doctordave
Veteran Member
I agree, the venus IV is doing a whole lot better than previous versions at higher ISOs.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Venus 4 promise fulfilled. Bring on the LX3 and FZ60!
- Thread starter Prognathous
- Start date
Prognathous
Veteran Member
From what I've seen so far, the TZ5 would produce a better image under the same ISO and the same conditions. Far better if you factor in the advantage of OIS (and therefore lower possible ISO) when shooting such a static subject.
Needless to say, you'll need to get a TZ5 and use proper test methodology to know for sure. As it is, the images you posted thus far are quite meaningless.
Prog.
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
Only one way to find out..go get a teddy bear take some shots.
You keep saying meaningless, but there isnt a hope in hell ISO 1600 on the TZ-5 would get up to that, because VE IV will just take out ALL the details..
And this is very evident on the shots seen in the review. Sure its pushing it on the sammie, def is..but I could get a pretty decent print out of that..because its not got uber NR processing.
And this is what we are talking about NR processing..
--
I am not the 'Ghost Hunter', nor am I the Irish actor in the 'Quiet Man' ;-)
Ok, agreed on the color saturation.
I agree completely, however the problem on the Panasonic is not the sharpening, which is good also for PP, but it is the NR (again much better than previous generations and indeed they deserve credit for that). If the LX3 is basically a LX2 with the TZ5 processing, I'm very curious as to what the LX3 low NR setting will look like. With the LX2 low was not low enough, but with this better processing and slightly more hands off base NR it might actually turn out very acceptable.
Oh I do think that apart from the TZ5 deserving it's HR (just) rating, DPreview kinda wanted to reward them for investing in what is most important; image quality. The small part we disagree on is that you say they got it right and I say close, but I wouldn't mind slightly more luminous noise with some more detail. I'm hoping that's what the LX3 will offer (if it is 4/3 it will be a whole different matter).
--
http://flickr.com/photos/56983515@N00/
Current cam: TZ1
Wish cams: LX2 or GX100 with Fuji F30 sensor and Pentax K100D super or K20D.
Wish lens: Pentax or Tamron 18-250mm.
Prognathous
Veteran Member
If it's not the same teddy bear under the same conditions, it won't prove a thing. Serious methodology is the key to a serious comparison.
I don't think it will. This teddy bear practically fills the frame. Easy subject.
Prog.
....you'll be in line for "the Panny ***** of the year" award. I liked the Samsung watch shot btw in the last thread LOL!...not exactly lowlight was it? .....and it was soft as your teddy shot to hide the noise. No problem for any P&S let alone the TZ5 to match that. And you proved naff all if you take into consideration (which you can't seem to fathom) the size prints and the customer base that this camera is aimed at. It a travel camera and most prints will be 6x4 & 7x5s and all your NR and noise **** & bull is irrelevant at those sizes.
Also you failed to answer a few questions in my last post. Can you Samsung take these?
Answer: ....nope sirree! It don't go to 280mm, does it?
Was amazes me more is that you obviously don't like the Panny cameras and their sensors.....you must have told us 10,000 times already. We heard you, so why don't you move onto the Samsung forum and be happy. You say you are a serious photographer and you have a website offering professional services in photography....well all I can say man is that business must be real quite because you spend more time here moaning about Panny cameras than out there working!
*****************************************
Packy
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
I dont call 1/17th sec f3.7 ISO 1600 "lights on sunny day" but there you go, thats just me I guess!
.....and it was soft as your teddy shot to
I didnt hide anything, sharpness is set to soft in camera, I made that point. So sharpen it up, sure its got noise! Course it has, but its got something the TZ-5 hasnt, "details" ! ;-)
No problem for any P&S let alone the TZ5 to match
Ok then I expect some watch and teddy shots from you shortly!
And you proved naff all if you take into consideration (which
I know, asking for decent NR processing isnt on you top list, I dont mind it myself ;-)
And I could post some nice shots taken on film, that you couldnt match, or some from my DSLR, does this prove much? You are avoiding the issue here, because I called you out, and its a dead cert that the king TZ high ISO noise champ, is little more than a false pretender.
Do you have a 500mm mirror lens on your TZ? Or a super WA zoom, or a 17-35mm for you film camera? Maybe I bought it not for the super zoom range, cos it aint got one..but because I wanted an inexpensive camera for snaps and videos.
Um you started this TZ is great at high ISO, lets finish it! Sorry I put up shots that show just how not great the TZ is at high ISO , yeah you are right its got OIS, nice one..but I paid £99 for that camera, this one is £250!
Its Quiet, yes..picking up a bit..got some nice stuff lined up next month..more than happy to share some of it with you guys
--
I am not the 'Ghost Hunter', nor am I the Irish actor in the 'Quiet Man' ;-)
Prognathous
Veteran Member
TZ5
P50
No contest. Nikon's Expeed gets killed by Panasonic Venus 4.
Prog.
P50
No contest. Nikon's Expeed gets killed by Panasonic Venus 4.
Prog.
Prognathous
Veteran Member
TZ5
S8000
The Fuji is chroma-noise bonanza, while the Panasonic is much cleaner.
Prog.
S8000
The Fuji is chroma-noise bonanza, while the Panasonic is much cleaner.
Prog.
Apparently those then were not the best of the competition I was referring to. 
I did compare it to the Canon A720 for a reason.
--
http://flickr.com/photos/56983515@N00/
Current cam: TZ1
Wish cams: LX2 or GX100 with Fuji F30 sensor and Pentax K100D super or K20D.
Wish lens: Pentax or Tamron 18-250mm.
I did compare it to the Canon A720 for a reason.
--
http://flickr.com/photos/56983515@N00/
Current cam: TZ1
Wish cams: LX2 or GX100 with Fuji F30 sensor and Pentax K100D super or K20D.
Wish lens: Pentax or Tamron 18-250mm.
Prognathous
Veteran Member
As I demonstrated above, the TZ5 high ISO is also better than the A720.
In addition, the camera itself is much more useful thanks to a 28-280 lens. I wouldn't personally consider buying the A720 even if it did have the upper hand in high-ISO, because without a 28mm wide-end I think it's too limiting. What's nice about the TZ5 is that the camera offers both better IQ at high-ISO and a much more useful lens.
Prog.
Entropius
Senior Member
If you're going to make a camera with a big sensor, it makes no sense to make the lens not interchangeable with other lenses designed for a big sensor...
Now, in this era of CCD's and live view and EVF's we can do without the whole reflex system. But it makes no sense to make a camera with a 4/3 sensor and then weld a lens to it when Olympus makes a whole list of them.
What do they call these? EVIL, I think -- electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens? Surprised nobody's made one. I imagine Olympus could make an even smaller, cheaper Four-Thirds camera by just cutting out the mirror box and OVF.
Then everyone would have their wish, as the people who demand high-ISO quality could get a $300 EVIL body and slap whatever standard lens they want on it, and the people who shoot in good light and want versatility could get a $400 FZ50, and the people who shoot in bad light and want versatility can get a bag full of lenses and some aspirin like they've always done, but without the goofy mirror-slap noise.
Now, in this era of CCD's and live view and EVF's we can do without the whole reflex system. But it makes no sense to make a camera with a 4/3 sensor and then weld a lens to it when Olympus makes a whole list of them.
What do they call these? EVIL, I think -- electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens? Surprised nobody's made one. I imagine Olympus could make an even smaller, cheaper Four-Thirds camera by just cutting out the mirror box and OVF.
Then everyone would have their wish, as the people who demand high-ISO quality could get a $300 EVIL body and slap whatever standard lens they want on it, and the people who shoot in good light and want versatility could get a $400 FZ50, and the people who shoot in bad light and want versatility can get a bag full of lenses and some aspirin like they've always done, but without the goofy mirror-slap noise.
Amen. For FZ-60, starting at 28mm is absolutely essential. For LX-3, I want it to be a creative version of all-auto TZ5, so I'd place greater premium on extending the telephoto range (currently 112) than on the wide angle (currently 28); how about a 26-260 compromise?
genece
Forum Pro
Just in case you want to check print a photo from a FZ30 at 5mp and one at 8 mp and tell me the difference........Also I have lots of photos from a 6mp D50 and a 10 mp D80 and I defy anyone to tell the difference........Its still the Noise reduction smearing that ruins prints.
I also have lots of prints from a FZ10 that according to you should be worse than one of these new cameras........dream on.
--
Gene from Western Pa
http://imageevent.com/grc6
http://grc225.zenfolio.com/
FZ10....20 and 30 and FZ18
D50 ....D80 - 18 to 200VR- 50mm 1.8 - 80 to 400 OS
Just trying to learn and it's slow going!
I also have lots of prints from a FZ10 that according to you should be worse than one of these new cameras........dream on.
--
Gene from Western Pa
http://imageevent.com/grc6
http://grc225.zenfolio.com/
FZ10....20 and 30 and FZ18
D50 ....D80 - 18 to 200VR- 50mm 1.8 - 80 to 400 OS
Just trying to learn and it's slow going!
Prognathous
Veteran Member
imaging-resource.com doesn't have TZ5 samples yet, but they do have samples shot with the Canon A720 and your beloved Samsung L700. Let's have a look at the ISO 800 crops:
Canon A720
Samsung L700
The Canon has a lot more detail, nicer colors and way less chroma-noise.
Now here's the logic: TZ5 high ISO is better than A720 (see above examples), so if the A720 is better than the L700 (and it's a lot better), then the TZ5 is worlds better than the L700. If you want to prove otherwise, show us comparable samples of the two (and make sure to use methodology that's at least as serious as imaging-resource.com).
The original images are here:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A720IS/FULLRES/A720IShSLI0800.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/L700/FULLRES/L700hSLI0800.HTM
Prog.
Canon A720
Samsung L700
The Canon has a lot more detail, nicer colors and way less chroma-noise.
Now here's the logic: TZ5 high ISO is better than A720 (see above examples), so if the A720 is better than the L700 (and it's a lot better), then the TZ5 is worlds better than the L700. If you want to prove otherwise, show us comparable samples of the two (and make sure to use methodology that's at least as serious as imaging-resource.com).
The original images are here:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/A720IS/FULLRES/A720IShSLI0800.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/L700/FULLRES/L700hSLI0800.HTM
Prog.
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
As dave pointed out. He can only test what he has.imaging-resource.com doesn't have TZ5 samples yet, but they do have
samples shot with the Canon A720 and your beloved Samsung L700. Let's
have a look at the ISO 800 crops:
Canon A720
Samsung L700
The Canon has a lot more detail, nicer colors and way less chroma-noise.
Now here's the logic: TZ5 high ISO is better than A720 (see above
examples), so if the A720 is better than the L700 (and it's a lot
better), then the TZ5 is worlds better than the L700. If you want to
prove otherwise, show us comparable samples of the two (and make sure
to use methodology that's at least as serious as
imaging-resource.com).
As it stands, I dont agree with his review on that camera, I have been very vocal on this issue, and more than happy to admit the weak spots. High ISO its doing a better job than most for its sensor size... and have been man enough to provide full sized samples for anyone to view as the please.
So in short, we have to agree to disagree..and the same goes for the IR, if you bother to look around, yoiu will see a number of reviews for the L700, ephotozine, whilst I dont like their site..called it "one of the best we have tested" and have full sized samples to show. Megapixel also rated it pretty well for that dept.
Fact remains, whilst the TZ-5 is not too bad at ISO 400, and yes its an improvement on the prior model, it does indeed get a bit of a smack about with a cheap samsung.
--
I am not the 'Ghost Hunter', nor am I the Irish actor in the 'Quiet Man' ;-)
Depends what you are taking pictures of. Flower macros? A squirrel that fills the screen? Ducks? Sure, those look fine. Take a landscape photo with distant trees or a downtown scene with people, signs, store windows etc. and the lower mp cameras just cannot and do not capture the fine detail. I've taken full-zoom shots with my FZ50 where street name signs blocks away can actually be read; at 3 MP the green sign with white letters would more resemble a fuzzy green stick mounted on a pole.
You mean the greater loss of low contrast detail in the watch at ISO 400 or the lovely red shine around the Martini text at ISO 800? The only thing you have demonstrated is your opinion, which I only partly agree with.
AFAIK we were discussing processing not cameras, but hey, it's your thread don't let me stop you from going off-topic.
Let me just summarize before this drags on and on:
- Panasonic made a significant improvement in processing, with better retaining of detail and color saturation at higher ISO.
- You consider it now best of the 1/2.5' competition, with better color saturation and a cleaner look throughout the ISO range and welcome low sharpening.
- I consider it close and also appreciate the low sharpening and good color saturation, but personally would wish for a bit less luminance NR with better low contrast detail (like the A720), but can understand Pannys decision considering the target group for this camera. (there is some color glow at ISO 800 but don't really care since I don't expect to be able to get good ISO 800 with a 1/2.5' sensor).
--
http://flickr.com/photos/56983515@N00/
Current cam: TZ1
Wish cams: LX2 or GX100 with Fuji F30 sensor and Pentax K100D super or K20D.
Wish lens: Pentax or Tamron 18-250mm.
Prognathous
Veteran Member
For large prints, the one with 8MP will print better (as long as you isolate the pixel count issue from processing, and to do that you need to compare the shots in RAW).
Same here. D80 will provide better large prints.
You can get zero NR smearing by shooting RAW. Do it, print large, then come back to report which one produced the better images - D80 or D50.
Again... shoot RAW, process with as much NR as you like, print large, then tell us if the FZ30 doesn't provide better prints.
Prog.
What is neat about this forum, and from what I've seen better than some others, is that here we have a rather spirited discussion and some disagreement, yet everyone stays civil. I've seen discourse in other forums where the topic turned to whether posters had psychological problems and much worse. I"m most of the way through reading this topic and nobody's behaved in any manner they'd have to regret later.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum