Why buy an FZ?

ChrisLumix · Feb 16, 2011

Egret said:
Mike,

I hope it helps. It certainly will not get rid of all the frog spawn, but for me seems to make it less noticeable particularly in the shadows. If it does not help or you feel it is even worse then sorry to have wasted your time. It's a pain since we all have our own subjective feelings as to what constitutes better.

As to pixel density, you may be right since while I love the speed of the FZ35 and some other features, sometimes I like the image quality of the FZ18 better since the frog spawn seems less evident particularly in the shadows. And of course this camera while having a slightly smaller sensor dropped the pixel count back to 8 megapixels, and maintains a fairly constant aperture over a rather wide zoom range somewhat like the FZ50.

Now here's where I have a problem. I've just read every FZ review from the FZ8 to the FZ100 and the most expert reviewers seem to agree that the NR is as big a problem, if not worse, than the noise itself. So, is the 'frog spawn' the result of poor NR or is it simply noise? The problem I have regarding it as 'noise' is that when I add noise in Photoshop what I get is an even phenomenon and more akin to tiny film grain, than what I'm seeing on some of my FZ38 shots. I'm therefore tempted to suggest that 'frog spawn' MAY be Panasonic's NR? At any rate, I've dialled the camera's NR down to -1 and I will try what that looks like.
--
Panas0n!c Lum!x FZ-38

Mikedigi · Feb 16, 2011

ChrisLumix said:
Now here's where I have a problem. I've just read every FZ review from the FZ8 to the FZ100 and the most expert reviewers seem to agree that the NR is as big a problem, if not worse, than the noise itself. . . . .

Yes, I tend to call it frogspawn because it's blotchy and I don't really know how much is noise and how much is NR artifacts. From my FZ8 onwards I have always run the NR at Low, or with the FZ38, at -2, based on the experts' comments on this Forum.

They say that to see the noise, without the NR, we have to look at a RAW file, where there has been no NR or other Pic Adjusts.

I've not yet tried Egret's suggestion of starting with a "raw JPEG", with Contrast, Saturation, Sharpness and NR set to the minimum of -2, then denoising, then tarting up in Picasa or whatever, but that will probably give the best result, based on some stuff I did with the FZ8.

I am a fan of cameras where NR can be switched off completely, giving the user the option of just tolerating the noise or using an external NR program like Noiseware Community without prior interference by the in-camera NR. I always had NR switched off with my Oly E-410 (where it's called "noise filter" or "NF") and the noise was the kind of fine grain to which you refer, and was often tolerable right up to 800 ISO, but of course that's a very big, heavy, clumsy camera by FZ38 standards.

The frogspawn, perversely, seems to take special delight in disfiguring faces, where it is difficult to ignore, even at 80 ISO.

Mike

ChrisLumix · Feb 21, 2011

Mikedigi said:
ChrisLumix said:

Now here's where I have a problem. I've just read every FZ review from the FZ8 to the FZ100 and the most expert reviewers seem to agree that the NR is as big a problem, if not worse, than the noise itself. . . . .

Click to expand...

Yes, I tend to call it frogspawn because it's blotchy and I don't really know how much is noise and how much is NR artifacts. From my FZ8 onwards I have always run the NR at Low, or with the FZ38, at -2, based on the experts' comments on this Forum.

They say that to see the noise, without the NR, we have to look at a RAW file, where there has been no NR or other Pic Adjusts.

I've not yet tried Egret's suggestion of starting with a "raw JPEG", with Contrast, Saturation, Sharpness and NR set to the minimum of -2, then denoising, then tarting up in Picasa or whatever, but that will probably give the best result, based on some stuff I did with the FZ8.

I am a fan of cameras where NR can be switched off completely, giving the user the option of just tolerating the noise or using an external NR program like Noiseware Community without prior interference by the in-camera NR. I always had NR switched off with my Oly E-410 (where it's called "noise filter" or "NF") and the noise was the kind of fine grain to which you refer, and was often tolerable right up to 800 ISO, but of course that's a very big, heavy, clumsy camera by FZ38 standards.

The frogspawn, perversely, seems to take special delight in disfiguring faces, where it is difficult to ignore, even at 80 ISO.

That's a useful reply - thanks

I intended to start experimenting with the FZ38's processing settings - e.g. by taking the same shot with everything at 0, then one by one set the others to -2 and take one shot each, then finishing off with all 4 settings set to -2.

Hopefully then, with the JPEGs imported to Pixelmator I will either see differences between those shots and make a decision what to set in future, or else I won't.

To make the comparison, I will need to take screenshots of a portion of each shot, at full size - it's impossible to compare 6 full size pictures on a single monitor at the same time. I thought I would grab a screenshot of a section that shows a reasonable variety of contrast and colour edges - do you agree?

Chris
--
Panas0n!c Lum!x FZ-38

Mikedigi · Feb 21, 2011

ChrisLumix said:
. . . . To make the comparison, I will need to take screenshots of a portion of each shot, at full size - it's impossible to compare 6 full size pictures on a single monitor at the same time. I thought I would grab a screenshot of a section that shows a reasonable variety of contrast and colour edges - do you agree?

Yes Chris, that's what I do. In Windows one can use the Prt Scrn button, or the Snipping Tool, but I don't know anything about Mac.

Mike

Mikedigi · Feb 22, 2011

I said:
. . . . I've not yet tried Egret's suggestion of starting with a "raw JPEG", with Contrast, Saturation, Sharpness and NR set to the minimum of -2, then denoising, then tarting up in Picasa or whatever, but that will probably give the best result, based on some stuff I did with the FZ8. . . . .

On my first effort with the above, denoising straight after "JPG with pic adjusts at -2" was a disaster - there wasn't much noise and the NR program removed an unusual amount of surface detail.

But going from the -2 original JPG straight into Picasa worked fine and the result could then have been denoised normally.

Mike

Egret · Feb 22, 2011

Dear Mike,

It may also depend upon the noise reduction program you use. I use Define 2.0. Also less aggressive noise reduction may be necessary when doing it earlier in the procedure before sharpening. But if it works better for you later in the procedure, that's great too. Or you may even be able with a lot of pics to avoid it almost entirely, and just control some of the frog spawn by refining and controlling your sharpening. The thing that I am trying to avoid is having the frog spawn in a full blown sharpened grainy state (with in-camera processing) before I even have a chance to work on it. It may turn out to be more trouble than it is worth. Sometimes I think about just setting the camera to zero on everything (not + or minus, but just neutral) and just accepting the pics as they are and worry more about the shot and composition.

MusicDoctorDJ · Feb 22, 2011

Egret said:
Dear Mike,

Sometimes I think about just setting the camera to zero on everything (not + or minus, but just neutral) and just accepting the pics as they are and worry more about the shot and composition.

Say it isn't so . . .

Taking a picture and enjoying the image for the content and not fretting over the technical aspects of the camera used to take the image.

That is actually a concept that many here in the chats just can't seem to grasp, or have forgotten about!

--
J. D.
Colorado

Mikedigi · Feb 22, 2011

Egret said:
Dear Mike,

It may also depend upon the noise reduction program you use. I use Define 2.0. . . . . . .

Many thanks for all your help.

Since writing my last comment I have tried starting with Contrast and Saturation 0 and Sharpness and NR -2, which is, I think, what you suggested in the first place. This does look very promising and I agree that not having a lot of sharpening in the early stages does seem to help.

Mike

Mikedigi · Feb 22, 2011

MusicDoctorDJ said:
. . . . Taking a picture and enjoying the image for the content and not fretting over the technical aspects of the camera used to take the image. . . . .

Thanks DJ, I agree and it is what I usually do, but in this case I was not looking for problems, the frogspawn on faces just came and found me, so I did not "enjoy the content".

Mike

Mikedigi · Feb 22, 2011

LTZ470 said:
. . . . This is from some of the first I took with a ZS7/TZ10 (Same sensor as a FZ35)...the clarity and sharpness is impressive and the Macro ability (AF is great!)

That's better than anything I've done in macro with my FZ8/FZ38! How did you do it, please, and was it macro or telemacro?

Mike

ChrisLumix · Feb 23, 2011

Mikedigi said:
ChrisLumix said:

. . . . To make the comparison, I will need to take screenshots of a portion of each shot, at full size - it's impossible to compare 6 full size pictures on a single monitor at the same time. I thought I would grab a screenshot of a section that shows a reasonable variety of contrast and colour edges - do you agree?

Click to expand...

Yes Chris, that's what I do. In Windows one can use the Prt Scrn button, or the Snipping Tool, but I don't know anything about Mac.

Mike

It's even easier on Mac - if you press a particular key combination, you can draw any sized rectangle around any bit you want to capture.
--
Panas0n!c Lum!x FZ-38

Search

Why buy an FZ?

ChrisLumix

Veteran Member

Mikedigi

Forum Pro

ChrisLumix

Veteran Member

Mikedigi

Forum Pro

Mikedigi

Forum Pro

Egret

Forum Enthusiast

MusicDoctorDJ

Forum Pro

Mikedigi

Forum Pro

Mikedigi

Forum Pro

Mikedigi

Forum Pro

ChrisLumix

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts