Reading mode: Light Dark

First day with FZ50+LW55

Go to last post
aftab

aftab

Forum Pro
Messages
10,483
Solutions
2
Reaction score
3,157
Location
Thames, NZ
It was Kirwin's idea... he said I should get this wide angle... never thought about it before, it is interesting how we think more about tele than wide with FZs... got it few days ago, but only managed to take it out today... few pics from my neighborhood.... as always, CC welcome







http://www.flickr.com/photos/aftab/
 
Hey Aftab..... these are good.... you beat me at getting the WA lense... more expensive than the TCon tho eh?....The second one is lovely and sharp and well saturated...the other two look a little soft on my monitor. However they are all excellent. Have you tried it with 16:9 ratio yet? I would be very interested to see how and if, it performs ok?....

Another question I would like to ask....... Ive noticed when using the XP Windows viewer, my images look very soft. compared to viewing with PSE4 at full screen.where they look nice and crisp. But what I have noticed when using the XP viewer...is that if I clik on the full size icon to view at 100%, then clik on the icon to "fit to screen", I get an image that is 20 times sharper than if I were merely to clik thru the images one by one.

What Im trying to say is... I get a really clear image usin XP only if I go 100% then return to "Fit To screen" If I dont use this process, all my images look soft and flat, compared the the full screen view in PSE4. Do youu get this phenonia, if you try using the XP viewer... I would appreciate it if you could try it, and see if you get the same as me.... Then I would like someone to give me a fix for this problem, if there is one. It would be so nice to get the actual full resolution pictures using the XP viewer, without having to go thru this process, or having to open up PSE4 to see them really clearly.

Regards

Rik
 
KIWI Rik said:
Hey Aftab..... these are good.... you beat me at getting the WA
lense... more expensive than the TCon tho eh?....The second one is
lovely and sharp and well saturated...the other two look a little
soft on my monitor. However they are all excellent. Have you tried
it with 16:9 ratio yet? I would be very interested to see how and
if, it performs ok?....
Click to expand...
Thanks Rik, is it more expensive than TC?... I didn't know that...I agree second one is sharpest of all, but the other two looks fine on my monitor, if they didn't then I could have applied a bit more USM...my monitor resolution is set to 1280x1024 pixels and when I reduce it to 1024x768 the images look a bit softer, whats your resolution set to?... yes, I am very pleased with colors I am getting from FZ50, they look so natural and rich, at least thats what I see on my monitor. I haven't tried 16:9 with FZ50 yet, but I will... it should be fun.
Kiwi Rik said:
Another question I would like to ask....... Ive noticed when using
the XP Windows viewer, my images look very soft. compared to
viewing with PSE4 at full screen.where they look nice and crisp.
But what I have noticed when using the XP viewer...is that if I
clik on the full size icon to view at 100%, then clik on the icon
to "fit to screen", I get an image that is 20 times sharper than if
I were merely to clik thru the images one by one.
What Im trying to say is... I get a really clear image usin XP only
if I go 100% then return to "Fit To screen" If I dont use this
process, all my images look soft and flat, compared the the full
screen view in PSE4. Do youu get this phenonia, if you try using
the XP viewer... I would appreciate it if you could try it, and see
if you get the same as me.... Then I would like someone to give
me a fix for this problem, if there is one. It would be so nice
to get the actual full resolution pictures using the XP viewer,
without having to go thru this process, or having to open up PSE4
to see them really clearly.
Click to expand...
Very interesting observation...I didn't notice it before, but I have just tried it and it seems that you are right... when increased in size and then reduced again the images look a bit sharper in Windows Picture and Fax Viewer.. the difference is very slight, but it is there.. even the noise seem to become a bit more prominent.... does that mean that Windows is applying some sharpening algorithm somewhere? .. I don't know...with regard to the difference in sharpness between PSE4 and Windows Viewer.. I have noticed it before... I don't know if there is a solution to this other than increasing your monitor sharpness if it is not already set to the highest resolution. I would love to hear what others think.
Kiwi Rik said:
Regards

Rik
Click to expand...
--
Cheers
aftab
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aftab/
 
aftab said:
KIWI Rik said:
Hey Aftab..... these are good.... you beat me at getting the WA
lense... more expensive than the TCon tho eh?....The second one is
lovely and sharp and well saturated...the other two look a little
soft on my monitor. However they are all excellent. Have you tried
it with 16:9 ratio yet? I would be very interested to see how and
if, it performs ok?....
Click to expand...
Thanks Rik, is it more expensive than TC?... I didn't know that...I
agree second one is sharpest of all, but the other two looks fine
on my monitor, if they didn't then I could have applied a bit more
USM...my monitor resolution is set to 1280x1024 pixels and when I
reduce it to 1024x768 the images look a bit softer, whats your
resolution set to?... yes, I am very pleased with colors I am
getting from FZ50, they look so natural and rich, at least thats
what I see on my monitor. I haven't tried 16:9 with FZ50 yet, but I
will... it should be fun.
aftab said:
Another question I would like to ask....... Ive noticed when using
the XP Windows viewer, my images look very soft. compared to
viewing with PSE4 at full screen.where they look nice and crisp.
But what I have noticed when using the XP viewer...is that if I
clik on the full size icon to view at 100%, then clik on the icon
to "fit to screen", I get an image that is 20 times sharper than if
I were merely to clik thru the images one by one.
What Im trying to say is... I get a really clear image usin XP only
if I go 100% then return to "Fit To screen" If I dont use this
process, all my images look soft and flat, compared the the full
screen view in PSE4. Do youu get this phenonia, if you try using
the XP viewer... I would appreciate it if you could try it, and see
if you get the same as me.... Then I would like someone to give
me a fix for this problem, if there is one. It would be so nice
to get the actual full resolution pictures using the XP viewer,
without having to go thru this process, or having to open up PSE4
to see them really clearly.
Click to expand...
Very interesting observation...I didn't notice it before, but I
have just tried it and it seems that you are right... when
increased in size and then reduced again the images look a bit
sharper in Windows Picture and Fax Viewer.. the difference is very
slight, but it is there.. even the noise seem to become a bit more
prominent.... does that mean that Windows is applying some
sharpening algorithm somewhere? .. I don't know...with regard to
the difference in sharpness between PSE4 and Windows Viewer.. I
have noticed it before... I don't know if there is a solution to
this other than increasing your monitor sharpness if it is not
already set to the highest resolution. I would love to hear what
others think.
aftab said:
Regards

Rik
Click to expand...
--
Cheers
aftab
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aftab/
Click to expand...
Hi Aftab..Thanks for your response. Ive just checked again my XP viewer, and there is a greater increase in clarity with those photos taken with "in camera sharpeness" set to high....or those pictures which I have sharpened in PSE. I found this issue happened more markedly when I had sharpened a picture, then when I reveiwed it in XP viewer, it was completely flat, until I went thru the above exercise. Not so noticable with pictures that have not had any sharpening done, either in camera or any in PP.

I have my LCD monitor set for 1280x1024 at 96dpi. Im not sure if setting it to 72dpi, as it does with the sRGB process in the camera. I wonder if this would make any difference. Are we susposed to match this I wonder. Setting the monitor to 72dpi is suposed to make things smaller and finer, but i've not been game enough to try it and see what effect this may have ...Any thoughts ?????

Your photos which I felt were a tiny bit flat...... I think it is more a lack of contrast.... something I seem to prefer.... So I think it is just me on this one....

Regards Rik
 
KIWI Rik said:
Another question I would like to ask....... Ive noticed when using
the XP Windows viewer, my images look very soft. compared to
viewing with PSE4 at full screen.where they look nice and crisp.
But what I have noticed when using the XP viewer...is that if I
clik on the full size icon to view at 100%, then clik on the icon
to "fit to screen", I get an image that is 20 times sharper than if
I were merely to clik thru the images one by one.
Click to expand...
Well, this a big surprise to me too. I notice the same, at 800 x 600 resolution (yes I'm old fashioned, this gives me the best refresh rate without headache). I never did notice this because I always use ACDsee (5.0). A few weeks ago I did a try with Xnview. That program seemed as least as good as ACDsee, but the full image shown was a little bit worse, so I went back to ACDsee.

What I know, the resampling of pics is different for every other program. As long as the screen has a different resolution as the original, resampling will have to happen. Now comes out that windows viewer even has different behaviour for different sizes. The only solution I can think of is not a solution, just use another program. PSE 4 is unknown by me, for me ACDsee has always been a nice program, but XNview could also be interesting.
 
These look great. A Wide Converter is on my short list of wanted accessories... and this makes me want it more. The tests I've seen give the LW a bit of an edge over the TCON.
KIWI Rik said:
Another question I would like to ask....... Ive noticed when using
the XP Windows viewer, my images look very soft. compared to
viewing with PSE4 at full screen
Click to expand...
I've noticed the same thing. If I'm just previewing photos straight off the card through the viewer, I'm often disapointed, until I open them up in PaintShopPro, and they look a lot better.

--
http://www.timandsharon.net
http://www.flickr.com/photos/timcoop/
 
Hi aftab!

Looking good.

Give us some handling experience with this thing. How long does it take to screw it on/off? It is a big hassle to use?
 
I don't know if this is germain, but in Photoshop you always have to set the view to 25%, 50%, 75%,1005 to see the sharpest pricture...

-ddog
 
secretworld said:
rogie australia said:
i have the LT 55 and the LW would be good i also like wideangle and
use my FX01 for those pics
Click to expand...
How do you like the LT55? Can you post some sample pics? I´m
thinking about buying it , but the review isn´t that great on CK´s.
Thanks
Vincent
--
Click to expand...
Hi Vincent, search for kirwin's thread, he posted some LT55 images some time ago, I got one too, but haven't used it for a long time... I think its good, but not as good as Nikon's TC(very expensive).
aftab
 
timcoop said:
These look great. A Wide Converter is on my short list of wanted
accessories... and this makes me want it more. The tests I've seen
give the LW a bit of an edge over the TCON.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your comments....From my short experience in using the wide converter, I would agree with you, I think its better than Pana's TC.
aftab
 
Robiro said:
Hi aftab!

Looking good.
Click to expand...
Thanks Robiro... I think I didn't post the right samples for a wide converter, for example pic#1 was cropped to get rid of some empty sky, you don't get an idea about the converter's performance...similarly pic#2 was cropped too...from pic#3 you get some idea, it was not cropped..it was shot from only a few centimeter distance and still covered a good area.
Robiro said:
Give us some handling experience with this thing. How long does it
take to screw it on/off? It is a big hassle to use?
Click to expand...
I think it handles very well, takes only few seconds to put in or take off and its very light weight. I thought you would like it... it definitely would add more spice to your wide/perspective shots.

--



http://www.flickr.com/photos/aftab/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top