one.

Until then, all hopes lie with Fuji. :)

9:36 pm - Sunday, December 11, 2005

#274 GARY POGODA

Breaker, NightHawk. I just read your long-awaited S9000 review at
Imaging Resource. Actually, I only scanned it, but in doing so, I did
not see any mention of the cameras lack of OIS. However, I did see
its less than spectacular noise performance results, which I thought
would have been better. What did you think?

8:15 pm - Friday, December 16, 2005

#275 Gilbert Eckhardt

well, well, after reading a lot of comments I must might as well ad my own experience with canon, fuji and panasonic etc. To keep it short though: canon pro 1 had a bad AF, Fuji S9500 (in Europe its 9500) is only good with tripods at ISO 100 and normal cloudy outdoor pix, though very handly. ISO400 is okay for small sized pix. Lumix FZ30 is great, except for the noise, which can be easily removed or surpressed with noisereduction. I have checked a lot of test photos in magazine-CDs, even from Canons nur 3500 dollar SLR. And guess what: even that one makes good pix only cause of a stronger but smarter noisereduction. Very little details like fabrics etc. in a distance could not be noticed anymore with the Fuji or Canon SLR, but - astounding: with the Lumix compact and FZ30 you could see even details none of the others did! Dispite the little noise. After removin g that noise carefully manually the pix were more detailed than with the costly SLR! So now make your choices... and don't let you get fooled by testphotos being done on a tripod or with black and white testcharts, never experienced in real life situations! The camera manufacturers optimize their software according to those tests, just like the graphic-board manuf. do with Doom etc.

1:27 pm - Saturday, December 17, 2005

#276 bazza

Hi, Gilbert

Over the last few weeks I have spent a small fortune on top quality paper and litres of Epson inks printing A4's from full-sized sample images from FZ30, S9500 and R1.

I had given up of the FZ30 and S9500 until shops in the UK started offering the S9500 at £399.

My findings so far:

1. At ISO 100 all 3 give good A4 results providing they are well exposed.
2. At ISO 100 Centre sharpness for S9500 is marginally better than FZ30
3. At ISO 100 Edge sharpness is marginally better on FZ30
4. At ISO 100 For underexposed areas of the print (eg shaded areas in an otherwise bright scene)the FZ30 showed some noise
5. At ISO 100 the R1 beat the others in all respects
6. At ISO 200 the S9500 was the same as it had been at ISO 100
7. At ISO 200 the FZ30 showed quite a lot of noise in underexposed areas, making the print look "digital" rather than "photographic"
8. The S9500 turned in a very good A4 portait at ISO 400 with nice bokeh. However, a portrait at ISO 1600 exhibited unacceptable noise in dark hair areas and a little less detail in other features.
9. Both FZ30 and S9500 produced stunning A4 photos of buildings in bright California sunshine at ISO 80. Really nothing to choose between them.
10. Both FZ30 and S9500 produced good, detailed, well exposed A4 prints of macro subjects (mostly flowers)

11. With both the FZ30 and S9500 at full wide angle, verticals are bent (barrel distortion) at the edges of the print... but with the FZ30 it was also noticeable much nearer the centre as well. Not happy with that. I might expect it if it was a 24mm equivalent but not 35mm.(I use a 21mm Zeiss Biogon which exhibits less barrel distortion.)

So what have I learned?

You've got to print the samples - just looking at them on a monitor can be very misleading.

They are all good cameras, the Sony R1 delivers the best prints by far, but costs £200 more than the Fuji and £170 more than the FZ30.

For convenience, the FZ30 wins.

For print quality, the S9500 wins.

Personal opinions only but I might buy the S9500 as a stop gap until Sony develop the R2!

3:26 pm - Tuesday, December 20, 2005

#277 NightHawk

bazza -- awesome

It would be great if you could now do a couple at 18X24 or 16x24inches or equivalent (-you of course can test it out on A4 paper by just doing a crop - only use 1/2 of the image.) I understand that would have been far more costly so that is why I say a few but that is a true test of my ideal camera. 8x10s are more for testing of 3-5mp cameras.

So what is the problem with the s9500 the lens or the eye? Seems that the FZ30 has the better lens and the s9500 has the better eye. What is your take?

What about shutter lag? does the s9500 fast auto focus mode actually work?

7:58 am - Friday, December 23, 2005

#278 NightHawk

Held a s9000 and a FZ30 today for a short while. The FZ30 feels to light to be a camera (plastic) and did not like its boxy shape (but would fit nicely in a camera bag). Both fit my hands great, but I prefer the heft and looks of the s9000 and that it runs on AA batteries. The price is great also under $600 for the s9000 (at a not so cheap place). I am just wanting on a report on print quality at 18x24 inch and a review by image resources.

7:06 am - Saturday, December 24, 2005

#279 NightHawk

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S9000/S9KA.HTM

the s9000 is the winner by a mile

11:41 am - Sunday, December 25, 2005

#280 NightHawk

This is what I would do if I had $800 - I would buy the Fuji s9000 from CompUsA with a 2 year carry in warranty. Yes you can return it no questions asked for 2 years for the same camera (or in 2 years the upgraded camera).
http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?product_code=51636173&pfp=SEARCH

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S9000/S9KA.HTM
Key points for me is that they state that the lens is good, the camera produces prints at quality better than expected for a 9mp camera (tested at 13x19 inch) and that the high speed auto focus works!!!

5:14 pm - Tuesday, December 27, 2005

#281 NightHawk

Drats I looked at the review for the Sony R1 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM it is awesome. The shutter lag seems to be far less than I thought so the s9000 only has a few advantages. I will probably settle for the s9000 - I love the 4 pic mode and the AF help on manual focus and a 11 power zoom starting at 28mm. But need to test drive both. The images of the s9000 are better than my current camera Sony F707 and with Raw should be awesone with photoshop CS2 (in camera sharpening and noise processing creats problems). Just wish they offer long version of the R1 current(24mm-120mm). A R1 long (100mm - 500mm or 80 -300mm) smiles would be faster to use than the 900 plus g converter and the second camera would cost less than comparable lens for a DSL.

12:40 am - Thursday, December 29, 2005

#282 NightHawk

Well after thinking about it there is no way I would settle for the Fuji s9000 after reviewing in detail the Sony R1. Maybe I will have to get both -- the s9000 instead of the bogus converter for the R1. The s9000 shines at telophoto - the lens is far better at that than wide angle. I do love my sony f707. A R1 and a s9000 would make a great two lens kit - smiles.

5:36 am - Friday, December 30, 2005

#283 bazza

Happy New Year to all you guys 'n galls out there.

I haven't bought a Fuji S9500 yet but borrowed one for an hour or so from a local shop (the owner's camera, not one on-sale)

Very responsive and a pleasure to use. It's lightweight compared with the R1 but you gets what you pays for. The day was drab and gloomy so most shots were with the built-in flash. Absolutely no redeye and results appeared good on screen. I'll print one or two next week and decide yes or no.

I'll also print some crops, 16x24 (and bigger) equivalents, Nighthawk, and let you know. The chances are, though, that results will largely depend on how good the interpolation software is (I use Qimage and it's pretty good.)

12:25 pm - Tuesday, January 3, 2006

#284 Cindy

I bought a Panasonic DMC-FZ30 digital camera in Dec. It works great except one thing. When I used it in a room full of people and they were all sitting still....no problem. If anyone moved even just their hand, that part of them would be blurry. The stabilizer was on and it was in auto mode. I have never had that happen with another camera. I hope it is just the settings need to be changed. I am new to digital cameras. Maybe I am missing somethin obvious.I have had SLR fim cameras. So I am not new to most os the settings. I see no other problem with the camera. It is awesome!!!! Any advise you have would be great.

4:02 am - Wednesday, January 4, 2006

#285 NightHawk

Bazza great!!! you might want to read the unsharp mask info in http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S9000/S9KA.HTM. That seems to help lots. They rated the s9000 very high for having a 10power plus lens and I think I would use the 4 shot mode a lot!.

Thanks

Kevin

4:54 am - Wednesday, January 4, 2006

#286 NightHawk

Cindy: It is not a fault with the camera - if you like to go auto might have to go to stop/fast action mode. The lighting might not allow a fast enough shutter speed to stop blurr due to movement. What is the shutter speed? Image stabilization reduces the blurr of the whole image due to camera shake it is not designed to and cannot stop blurr as a result of movement of the part of the subject. That is where YOU have to select faster shutter speeds. I suggest that you learn about your camera and get out of auto mode and think about shutter speed versus f stop. "When I used it in a room full of people and they were all sitting still....no problem. If anyone moved even just their hand, that part of them would be blurry. The stabilizer was on and it was in auto mode."

5:09 am - Wednesday, January 4, 2006

#287 bazza

Hi Cindy

Nighthawk's got it right on. With any telephoto lens the biggest problem is usually the photographer's inability to hold the camera steady enough. The greater the telephoto effect, the worse it gets. The stabilisation feature helps a lot and it's a strong-point of the FZ30. At maximum telephoto and without the stabilisation you would have to set a shutter speed of a four-hundredth of a second to avoid blur due to your camera movement. With stabilisation turned on you should get away with a one-hundredth (even less if you haven't had a drink at the party.)

The stabilisation does absolutely zilch to compensate for movement in your subject, though, because the camera has no way of sensing it.

I normally find that a shutter speed of 1/100 freezes gentle to moderate movement and 1/200 will freeze most human movement.

On its Auto setting your camera will try to set its lowest sensitivity (ISO 80)to minimise noise in the image and this often means a fairly slow shutter speed.

You could:

i) manually set the ISO higher (say ISO200) and put up with a little extra noise which you won't see in 4x6 prints (but probably will in 8X10's)

or (ii) set the camera in shutter priority mode to 1/200 sec. and hope that the lens is fast enough to cope

or (iii) set to aperture priority and open up the lens to it's widest setting (f2.8 or so depending on zoom used) and hope that the shutter speed it chooses is fast enough to freeze the subject's movements

or (iv) use flash, whereby the effective shutter speed is determined by the duration of the flash (very fast) rather than by the shutter. Not always appropriate, though, especially in good daylight.

or (v) - tell them to keep still!

Happy shooting

Bazza

3:55 pm - Wednesday, January 4, 2006

#288 Cindy

Thanks so much for the advice! I thought it might be something like that. It was at a party and there MAY have been drinks invloved. ; ) Digital photography is new to me and I had not seen this with my SLR film camera. I am a amateur who wants to learn so much more about photography. This camera is amazing and will be allot of fun. Can you suggest a book on digital photography that would help? Thanks!

6:28 pm - Wednesday, January 4, 2006

#289 NightHawk

Cindy
That is strange as digital cameras function simualarly. The basics are the same. I suggest you get a good basic photograph book that explains fstop, shutter speed, and "film speed". Digtal cameras operate using the same principles.
Feel free to contact me directly and I may be able to help -- .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
I am thinking on writing a basic photography book with that explained and my take on digital photography. The goal to take some of the mystery out of the basics -- smiles.

What I meant by getting out of auto mode was try to think about what the camera is doing. Even if the Camera is in auto mode your brain does do not have to be - smiles. I seldom use auto mode but prefer to specify A (f stop) or S (shutter speed).

7:09 pm - Wednesday, January 4, 2006

#290 NightHawk

Bazza
Well done! Great explaination

Kevin

7:13 pm - Wednesday, January 4, 2006

#291 bazza

Hi, Nighthawk

Did what you asked and printed a larger image from the S9000.

I chose one of Simon Joinson's images from his recent review (Trafalgar Square with fountain and St Martins in the Field Church) as I knew it printed extremely well at 10x8 - and we all have access to it to try it ourselves.

The EXIF says it was 1/500 at f5.6, a 9MP JPEG (Fine) Auto white balance, auto exposure; sharpening, contrast and color all normal (ie straight out of the camera but I dont know if Simon did any post processing - I suspect not)

I took a crop of the original image covering centre to top edge, and printed at 10x8 on an decent Epson photo printer, Epson Premium paper and Qimage working at "best" interpolation. The crop size meant that this was equivalent to a 20x16 print.

The result surprised me. No blotching or other artifacts in the blue sky areas, a LOT of fine detail, slight edge artifacting on a flagpole against blue sky but not visible when viewed from 10 inches and only really noticable using a magnifying loupe (well, it was a Zeiss Planar 2.8 lens really as I didn't have a loupe to hand!) Detail at the top edge was surprisingly good.

OK, nowhere near as good as similar sized architectural print I'd done from a MF Rollei neg, but as good as a lot of 35mm film efforts I've seen. If I'd printed this at 20x16 I would have cheerfully put it on my wall, and it wasn't even a Raw image!

hope this helps, Kevin

Bazza

10:44 am - Thursday, January 5, 2006

#292 bazza

Forgot to mention, Simon Joinson's review is at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms9000/

Simon, if you happen to read this did you do any pp on the trafalgar square image (No 1 in your sequence?)

10:52 am - Thursday, January 5, 2006

#293 Suresh

Dear Gary and others

Its long time back that I wrote in these columns. But I have been reading the postings.

Finaly, today I purchased one Canon A620, their latest introduction. I choose this instead of a Prosumer is because of its size. Though its not a very compact its trade off between the pocket size compacts and DSLR.

I am just trying it out. I shall write more on its performance later.

Meanwhile, while shopping I happen to saw the fuji s9000. its huge and without battery felt lighter and is way cheaper than canon 350D Rebel. I cant commen on its features or performnace. But I strongly feel for the price it has to be way on the top than others.

I have a few doubts. can you help me here.
what is meant by / relevence of "Flash Synch".

Canon A 620 is having this to be switch on or off but no explanation is given.


Thanks
regards
suresh

7:50 pm - Thursday, January 5, 2006

#294 NightHawk

"Flash Synch" the Fuji is nearly unbeatable here. I has a hot shoe and a pc cord socket. Flash Synch is basically synchornizing falsh with the shutter opening. Many digitals use properitory flashes and only function with there own flashes. Pc socket lets the camera control studio strobes.

3:19 am - Friday, January 6, 2006

#295 Travis

Can anyone tell me a good place to buy a back up battery that is a good deal. Looking online most are about $70 to $80. Some are $20.00 for the same battery. What's with that??

7:35 am - Friday, January 6, 2006

#296 Suresh

Thanks NightHawk - A620 provides 2 settings (1st Curtain And 2nd Curtain ). I got the explanation from their japaneese site. In fact it is having a detailed explanation for all the functions/settings of each and every canon camera.

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/psa620/index-e.html

There is more information here than on any other site

I just started the practicals on a digital camera. Any way the first impressions are not bad, but I have to print a few images to access the camera.

I shall get back after that

regards
suresh

8:19 am - Friday, January 6, 2006

#297 NightHawk

sorry thought you were asking a basic question - I amd totally clueless about what you asked about -- please tell me what you found out about the cannon

8:29 am - Friday, January 6, 2006

#298 NightHawk

Brazza:

Thanks a great deal -- now do you know where I can get a loan for a "two lens kit" - smiles. First "lens" Sony R1 (WA to medium telo) and the Second s9000 (telophoto - WA backup). That would be a great combination with two lens and a backup camera. Plus I have the sony accesories - my sony and the R1 use the same flash and batteries - surprisingly.

8:38 am - Friday, January 6, 2006

#299 Suresh

NightHawk - I changed my to TFT. so I can't tell about the quality. old monitors and TFT's reproduce colors differently. Hence I have given a few for printing. I shall get them tommorrow.

The default size of the images with quality set to Superfine and size Large is 17 X 12.8 with a resolution of 180. This is huge for a semi-compact size camera. off course the images look good with exllent detail. some of them are overbright. but this could be due to my lack of knowledge about various settings. A little tweaking in Photoshop corrected them. I tested a few with ISO 400 and the noise was not that bad as feared. It could be corrected easily with Neat image or the like ones.

I shall write more after getting the prints.

There is one thing I didnt like - that is the rubber flip cover over the usb port. It is flimsy and might break if not carefull.


regards
suresh

9:34 pm - Friday, January 6, 2006

#300 NightHawk

sony R1* s9000 sony F707 KM A200 canon A620
10mp 9mp 5mp 8mp
file size 26.1 14.1 22.9 20.2 mb
3888 3486 2560 3264 3066
2560 2615 1920 2448 2309
1:1.5 - - - 1:1.33format - - - -
poster 23.2 17.1 21.8 20.4 in
size 17.4 12.8 16.3 15.4 in


above in is print size in inches based on 150 pixels per inch - usuaable print size is determined more by image quality of course than number of pixels.

*print quality unmatched due to
quality of lens and sensor.

12:06 am - Saturday, January 7, 2006