My HS50 EXR - Pano Plus L v M v 8 ...

Started Apr 9, 2013 | Discussions
Lloydy
Forum ProPosts: 18,865Gear list
Like?
My HS50 EXR - Pano Plus L v M v 8 ...
Apr 9, 2013

... Went out a couple of days back to the local viewpoint with the intention to take a panorama of the town from North through South.

That was the plan but the South view is now blocked by foliage. So, had to settle for North only.

Below is the result from seven L (large) sized images stitched. The actual size is 55 x 12 inches but, obviously, resized to fit here.

Below that are some comparison images of test shots. If you care to read on, I'll explain them.

The first comparison set is a 100% view of L (large) size, at left, and M (medium) size at right. Both images are resized. The L down slightly, the M up slightly. They have also both had Auto Contrast applied in PS, nothing else.

Note - I took several L size and several M size and then chose the best of either for the comparison. Settings were identical, except for the size.

Next below is the L size image at 100%, at left, and at right is a Jpeg image at 100% taken some seven years back with a ten year old 8 mp camera. Same as the HS50 EXR image, only Auto Contrast applied.

Note - Both images were taken at roughly the same time of year and same time of day and in similar lighting conditions. Not by design, simply happenstance.

The next set is a conversion from Raw, in Lightroom, with default settings, at left, and the Jpeg from the ten year old 8 mp camera at right.

You can draw your own conclusions.

HS 50 EXR Edits Gallery

-- hide signature --

Dave

alexisgreat
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,858Gear list
Like?
Re: My HS50 EXR - Pano Plus L v M v 8 ...
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

Wow Dave, some very interesting results..... you mentioned that the 8 MP camera was 10 yrs old, so circa 2003, would it happen to be the Olympus C-8080 by any chance?  I think that came out in 2004, but it's close enough lol.

On second thought, that camera may have had more zoom than the great Oly camera did, so was it the Sony F808 or Nikon 8800 perhaps?

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

 alexisgreat's gear list:alexisgreat's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Olympus E-520 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lloydy
Forum ProPosts: 18,865Gear list
Like?
Alex ...
In reply to alexisgreat, Apr 9, 2013

alexisgreat wrote:

Wow Dave, some very interesting results.....

... Interesting was not exactly the word that sprung to mind 

you mentioned that the 8 MP camera was 10 yrs old, so circa 2003, would it happen to be the Olympus C-8080 by any chance?  I think that came out in 2004, but it's close enough lol.

On second thought, that camera may have had more zoom than the great Oly camera did, so was it the Sony F808 or Nikon 8800 perhaps?

Sony F828, which I still have but have not used in a few years now.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

-- hide signature --

Dave

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tim39
Senior MemberPosts: 2,879
Like?
Re: My HS50 EXR - Pano Plus L v M v 8 ...
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

Ouch!

-- hide signature --

Tim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lloydy
Forum ProPosts: 18,865Gear list
Like?
Tim ...
In reply to Tim39, Apr 9, 2013

Tim39 wrote:

Ouch!

... Not the word I first thought of but it was also a four letter word 

Ouch is a good descriptor though !

-- hide signature --

Tim

-- hide signature --

Dave

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alexisgreat
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,858Gear list
Like?
Re: Alex ...
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

Dave your results are interesting to me because I brought up something I read elsewhere about EXR sensors perhaps not having the same discernable resolution as conventional ones, perhaps because of the modified color filter array (being particularly obvious with green foliage, because that is the color filter most impacted.)

Also I believe Bill bought the HS20 and commented the visual resolution did not match his 8 MP Olympus C-8080- granted the glass on the Oly is extraordinary.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

 alexisgreat's gear list:alexisgreat's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Olympus E-520 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alexisgreat
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,858Gear list
Like?
Re: Alex ...
In reply to alexisgreat, Apr 9, 2013

It will be interesting to see if someone gets both the HS50 and the SL1000 and does a direct comparison, as the SL1000 uses a non EXR sensor.

Im not sure if it's EXR at work here or the fact that these newer sensors are CMOS, but if the SL1000 displays the same effect then we can eliminate the modified color filter array as the cause.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

 alexisgreat's gear list:alexisgreat's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Olympus E-520 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lloydy
Forum ProPosts: 18,865Gear list
Like?
Alex ...
In reply to alexisgreat, Apr 9, 2013

alexisgreat wrote:

Dave your results are interesting to me because I brought up something I read elsewhere about EXR sensors perhaps not having the same discernable resolution as conventional ones, perhaps because of the modified color filter array (being particularly obvious with green foliage, because that is the color filter most impacted.)

Also I believe Bill bought the HS20 and commented the visual resolution did not match his 8 MP Olympus C-8080- granted the glass on the Oly is extraordinary.

... The results are somewhat disappointing when I see a comparison like this, especially the Raw results.

