S2 smart zoom?

[Montana500]

"Big deal !! You end up with a 1Mpx picture out of an initial 5Mpx sensor ! .. what's the point ? the summit of digital snake oil ! "

The big deal is you can focus and frame your photo better than you could if you cropped in photoshop.

 

[Montana500]

"Personally, I think I'd stick with the highest res. image at 12x with IS and leave it to more powerful post-processing to enlarge anything I needed after that."

You are dropping down in resolution, but you are maintaining all other qualities.

This is a huge advantage when trying to focus in on and frame wildlife shots.

 

[Rob Bernhard]

And it's available on almost every single digital camera out there (save, digital SLRs).

And it's complete and total rubbish.

 

[Montana500]

"picture speaks a thousand words. so post the photo you take at 16x smart-zoom vs pic you take at 10x & cropped to 16x by s/ware, then let our eyes see 'em"

good luck properly focusing the eagle in photoshop cropping out to 16x versus the guy who had 16x smart zoom i nthe field to begin with

 

[Montana500]

"And it's available on almost every single digital camera out there (save, digital SLRs).

And it's complete and total rubbish. "

that is not what we are talking about. "smart zoom" on some fuji, olympus and fuji models is a very handy feature.

 

[Montana500]

http://www.photoxels.com/article_zoom.html

interesting couple paragraphs on smart zoom.

 

[aC39]

i have to thank montana for brightening my monday, i'm sitting here reading his posts and quitely laughing my @$$ off at work.... you people have to realize all he's going to do is constantly repeat the marketing mumbo-jumbo thats obviously infested his mind, and he has no comprehension of how the camera is actually focusing/metering, and how photoshoping it is no different in the end (and as i agree with the marjority of posters, superior to that of super zoom)

i'm going to say this once montana, and youre going to disagree but it really doesnt matter. YOU FELL FOR THEIR MARKETING SCHEME, you have been brainwashed into believing that your camera is doing something it isnt, you are wrong if you think it is focusing "better".

just keep saying this to yourself... "i'm wrong" say it over and over and maybe eventually it will replace the synaptic responses in your brain which have been formed by hp/fuji whoever got it in there to begin with.

(no i dont need to prove my point, its been proven multiple times in this thread, always followed by "if you think cropping in PS from 12x is better than focusing at 16x then youre crazy" over and over and over ad nausium)

 

[aC39]

So, in effect, you've basically more or less retained the same image > quality but you have to save your resulting simulated[ b] zoomed > image in a smaller image size. Of course, if now you turn around and > enlarge it in post-processing, you will be limited to what a 3MP image can > be enlarged up to without image degradation.

I call Smart Zoom "ethical digital zoom" because it is not made available at > full image size -- this would cause image degradation. The smaller you > elect to save your image, the more smart zoom power you have available > (folks, you're basically just cropping the image without re-enlarging, > which you can also do at any time in post-processing)[ b]. I would > personally not recommend cropping down below 3MP, which means that > Smart Zoom is useful only in digital cameras with 4MP and above.

taken ver'batim from your own posted article, which admits full well you can do this "simulated" zooming all the same in post processing. your original full megapixel image is no more/less upsampled than this reduced image, so theres no more/less loss either way, so in effect youre removing frame information in camera they you may well decide you had wanted later, anything more youre telling yourself is just hurting yourself.

 

[aC39]

woops, forgot the forum doesnt support bbc code... just imaging that the text between the 's is bold

 

[neuron09]

So, it is just cropping in camera without interpolating? That seems pretty useless, IMO.

 

[Montana500]

"So, it is just cropping in camera without interpolating? That seems pretty useless, IMO"

not when it allows you to properly focus and frame a subject in the field, something you cant do in photoshop.

If you are at a national park, and there is an eagle 16x away - are you better off zooming in to 12x far away from the bird, which is unfocused of course, and then cropping down to 2 mp in Photoshop, or are you better off using the 16x smart zoom at 2 mp, and then properly focusing and framing the bird in the field?

which gives you a better photo?

come on.

 

[roelofj]

Montana, come on. And please just don't paste you're previous arguments again!

(please note that amount of s are approximate, no relation to real pixels!)

