HS30 taking pasty pictures of Moon

[Italiese]

Hello,

I'm new in the forum so I hope I'm writing in the right place.

I just bought a Fujifilm HS30 and took some pictures of a full Moon but I'm not at all satisfied with the results. I used almost all kind of combination of settings (Tone, Sharpness, Noise), exposure, ISO (used mostly 100) but the results I got was always not sharp at all and sometimes the pictures looks like an oil painting or pasty.

I owned a HS10 before and I always got impressed of the results such a "simple" compact camera could deliver, so I supposed the HS30 should deliver the same quality or even better. Here are 2 examples. I was in a hurry when I posted them so the HS10 shot isn't one the best, but it is possible to compare it a little:









When zooming on the images it is possible to see what I'm talking about.

I didn't take a RAW picture yet, but I'll do that soon, but still HS10 shots weren't taken in RAW either.

Now I would like to know if someone else is experiencing the same thing or maybe is my camera not working as it should? Any tips?

 

[jcmarfilph]

They have similar IQ although you have shot them at different dates.

If you are not processing RAW or JPEG then use Sharpness = Standard, NR=Standard otherwise, NR=Low, Sharpness=Low

HS30 will definitely have an edge if you shoot it in 16MP RAW and PP and downsize it.

-=[ Joms ]=-

 

[Italiese]

Thank you for your answer. I already tried your suggested settings and the result was not that different. Maybe I should post some other pictures where the problem is more evident. However, I'll definitely try shooting some RAW to see the difference.

Wonder even if the metering mode (i.e. spot) make some difference?

 

[jcmarfilph]

Yes spot-metering is a must for moon photography.

Thank you for your answer. I already tried your suggested settings and the result was not that different. Maybe I should post some other pictures where the problem is more evident. However, I'll definitely try shooting some RAW to see the difference.

Wonder even if the metering mode (i.e. spot) make some difference?

--
-=[ Joms ]=-

 

[Michael Melb AU]

HS30 sports EXR technology - which is ambiguous to say the least. It's also very persistent and tries to get everywhere, manual modes included. The idea was to widen the tonal range and minimize noise, but often it comes at cost of lower sharpness and oil paint effect. The picture looks like it was heavily processed - which it was. The best way to deal with it is to control how much EXR contributes to the image. Joms did give you some good advice. I would add to that using L image size (this limits what EXR can do), setting DR to no more than 100, use single auto-focus (AF-S), and best of all - take RAW and process it. Another thing - if you still own HS10 do comparison shots at the same time. Moon features change dramatically depending on it's phase and atmospheric conditions.
--
Everyone can do it - some do it well. But nobody is perfect.

 

[HZP]

Here is one from a Nikon P510. Almost same position.

Maybe you are doing something wrong. I can even get better results with the good old s100fs.

 

[PerH]

HS 30 with spot metering.
PerH

 

[jcmarfilph]

Here you go HS30 moon shot of yours...



-=[ Joms ]=-

 

[bobmandwendyv]

Don't know about spot metering with my ancient and much loved S1000FD but here's a very old moonshot handheld in downtown Toronto.

Regards,
Bob





.

 

[Billx08]

HS30 will definitely have an edge if you shoot it in 16MP RAW and PP and downsize it.

I already tried your suggested settings and the result was not that different.

Wrong. This isn't true for fine, low contrast subjects, and the moon's surface is definitely a low contrast gray. That's why Italiese didn't see much of a difference. It's good to see people that can accurately describe what they see and not (as you do too often) describe what you'd like us to believe about the HS30.

Thank you for your answer. I already tried your suggested settings and the result was not that different. Maybe I should post some other pictures where the problem is more evident. However, I'll definitely try shooting some RAW to see the difference.

Yes spot-metering is a must for moon photography.

You couldn't be more wrong. In fact, both exposures were pretty good for the moon, both slightly underexposed, with the HS30 a tad more underexposed than the HS10. The moon is illuminated by the sun just as the earth is, so exposures would be similar to shooting scenes on a sunny day if the moon was just as reflective as the earth, and we could used the Sunny 16 Rule that scores of photographers used before light metering was in common use. But since the moon is a less reflective gray, A Sunny 8 rule would work for the moon most of the time. Since Fuji tends to rate its camera ISO values a bit optimistically, they should probably use a Sunny 5.6 rule, which would be "With the camera set to f/5.6 and the ISO at ###, use 1/### for the shutter speed. These are almost the exact values used for the photos in the OP, with 1/160 and 1/125 used instead of the 1/100 that the rule would suggest. Since both produce slightly underexposed photos of the moon, 1/100 sec. would probably be best, but 1/125 would still work pretty well.

 

[Billx08]

. . .
I would add to that using L image size (this limits what EXR can do)

I'd suggest shooting both L and M size images whenever you're not sure, but the OP shot both and found little difference, which should be no surprise with subjects like the moon. The moon's low contrast tends to make the HS cameras use more aggressive in-camera processing, even at ISO 100, and it starts even earlier when L size is used. That's why L size produces better results with high contrast, not-so-fine subjects (like camera resolution test charts) and M size usually produces better results with soft, low contrast subjects like leaves, grass, fur, etc.

. . . setting DR to no more than 100,

For the moon, yes, but if you check the EXIF data you'll see that both cameras used DR 100%.

Another thing - if you still own HS10 do comparison shots at the same time. Moon features change dramatically depending on it's phase and atmospheric conditions.

Shooting at the same time is best for comparisons since as you note, atmospheric conditions can change. But the two photos, shot only a few days apart show for all practical purposes, full moons. This produces low contrast photos. For greater detail you want to shoot when the moon is in more of a crescent phase, which will produce more high contrast shadows.

 

[Billx08]

Here is one from a Nikon P510. Almost same position.

Maybe you are doing something wrong. I can even get better results with the good old s100fs.

Both the P510 and the S100fs are well known for exceptionally high resolution, and they produce higher resolution images than any of the HS cameras. Another thing to consider that might explain the poor results (besides what I've already mentioned) is that you'll get better photos if the moon is shot high in the sky. The lower it is, the more resolution-robbing atmosphere that you have to shoot through.

 

[Billx08]

HS 30 with spot metering.

It did what it's supposed to do or it let you down, depending on what your goal was. It produced a middle gray tone for the gray moon. You could have increased the exposure by a stop or more and still been below clipping (blown highlights), which would have let you see more detail in the shadow areas. Being the brightest object in the sky, the moon usually appears to be quite bright, not grayish as your photo shows it, but it's still a pretty good capture.

 

[Larry Winters]

HS30 will definitely have an edge if you shoot it in 16MP RAW and PP and downsize it.

I already tried your suggested settings and the result was not that different.

Wrong. This isn't true for fine, low contrast subjects, and the moon's surface is definitely a low contrast gray. That's why Italiese didn't see much of a difference. It's good to see people that can accurately describe what they see and not (as you do too often) describe what you'd like us to believe about the HS30.

Thank you for your answer. I already tried your suggested settings and the result was not that different. Maybe I should post some other pictures where the problem is more evident. However, I'll definitely try shooting some RAW to see the difference.

Yes spot-metering is a must for moon photography.

You couldn't be more wrong. In fact, both exposures were pretty good for the moon, both slightly underexposed, with the HS30 a tad more underexposed than the HS10. The moon is illuminated by the sun just as the earth is, so exposures would be similar to shooting scenes on a sunny day if the moon was just as reflective as the earth, and we could used the Sunny 16 Rule that scores of photographers used before light metering was in common use. But since the moon is a less reflective gray, A Sunny 8 rule would work for the moon most of the time. Since Fuji tends to rate its camera ISO values a bit optimistically, they should probably use a Sunny 5.6 rule, which would be "With the camera set to f/5.6 and the ISO at ###, use 1/### for the shutter speed. These are almost the exact values used for the photos in the OP, with 1/160 and 1/125 used instead of the 1/100 that the rule would suggest. Since both produce slightly underexposed photos of the moon, 1/100 sec. would probably be best, but 1/125 would still work pretty well.

Nothing wrong with your settings or the OP's but what was your photometry (metering) mode? Since you implied spot was wrong I can only assume you use average or multi, since you have to choose one.

I've always obtained the best results with spot metering with a full moon as average or multi blows out the moon so much there is no detail left.

lw

 

[jcmarfilph]

HS30 will definitely have an edge if you shoot it in 16MP RAW and PP and downsize it.

I already tried your suggested settings and the result was not that different.

Wrong. This isn't true for fine, low contrast subjects, and the moon's surface is definitely a low contrast gray. That's why Italiese didn't see much of a difference. It's good to see people that can accurately describe what they see and not (as you do too often) describe what you'd like us to believe about the HS30.

Thank you for your answer. I already tried your suggested settings and the result was not that different. Maybe I should post some other pictures where the problem is more evident. However, I'll definitely try shooting some RAW to see the difference.

Yes spot-metering is a must for moon photography.

You couldn't be more wrong. In fact, both exposures were pretty good for the moon, both slightly underexposed, with the HS30 a tad more underexposed than the HS10. The moon is illuminated by the sun just as the earth is, so exposures would be similar to shooting scenes on a sunny day if the moon was just as reflective as the earth, and we could used the Sunny 16 Rule that scores of photographers used before light metering was in common use. But since the moon is a less reflective gray, A Sunny 8 rule would work for the moon most of the time. Since Fuji tends to rate its camera ISO values a bit optimistically, they should probably use a Sunny 5.6 rule, which would be "With the camera set to f/5.6 and the ISO at ###, use 1/### for the shutter speed. These are almost the exact values used for the photos in the OP, with 1/160 and 1/125 used instead of the 1/100 that the rule would suggest. Since both produce slightly underexposed photos of the moon, 1/100 sec. would probably be best, but 1/125 would still work pretty well.

Lol are you blind? Oh lemme guess, a well-exposed moon is a moon just in all-white-glory?

Both shots are overexposed and you have to pull down the highlight to see more detail (see my edits).

-=[ Joms ]=-

 

[Italiese]

Well, this is the first time I post something on this forum, but I can already say that I like it! Lot of comments have been posted just only few hours after I opened my thread ...so nice! Never happened before in other forums. Thank you everybody.

Well, unfortunately I don't have anymore the HS10, but I have many old pictures so I'll try to take same shots at the same time/day as the old ones. Regarding all the tips I received from you guys, well I had already tried most of them but the result was quite the same. The only things I have left are shooting the Moon at different phases and when she is higher in the sky (btw my shot was taken when the Moon was 20 degree above the horizon) and RAW. If this last one works then I think it is a pity that I have to use that to get a decent Moon picture.

 

[Italiese]

Is the sharp one on the left mine as well?? In that case how did you make it?

 

[Italiese]

I tried both spot and multi and still same result. The only difference was in the LCD display visualizing a clear image of the moon in spot mode. In multi it was just blurried, but as said the result was pretty the same.

 

[Billx08]

Yes spot-metering is a must for moon photography.

You couldn't be more wrong. In fact, both exposures were pretty good for the moon, both slightly underexposed, with the HS30 a tad more underexposed than the HS10. The moon is illuminated by the sun just as the earth is, so exposures would be similar to shooting scenes on a sunny day if the moon was just as reflective as the earth, and we could used the Sunny 16 Rule that scores of photographers used before light metering was in common use. But since the moon is a less reflective gray, A Sunny 8 rule would work for the moon most of the time. Since Fuji tends to rate its camera ISO values a bit optimistically, they should probably use a Sunny 5.6 rule, which would be "With the camera set to f/5.6 and the ISO at ###, use 1/### for the shutter speed. These are almost the exact values used for the photos in the OP, with 1/160 and 1/125 used instead of the 1/100 that the rule would suggest. Since both produce slightly underexposed photos of the moon, 1/100 sec. would probably be best, but 1/125 would still work pretty well.

Lol are you blind? Oh lemme guess, a well-exposed moon is a moon just in all-white-glory?

Both shots are overexposed and you have to pull down the highlight to see more detail (see my edits).

No, I'm not blind and it's clear that the photos are not overexposed, since the highlights of both photos haven't reached the right edge of the histograms. Pulling down the highlights may make them a little easier to see but it murders the dark regions. These weren't RAW photos, just JPEGs, so the fact that there was detail when you pulled down the highlights PROVES that the photos weren't overexposed. If they were, the highlights would have been blown and there would be no detail to see.

The way Italiese shot the photos produced what other photographers would get using the ETTR philosophy, good exposures. That lets you adjust the brightness, darkness, tonality, whatever in PP, getting the best IQ possible. Intentionally underexposing always results in poorer IQ and often results in posterization if you need to adjust the tonality in PP. What the OP should get from this thread is that you're one of the forum's most unreliable and untrustworthy where advice and judgment is concerned. Most of us have known this for a long, long time.

 

[Larry Winters]

I tried both spot and multi and still same result. The only difference was in the LCD display visualizing a clear image of the moon in spot mode. In multi it was just blurried, but as said the result was pretty the same.

If you had actually looked at the whole pic on your computer the multi metering image would have been pure white with minimal if any detail or contrast. All detail most likely blown out because the camera metering was trying to brighten the black sky and therefore made the moon too bright.

lw