Overall, it has nothing to do with the lens, it is simply that the sensor is way noisier than it ought to be (even shooting Raw), and the EXR Jpeg engine is not extracting the detail it should. In fact, it is crucifying detail. Especially at M size.

Whilst I posted Raw conversion results from Lightroom at default settings, even trying a whole lot of edit tricks did nothing to improve the IQ. I got slightly better results from the RFC EX but nothing came close to the base Sony image.

I'm now wondering what the new comparable crop of Sony's would produce 

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

-- hide signature --

Dave

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alexisgreat
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,858Gear list
Like?
Re: Alex ...
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

You read my mind Dave! I was just about to post that I dont think it has anything to do with the lens, because we have already demonstrated that the lens seems sharp, especially compared to previous HS series cameras, but even more to the point, all lenses display a characteristic pattern (particularly in superzoom cameras, but in general, in all cameras and all lenses, it's just a matter of degree) of being sharp near the middle of the frame and progressively less so towards the edges. The effect I am seeing here has no gradient, the mush seems to be equal everywhere, so this is either the sensor or the camera's own processing at work here.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

 alexisgreat's gear list:alexisgreat's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Olympus E-520 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MarvinErich
Junior MemberPosts: 39Gear list
Like?
Re: Dave...
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

Lloydy wrote:

alexisgreat wrote:

Wow Dave, some very interesting results.....

... Interesting was not exactly the word that sprung to mind 

you mentioned that the 8 MP camera was 10 yrs old, so circa 2003, would it happen to be the Olympus C-8080 by any chance?  I think that came out in 2004, but it's close enough lol.

On second thought, that camera may have had more zoom than the great Oly camera did, so was it the Sony F808 or Nikon 8800 perhaps?

Sony F828, which I still have but have not used in a few years now.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

-- hide signature --

Dave

Thanks Dave.

This is really complicated results. 10 years old cam beats a new one!

The F828 has a HUGE pixel size and large sensor. Aperture is f/2 in wide angle. But I keep having no words.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
xeriwthe
Regular MemberPosts: 369
Like?
it's not too surprising
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

Well, the Sony F828 sensor is twice the size of the HS50 (60mm sq. vs 30mm sq.), so it seems that 10 years of innovation, minus a switch to CMOS tech, has not made up for a 1 stop difference in sensor size.

CMOS is generally a detriment to image quality.  It combines 3 functions (charge collection, charge amplification, analog to digital conversion) into one chip, instead of separating the stages into different 3 different chips, as in a CCD system.  Fewer chips benefits power consumption (1 chips is easier to power than 3 chips), manufacturing cost (yay profits, IQ be darned), and sensor readout bandwidth (so we have tons of 1080p recording devices now and the ability to shoot 10fps at 12MP).

So, even if we have reached the point where CCD and CMOS have reached parity, there's still the fact that there's a 1 stop difference in size.  Just keeping things in perspective.  It would be interesting to see a comparison with double the ISO on the sony, just to be fair

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lloydy
Forum ProPosts: 18,865Gear list
Like?
Xeriwthe ...
In reply to xeriwthe, Apr 9, 2013

xeriwthe wrote:

Well, the Sony F828 sensor is twice the size of the HS50 (60mm sq. vs 30mm sq.), so it seems that 10 years of innovation, minus a switch to CMOS tech, has not made up for a 1 stop difference in sensor size.

CMOS is generally a detriment to image quality.  It combines 3 functions (charge collection, charge amplification, analog to digital conversion) into one chip, instead of separating the stages into different 3 different chips, as in a CCD system.  Fewer chips benefits power consumption (1 chips is easier to power than 3 chips), manufacturing cost (yay profits, IQ be darned), and sensor readout bandwidth (so we have tons of 1080p recording devices now and the ability to shoot 10fps at 12MP).

So, even if we have reached the point where CCD and CMOS have reached parity, there's still the fact that there's a 1 stop difference in size.  Just keeping things in perspective.  It would be interesting to see a comparison with double the ISO on the sony, just to be fair

... Thank you for your explanation.

The F828 hasn't been turned on for a few years and I am now attempting to charge the battery. If successful I'll do a couple of side by sides - Just for fun.

-- hide signature --

Dave

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lloydy
Forum ProPosts: 18,865Gear list
Like?
Marvin ...
In reply to MarvinErich, Apr 9, 2013

MarvinErich wrote:

Lloydy wrote:

alexisgreat wrote:

Wow Dave, some very interesting results.....

... Interesting was not exactly the word that sprung to mind 

you mentioned that the 8 MP camera was 10 yrs old, so circa 2003, would it happen to be the Olympus C-8080 by any chance?  I think that came out in 2004, but it's close enough lol.

On second thought, that camera may have had more zoom than the great Oly camera did, so was it the Sony F808 or Nikon 8800 perhaps?

Sony F828, which I still have but have not used in a few years now.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

-- hide signature --

Dave

Thanks Dave.

This is really complicated results. 10 years old cam beats a new one!

... Certainly not what I was expecting to see.

The L v  M didn't surprise me though. It is an absolute myth that M size can give as good, or better, results than L size on the HS50 EXR or, for that matter, on the HS30 EXR. I have both.

Keep in mind that I was (am) a proponent of shooting M size on the F200 EXR, which I also have.

The F828 has a HUGE pixel size and large sensor. Aperture is f/2 in wide angle. But I keep having no words.

-- hide signature --

Dave

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alexisgreat
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,858Gear list
Like?
Re: Xeriwthe ...
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

Dave, he's right about CMOS, could also be EXR or even Fuji's noise processing or a combo of the above..... did you put NR on Low?

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

 alexisgreat's gear list:alexisgreat's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Olympus E-520 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alexisgreat
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,858Gear list
Like?
Re: Keep in mind guys
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

When the 2/3 format sensor at 8 mp first came out there was a lot of complaints about its levels of noise and how 8 mp was too much for that size sensor (before that we had 2/3 format 5 mp sensors which were better like in the Nikon CP5000 and 5700)..... it's older tech and we've gotten better since then, and actually the sensor that came out after that, the 1/1.8 format 7 mp sensor was actually BETTER even if it was a little smaller...... it was one of the reasons I bought the C-7070 rather than the C-8080 although the latter had the better lens the C-7070 had a sensor with a lower noise level.  Size isn't the only thing which matters here.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

 alexisgreat's gear list:alexisgreat's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Olympus E-520 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MarvinErich
Junior MemberPosts: 39Gear list
Like?
Re: Keep in mind guys
In reply to alexisgreat, Apr 9, 2013

alexisgreat wrote:

When the 2/3 format sensor at 8 mp first came out there was a lot of complaints about its levels of noise and how 8 mp was too much for that size sensor (before that we had 2/3 format 5 mp sensors which were better like in the Nikon CP5000 and 5700)..... it's older tech and we've gotten better since then, and actually the sensor that came out after that, the 1/1.8 format 7 mp sensor was actually BETTER even if it was a little smaller...... it was one of the reasons I bought the C-7070 rather than the C-8080 although the latter had the better lens the C-7070 had a sensor with a lower noise level.  Size isn't the only thing which matters here.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

To me the solution is put a APS-C sensor on bridge camera.

The ideia is simple:

At Wide angle we have a good IQ.

At full zoom, 1000mm, 1200mm or 1700mm, the projected image uses a small area in sensor, maybe 1/2". So in this way we have both great features in one cam: IQ and Super Zoom.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alexisgreat
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,858Gear list
Like?
Re: Keep in mind guys
In reply to MarvinErich, Apr 9, 2013

No APS-C I hate that 3:2 ratio, make it four thirds and we have a deal lol.

You can get better zooming with four thirds too, a 600mm EFL with 4/3 size sensor is still portable.  Make a quality 2x TC for people who want more reach.

I like your method but how many megapixels in that small area? You can still use the full sensor in my scenario above and for more reach the manufacturer should make a quality TC.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

 alexisgreat's gear list:alexisgreat's gear list
Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Olympus E-520 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lloydy
Forum ProPosts: 18,865Gear list
Like?
Alex ...
In reply to alexisgreat, Apr 9, 2013

alexisgreat wrote:

Dave, he's right about CMOS, could also be EXR or even Fuji's noise processing or a combo of the above..... did you put NR on Low?

... Believe me I have tried a myriad of settings. These particular images were shot with NR at -2 (low) and Sharpening at 0 (standard).

I don't think it has anything to do with the settings as the Raw files also display too much noise, and too little detail.

Reminds me of the early days of the HS10 when there was a lot of smearing of detail. Fortunately, a firmware update (mostly) resolved this.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

-- hide signature --

Dave

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Nando Kenobi
New MemberPosts: 19
Like?
Re: Tim ...
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

Tim39 wrote:

Ouch!

... Not the word I first thought of but it was also a four letter word 

Ouch is a good descriptor though !

-- hide signature --

Tim

-- hide signature --

Dave

Lol

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MarvinErich
Junior MemberPosts: 39Gear list
Like?
Re: Alex ...
In reply to Lloydy, Apr 9, 2013

Lloydy wrote:

alexisgreat wrote:

Dave, he's right about CMOS, could also be EXR or even Fuji's noise processing or a combo of the above..... did you put NR on Low?

... Believe me I have tried a myriad of settings. These particular images were shot with NR at -2 (low) and Sharpening at 0 (standard).

I don't think it has anything to do with the settings as the Raw files also display too much noise, and too little detail.

Reminds me of the early days of the HS10 when there was a lot of smearing of detail. Fortunately, a firmware update (mostly) resolved this.

How good is the HS10 became after firmware update? I still have hope.

-- hide signature --

http://Alex_the_GREAT.photoshop.com

-- hide signature --

Dave

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads