NEX-F3 frustration--is this related to ISO 200?

Well, first of all, why are you pushing EV by 1 stop? That washes out your entire scene and blows out the sky.  People generally want to run negative EVs for sunsets.

Would I be correct in guessing that you are only working with OOC JPEGs? OOC JPEGs are entirely tunable for the characteristics you want. Have you tried a Creative Style, and the options for vibrancy within?

One thing that can be said for sure: it has nothing to with the (non)availability of ISO100. Even with ISO100, the FZ28 is only capable of 10.1 EVs of DR and 17.9 bits of color depth, while even with "only" ISO200, the F3 has 12.3 EVs of DR, and 22.7 bits of color depth. The range of info that the F3 can capture is much, much more than the FZ28. The problem lies somewhere else.

I suggest going up to 400 ISO. Your shutter speed is lower on the NEX shot and that may be taking the edge off the sharpness.

The NEX shot is slightly overexposed. Remove that +1 EV adjustment.

The Panasonic shot is taken in much more contrasty lighting.

When you get more used to the camera, try shooting in JPG+RAW. Then you can adjust the image to your liking in Photoshop Elements, Lightroom or whatever. (I use Elements to adjust all Panasonic shots too - it does work with JPGs, it is just that RAW files have a bit more leeway).

There are of course lots of built in effects in the camera too. However, once done they are done; while adjusting contrast and saturation later gives you the chance to change your mind.

I'd have taken the NEX shot with a negative EV and tighter aperture.

--
http://www.martinirwinphotography.com

You say both photos were taken at dusk, but the photo taken with the Panasonic is clearly in full sunlight. You can see by the hard shadows cast by the boat that the shot is well lit with plenty of contrast and a warm tone provided by the sun which looks like its just about to set.

The NEX photo, on the other hand, is a shot taken with most of the subject matter in shadow so it will naturally look rather flat and dull in comparison.

I'm not saying you don't have a point, but your chosen photos don't demonstrate it. One thing's for sure though is that it won't have anything to do with your chosen ISO or aperture.

You'll probably find it's just that you like the out of camera jpg's the Panasonic produces better than the NEX. As dTew recommended, have a look at the 'Creative Style' settings. You mention sunset and landscape photos - there are Creative Styles for just these scenarios designed to enhance the natural tones in these types of photos. You may find these produce more pleasing results for you.

I see 2 main reasons:

1. Sun light is missing in NEX shot (as other guys mentioned)

2. NEX has MUCH bigger sensor size than FZ28 and because of that on same aperture you have much shallower depth of field and because of that most of your image is out of focus. I would suggest to try for such landscape shots aperture of f/8 or maybe even smaller. Yes - bigger sensor is not always better

I don't think I did that, the camera did...this was just after buying it so wasn't experimenting much at the time. But I'll keep that in mind. However, see below, I uploaded a sunset shot where the Panasonic chose 1EV and it worked fine...

Yes, the sunset setting is not getting the results that I want. I've been experimenting a lot, honestly, just not finding any sweet spot. Certainly nothing near what the Panasonic would give me at dusk.

Also, the full light landscape shots on the Sony aren't better than the panasonic...

panasonic, ISO 100, f 5.6, 1/200

Sony, ISO 200, f 13, 1/320

Any idea where the problem lies, besides EV? I'll try to take some more Sony shots for comparison so you can see what I mean. I don't have any direct comparison shots. I'm doing the best I can to show what I mean, but I get frustrated and have deleted a lot of test shots.

panasonic, ISO 160, 1 EV, f/4, 1/200

Here you can see EV was 1 with the Panasonic and it worked fine.

Generally the Panasonic seemed to "let in" light when even my eyes didn't see it and then took brilliant twilight shots. What does that mean?

Sony ISO 200, f/8, 1/800

Here you can see the "creative" effect adding a lot (too much) texture but is a fun effect...but i don't want that effect always. I want more definition without the effect, in a more naturalistic way. Do you know what I mean?

As I said, I do not have direct comparison shots. But trust me, the Panasonic would have "let in" light for the second shot to produce it a little better.

Then what is it?

I've been trying with those, they don't do the job. I deleted a whole bunch of sunset sky shots taken with the Sony because even in post they did not do the trick. And I tried everything--from full auto and Sunset mode to full manual and tweaking A and S..

You can see from the next set I just uploaded above, the camera selected f/13 for the landscape and it's still not so nice.

Having used both NEX and Panasonic TZ cameras in a wide variety of lighting, I don't think there is much difference in the general look of pictures from the two types of camera, used without "creative settings", in good light. The contrast and colour saturation are much the same.

What you do notice is that the Panasonic images are more noisy in poor light, and lack the fine detail you can get from a NEX with a good prime lens. All as you would expect from a much smaller sensor.

Sony, ISO 800, f13, 1/100

Clearly the Sony is a capable instrument. This picture of the owl is nice. At ISO 800, not noisy at all. I know ppl get defensive around here any time someone mentions frustration with the instrument. I am not bashing my camera, but there are certain situations that I want it to perform better. Owl in tree is thankfully not one of them

That's too bad about the lack of difference in the good light, I was hoping for some improvement there, as I was also not crazy about the Panasonic in bright light and landscape. But I know you are correct, it is what my eyes tell me when I compare by photo sets. You are also correct about the reduced noise overall with the Sony, at least there's that. And my telephoto shots with the Sony are better at the same end of the long range.

I've ordered the Sigma 30mm, maybe I will get better results with it. I am considering the 19mm as well. Being a sharpness freak will avoid the 16mm, it's not a bad lens if you like a softer feel but the pix I see from it are not sharp or vivid and that is my preference.

Yes, that's for sure one of the reasons. That for sure is getting you less blue int he skyes. If you dont know how to set exposure compensation  back to zero ,check the manual (ir is just the down arrow of the wheel).

It should be in zero for normal use. But you can play with it. To see more of the sky, set it to -1 or to -07. That means that the scene is darkened and you will get more from the sky. Of course, it will also darken other parts that you don't want to. It is a balancing game. The cameras try to guess it, but in the end, it should be you who decides.

Another thing would be to check HDR and DRO. IF DRO is off, try first setting DRO. This  will give you a bit more of dynamic range. IF that is not enough, or if it was already set (I think it is the default, but you may have accidentally change it, as you did with exposure compensation) use auto HDR. Auto HDR takes 3 pictures and tries to have 1 with all in it. Sometimes they look funky, sometimes they look great. It saves 2 images, one the HDR one, and the other the normal one, so even if the auto HDR looks funky, you have the normal one.

Another thing you can do is bracket. Depending on your model, you can have more options. The later cameras have more, but the older models, have only +-0.7 as max. I set that from time to time. It records 3 images and you can choose between different exposures for the best one. Afterwards, in your computer, you can delete the rest.

Finally, if at fails  there is RAW. Ok, raw intimidates a lot of new users (it did to me) but you can start with RAW+JPG , as I did, and when you feel secure (and realize you are wasting space with those JPGs, only save RAW. Use lightroom to start with, there are a lot of tutorials on using it.

Personally, for landscape I use a combination of RAW + bracketing, and I use the technivk of exposing to the right (brighter). I set exposure compensation to +0.7 and bracket so I get 3 exposures. One the one the camera thinks its the correct, another at +7 and a final one at +1.4. At home I choose the bigger one that doesn't clip highlights and process it. It takes more time, but I like it. Also makes me more careful I don't snap as crazy.

Probably this is already too much for you. I would tell you to right now change the exposure compensation for sure, and to play with it to understand it. And play with auto HDR. And in the future consider RAW. Thats all!

But then again, at f13 diffraction (optical effect of small apertures) could be affecting sharpness, so it might have been better at f8 or f11. This is the 16mm at f11, JPG, old NEX-5:



I would strongly suggest forgetting iAuto and trying aperture priority A mode, centre meter and focus (recompose after focus lock on half-press if necessary), turn off focus-assist light (doesn't work well), Auto-DRO (to preserve shadows and highlights in high-contrast scenes). Leave ISO at base 200 in good light,  in low light dial it up, use auto-ISO and wider apertures, or switch to shutter priority S mode if shutter speeds aren't fast enough.

There is no magical "seeing/letting in more light" property the Panasonic has - there is only good exposure, unless your blending different shots for HDR etc. And the NEX sensor has more dynamic range and colour depth, scientifically proven!

You are aware of how much less of a given scene will be in sharpest focus at modest apertures like f.4 or 5.6 on the NEX? This is normal for a large APS-C sensor, a creative tool, and dependent on the distance to your subject & background. Also remember to turn OSS on when hand-holding, and off on a tripod. Use a bracing stance - stand steady, tilt the LCD up looking down, press your elbows in to your sides, press the camera to your torso, cradle the lens underneath with your left hand, squeeze the shutter carefully with your right thumb. The small-sensor Panasonic will be more forgiving of mild hand/camera shake.

Base ISO and the kit lens should be able to deliver great colour depth and dynamic range sharp JPGs straight out of the camera. This is 28mm, f5.6, ISO200 on the older, lesser, NEX-5 (I only lightly tweaked the camera's JPG - Standard style, Contrast & Saturation +1, sharpened in Photoshop). I focused on the closer rocks and let the background headland be a little blurred:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59079068@N02/7986084167/

Have you noticed the Option button within any Creative setting to tweak sharpness/contrast/saturation? Standard or Options +1 for each is good for most situations, or Vivid for a punchier look.

It takes a while to get to grips with a new camera, and the larger sensor makes more demands on your skill and knowledge, for potentially better results. Good luck!

Alan



No offense but I still don't like the overall feel, which is the problem i'm having too.

nex f3

see I don't like these landscape shots at all, forget the composition, it's more the overall feel, texture, etc...not all milky and smooth, three dimensional, and polished, do you know what I mean? If this is all the Sony is capable of in landscaping, maybe I bought the wrong camera for my needs.

I will try these things, I have already been shooting RAW but lack good software at the moment, and my computer is sluggish so difficult to process RAW anyway

I doubt it.

If you look closely you'll see that the NEX shots are not that bad. There is a lot of detail in there. flat, dull, but it's there. It's just a matter of how you process the images ... either upfront in-camera (jpeg settings) or afterwards (RAW processing).

A NEX or other CSC or a DSLR can capture enough detail (sharpness, dynamic range) to get decent images, but you'll have to tell the camera how to do it. A compact camera might already do the processing that makes the images look "good" (that's what compact cameras often are made for) but if you look at the details you'll often see blown highlights, artifacts, posterization, noise etc etc.

I never use the "auto" mode on my NEX, but I also had the impression that the auto jpeg result is rather dull, unless you really start finetuning it.

Not sure I know what you mean exactly - of course this isn't "all the Sony is capable of," I was looking for stuff that related directly to your issues. You also know that overhead mid-day sun is a harsh difficult lighting situation, not as "milky and smooth" as golden hours after sun-rise & before sunset?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59079068@N02/7996918526/

Your problems are couched in ambiguous terminology - you want "milky and smooth" but you say you're a sharpness freak? You've ignored most of my lengthy post of helpful suggestions, but you definitely have a better camera than the Panasonic, the rest is up to you!

Alan

Sorry I don't have the technical terms. Maybe it's not sharpness or milky...All I know is what I like. I don't like this image either...it's kind of washed out, right? no depth...no offense but I am having the same trouble with my own shots.

Please don't say I'm ignoring your posts--how would you know what my brain is doing?