Taking the picture at 2 MP smart zoom:

* * * * * *

• • • E E *
    • E E *

* * * * * *
* * * * * *

With 5 MP:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• • • • • • • E E * * * * *
            • E E * * * * *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

not when it allows you to properly focus and frame a subject in the
field, something you cant do in photoshop.

1) Cropping afterwards can give you exactly the same picture as the smart zoom, or you can play around with differant compositions. Therefore I can see no reason why framing could possibly be better in camera.

2) Therefore the only advantage would be if focusing is better with the smart zoom. It has been stated in this thread that this is not so.
Can somebody produce something official proving/disproving this point?

3) True, smart zoom reduces need for post processing, but takes away option of playing with differant compostions.

I'll stick with cropping afterwards unless someone can convince me of the fact that focussing is better with the smart zoom.
roelof

 

[roelofj]

P.S

The E = eagle in my previous post

And i'm still waiting for my S2 to get my own eagles, can't wait!!!!

roelof

 

[Rob Bernhard]

Smart zoom is doing nothing that digital zoom doesn't already do. The argument is one of symantics. There is absolutly nothing new here.

 

[Montana500]

""

1) Cropping afterwards can give you exactly the same picture as the smart zoom, or you can play around with differant compositions. Therefore I can see no reason why framing could possibly be better in camera.""

How can photoshop focus in the field for you at 16x?

It can't. You do realize yo uneed to focus very well on these bird shots, correct?

""

2) Therefore the only advantage would be if focusing is better with the smart zoom. It has been stated in this thread that this is not so.""

How can it not be better to be at 16x, and have manual focus of the subject? I don't see how a 12x photoshop crop to 16x can duplicate that.

 

[digitalblue]

Yes I saw that line as well, here it is (Montana, take a look and see the quote from the article YOU posted on smart zoom):

"folks, you're basically just cropping the image without re-enlarging, which you can also do at any time in post-processing"

 

[Heihachi82]

Focus is done BEFORE taking the shot, so a 12x shot and a 16x shot will have the exact same focus metering/point/whatever, and the camera "see" the same pixels to judge where to focus, so the focus is exactly the same!

Why i should "focus" on photoshop, after taking a shot? You do the same after taking a shot using a 16x shot? You're telling that the 12x shot is all out of focus?

 

[neuron09]

"If you are at a national park, and there is an eagle 16x away - are you better off zooming in to 12x far away from the bird, which is unfocused of course, and then cropping down to 2 mp in Photoshop, or are you better off using the 16x smart zoom at 2 mp, and then properly focusing and framing the bird in the field?"

At 12x, why is the eagle unfocused? You state this as a certainty, but that somehow SmartZoom at 16x will fix this problem. I have an FZ3 (as well as 3 Canon digitals, so I am not Canon bashing in any way) and I use the spot focusing set up-- it is very accurate and works very well. Are the S1/S2 poor at focusing on a specific area of the field?

 

[Toedtoes]

From the article Montana so nicely provided:

"So, our recommendation still holds. If you want zoom power, only optical zoom matters! Smart Zoom is the better form of DIGITAL zoom, but what you GAIN in SIMULATED ZOOM power (again, you're just cropping), you LOSE in IMAGE SIZE. There's no free lunch.

Again, DON'T BUY a digital camera based on digital (traditional or SMART) zoom. Always compare optical zoom with optical zoom. If you are comparing 2 digital cameras with the same optical zoom, but one has smart digital zoom and the other has traditional digital zoom, then the smart zoom has a slight advantage. But personally, I wouldn't even look at that because there are a lot more important features to differentiate the cameras."

And by the way, I see absolutely NOTHING in this article about better focusing ability with "smart zoom". Your focusing is no better than with regular digital zoom, and that's no better than with your lesser optical, because your camera is still only seeing the subject at the 12x point (not at the imaginary 16x point of digital smart zoom). The camera focuses first and captures the image and then the image is cropped to the smaller size - no where in there are you focusing at a closer point than the optical lens can get to.

 

[aC39]

i said the same thing right here - http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=13776966 2 hours ago and montana seems to be ignoring it... but just wait, in a few minutes he'll post his same "but how can photoshop refocus at 12x what smart zoom can do at 16x" (copy/paste/copy/paste/copy/paste)