-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
C-730 going in for repair - sample photos - poor quality - opinions please
- Thread starter wdwms
- Start date
Leo
Veteran Member
Todd,
I have checked properties pf your images. It does not look that you set the camera correctly. The ISO set to 200ASA for the first one and to 247ASA for the second one. The small file size indicates that you a re using a HQ instead of SHQ. Set the camera to SHQ and 100 ASA and repeat the result. We all would like to see the second shots. Stet your camera to custom and select all these good settings.
At that high sensitivity and compression you suppose tog et more artifacts and noise.
Note: Image size for Bradly photos approx. 9,127K BMP and yours only 716K JPG. That makes a big difference.
Leo
I have checked properties pf your images. It does not look that you set the camera correctly. The ISO set to 200ASA for the first one and to 247ASA for the second one. The small file size indicates that you a re using a HQ instead of SHQ. Set the camera to SHQ and 100 ASA and repeat the result. We all would like to see the second shots. Stet your camera to custom and select all these good settings.
At that high sensitivity and compression you suppose tog et more artifacts and noise.
Note: Image size for Bradly photos approx. 9,127K BMP and yours only 716K JPG. That makes a big difference.
Leo
Thanks for the shots! they definately look better than what i'm getting. So far i've tried:
Pixel Mapping - 3-4 times (anything special to do? or just select it and go?)
Resetting on camera turning off - didn't do a thing
Leaving batteries out for 24 hours - still poor image quality, but it fixed the problem w/the buttons.
sigh ..
So much time and $ invested, and so annoying to have to send it back..
Todd
Pixel Mapping - 3-4 times (anything special to do? or just select it and go?)
Resetting on camera turning off - didn't do a thing
Leaving batteries out for 24 hours - still poor image quality, but it fixed the problem w/the buttons.
sigh ..
So much time and $ invested, and so annoying to have to send it back..
Todd
Bradly pointed out in previous posts that you should warm the camera up (have it in a warm environment and take a number of pics with it for a few minutes, I suppose--you need to get the CCD warm) before running the pixel mapping routine. When he did it, he used test shots to see if it had helped, and ran it several times until he got the best test shots he could get, and then stopped.
Leo makes some good suggestions below. After you've gotten what you can from the pixel mapping, repeat the shots using his suggestions and also with sharpness, contrast and saturation turned down. I'll bet it will help a lot. I don't think there's anything wrong with your camera, from what I've seen so far.
Glad you fixed your button problem. Guess Mike was right about that.
Leo makes some good suggestions below. After you've gotten what you can from the pixel mapping, repeat the shots using his suggestions and also with sharpness, contrast and saturation turned down. I'll bet it will help a lot. I don't think there's anything wrong with your camera, from what I've seen so far.
Glad you fixed your button problem. Guess Mike was right about that.
Inigo Montoya
Forum Pro
I haven't read the other responses yet (in a hurry at the moment), but there's nothing that jumps out at me on either of these that points to a bad camera.
the first shot looks like the one with flassh, but even so the camera was set for / used ISO 200. You're going to get noise at ISO 200. Set it for 100 and leave it there.
The 2nd shot must have been in auto-ISO mode as it shows ISO 247 in the EXIF info. Again, that means noise. The blurriness is because you were hand-holding the shot at 1/2 second shutter speed.
If memory serves, the C7xx series has an "AUTO" mode which has never quire worked right. Change to "P" (program) mode and set your ISO for 100 and try again, but be aware that you'll still get a soft/blurry image if you try to hand-hold w/out the flash in low light.
the first shot looks like the one with flassh, but even so the camera was set for / used ISO 200. You're going to get noise at ISO 200. Set it for 100 and leave it there.
The 2nd shot must have been in auto-ISO mode as it shows ISO 247 in the EXIF info. Again, that means noise. The blurriness is because you were hand-holding the shot at 1/2 second shutter speed.
If memory serves, the C7xx series has an "AUTO" mode which has never quire worked right. Change to "P" (program) mode and set your ISO for 100 and try again, but be aware that you'll still get a soft/blurry image if you try to hand-hold w/out the flash in low light.
All,
I'm a newbie to this forum but wanted to get some opinions on this
forum. In early Nov I got a C-730, hoping it to be a BIG step up
from my little Kodak DC260. So far, other than the super macro i've
been less than impressed. Here is what i've experienced so far:
• Photos from camera are often grainy and out of focus – just poor
overall quality
• Camera struggles from time to time focusing on objects
• Low light or indoors? fogettabout it!
• Pressing the monitor button does not turn on the monitor in all
modes except Auto. - Just started doing this last night
• Pressing “OK” button does not turn on monitor in all modes except
Auto. Therefore all settings must be made by looking through the
viewfinder - Just started doing this last night as well.
So I called Olympus Tech support. Kudos to them, they were more
than helpful, but to make a long story short, i emailed them 2 test
shots taken at HQ, one with flash one without. And they agreed that
I had a bum camera..So its off to the repair shop.. hope i can
get it back by xmas.
For those interested, and those who wish to comment or voice an
opinion, here are the test photos I sent.
http://www.disneycorner.com/flash.jpg
http://www.disneycorner.com/noflash.jpg
Hopefully someone will agree that these shots are not up to the
capabilities of the C-730..
A disspointed user..
Todd
warmed up the camera taking a number of pictures for about 15 minutes
Zoomed the camera in to the subject in low light conditions indoors(figuring that if the camera was doing the processing on something that covered more of the frame that it would be able to work better. Not sure if it helped or not really, just my thoughts on it.), went into the menu and executed PM.
turned camera off (a must do between each pixel mapping. Doing a second one under the same power on won't have any effect.)
took out the card and uploaded the image to view
looked at the image at 1:1 to see how the noise levels were (after doing a second one, I would leave the better result open to compare with the next result and close the other. I eventually got to the point where it wasn't getting any better and stopped when I got the equivalent of the best one once again)
repeated the process (minus warm up) until I got the best results.
Took a good dozen times or so total before I got the best results.....
Zoomed the camera in to the subject in low light conditions indoors(figuring that if the camera was doing the processing on something that covered more of the frame that it would be able to work better. Not sure if it helped or not really, just my thoughts on it.), went into the menu and executed PM.
turned camera off (a must do between each pixel mapping. Doing a second one under the same power on won't have any effect.)
took out the card and uploaded the image to view
looked at the image at 1:1 to see how the noise levels were (after doing a second one, I would leave the better result open to compare with the next result and close the other. I eventually got to the point where it wasn't getting any better and stopped when I got the equivalent of the best one once again)
repeated the process (minus warm up) until I got the best results.
Took a good dozen times or so total before I got the best results.....
tim_l
Active member
Don,
Ripper fish. I hope to rip into a few up on the Gold Coast this Christmas.
I've also read of running the pixel mapping to fix the noise problems.
Cheers,
Tim
Ripper fish. I hope to rip into a few up on the Gold Coast this Christmas.
I've also read of running the pixel mapping to fix the noise problems.
Cheers,
Tim
I added some new shots, taken this morning, showing off a 30"
striper I caught in the surf this morning
http://www.pbase.com/donald_spencer/test_samples
one shot taken on the beach
PB300028aa.jpg
three taken on my deck using the FL-40 as fill flash, camera on
tripod using self-timer
PB300001a.jpg
PB300002a.jpg
PB300003a.jpg
I'm going to send all these shots to Olympus. the noise is really
surprising.
I'll try turning down the sharpness,
--
C-700 and C-730 ULTRA ZOOM
FL-40 Flash, bracket and cable
Canon S900 printer
http://www.pbase.com/galleries/donald_spencer
(pbase supporter)
As other users I think this problem is due to wrong camera settings. The problem with the display button is not normal but seem to be solved now.
I think before sending back the camera this user should try to shoot again the same subject taking care that:
I am not really very interested in indoor pics, I like more outdoor, wildlife and sport events, as most of the users that buy a long zoom camera like this, I suppose.
Anyway I decided to make some tests just to improve my knowledge of the camera and I posted the results at:
http://www.pbase.com/antonio_2/c-730_test_shots
you can watch the first three pics named indoor. I had some fun with different flash settings. Be careful that light orientation plays an important role, if you create shadows with wrong light orientation noise can appear. I think indoor pics are more difficult than they can seem at first site, now understand why photgrapher uses theater to shoot objects. Anyway the result is acceptable for a camera with this price. What do you think?
I used all factory deafult settings and I didn't make any pixel mapping, I never feel the need for this, I just power on and shoot.
Finally some more words about noise. Some days ago there was a thread here talking about new C-730 reviews posted by Corne. In a side by side comparison with the HP850 Jeff from dcresource was claiming the C-730 is much more noisy because of the noise he could see in the sky. you can read the review at
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/c730uz-review/index.html
I noticed there was a mistake in this test detailed in
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=3853053
and Bradly said I was wrong because my pics were "noise filtered" by the camera. Well, first, this is not true because noise filtering happens only on speeds more than 1 second, mine are all faster, second, I was just waiting the rain to stop to go outside and demostrate the opposite, that happened saturday and I posted the results at
http://www.pbase.com/antonio_2/milan_italy
you can check these pics, compare the noise to the pic shown in dcresource and tell me if was right or not.
So the question still unanswered is: The c-730 has some noise problem, how much is it worst than competitors in the same price range?
One of these days I will ask a friend of mine his Canon S30, which is one of the best quoted cameras for light sensitivity and I will try to make an accurate comparison.
Have good luck and less noise with your C-730
I think before sending back the camera this user should try to shoot again the same subject taking care that:
- The camera is on a stable tripod
- AF / AE is performed right (see camera manual for more information)
- Camera shoot at ISO64 (ISO100 can still show some noise).
I am not really very interested in indoor pics, I like more outdoor, wildlife and sport events, as most of the users that buy a long zoom camera like this, I suppose.
Anyway I decided to make some tests just to improve my knowledge of the camera and I posted the results at:
http://www.pbase.com/antonio_2/c-730_test_shots
you can watch the first three pics named indoor. I had some fun with different flash settings. Be careful that light orientation plays an important role, if you create shadows with wrong light orientation noise can appear. I think indoor pics are more difficult than they can seem at first site, now understand why photgrapher uses theater to shoot objects. Anyway the result is acceptable for a camera with this price. What do you think?
I used all factory deafult settings and I didn't make any pixel mapping, I never feel the need for this, I just power on and shoot.
Finally some more words about noise. Some days ago there was a thread here talking about new C-730 reviews posted by Corne. In a side by side comparison with the HP850 Jeff from dcresource was claiming the C-730 is much more noisy because of the noise he could see in the sky. you can read the review at
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/olympus/c730uz-review/index.html
I noticed there was a mistake in this test detailed in
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=3853053
and Bradly said I was wrong because my pics were "noise filtered" by the camera. Well, first, this is not true because noise filtering happens only on speeds more than 1 second, mine are all faster, second, I was just waiting the rain to stop to go outside and demostrate the opposite, that happened saturday and I posted the results at
http://www.pbase.com/antonio_2/milan_italy
you can check these pics, compare the noise to the pic shown in dcresource and tell me if was right or not.
So the question still unanswered is: The c-730 has some noise problem, how much is it worst than competitors in the same price range?
One of these days I will ask a friend of mine his Canon S30, which is one of the best quoted cameras for light sensitivity and I will try to make an accurate comparison.
Have good luck and less noise with your C-730
Leo
Veteran Member
Actually a digital camera is not a car. The warmer camera is the more noise the image will have. That is the physics. Keep camera cool.
Leo
Leo
Leo
Veteran Member
That's the point. The idea is to warm the CCD up so that pixels inclined to be noisy will be, and can then be detected and adjusted or dealt with. If you run pixel mapping while the CCD is cool and relatively noise free, you'll defeat the purpose of the routine.
Leo
Veteran Member
All these tests have been done for C730 by Imaging-Resource at
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/C730/C73PICS.HTM
any possible to imagine test for C730 performed by the professionals.
Leo
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/C730/C73PICS.HTM
any possible to imagine test for C730 performed by the professionals.
Leo
Pixel mapping is something to correct problems with the CCD. So you want the CCD to be in a worse state when its done.... warm.
Do PM when the camera is cold and none of the problems that come with it getting warm will have been processed.
You're free to do it however you want though.......
Do PM when the camera is cold and none of the problems that come with it getting warm will have been processed.
You're free to do it however you want though.......
saint-laurent
Member
Mine too was sent back to the shop and got a replacement after a week of use. The viewer turned bright and dim repeatedly while focusing; it hanged several times after deleting image or when the quickview button was pressed. The only way to restore was to remove the batteries and insert them back. During video recording, the viewer used to be bright and clear but had since become totally dim under the same lighting environment. It's a really fragile camera that needs extra care.
I think we must distinguish between two different problems.
Cold ccd (made it rest in a cold place and just powered on)
http://www.pbase.com/image/7969218/original
Hot ccd (roughly 15 minutes of shooting)
http://www.pbase.com/image/7969389
Very hot ccd (roughly 30 minutes of shooting)
http://www.pbase.com/image/7972266
please zoom 1:1 or 2:1 and you will see on the top of the renault megane car all these wrong pixels white and blue. I discovered this problem because Leo teached me (thank you) and as you can see it's true.
Now what is this pixel mapping method supposed to solve, the 1st or the 2nd problem or both? I gave a look to the camera manual, Olympus says to run this pm procedure once in a year. Is There any official documentation saying pm solves problems with noise? I wonder if pushing this pm to much can damage the ccd...
Your comments appreciated as always...
- 1st problem
Cold ccd (made it rest in a cold place and just powered on)
http://www.pbase.com/image/7969218/original
Hot ccd (roughly 15 minutes of shooting)
http://www.pbase.com/image/7969389
Very hot ccd (roughly 30 minutes of shooting)
http://www.pbase.com/image/7972266
please zoom 1:1 or 2:1 and you will see on the top of the renault megane car all these wrong pixels white and blue. I discovered this problem because Leo teached me (thank you) and as you can see it's true.
- 2nd problem
Now what is this pixel mapping method supposed to solve, the 1st or the 2nd problem or both? I gave a look to the camera manual, Olympus says to run this pm procedure once in a year. Is There any official documentation saying pm solves problems with noise? I wonder if pushing this pm to much can damage the ccd...
Your comments appreciated as always...
Pixel mapping is "supposed" to solve the first, hot pixel noise. However, it appears from the reports of two people who have tried it that it has effects beyond that purpose that also affect the other kind of noise (often called "luminance" noise). Bradly's experiments with this are the most detailed. Maybe others should repeat his experiments and see if they make a difference with both kinds of noise. Your camera already seems to be fairly good noise-wise, of course, so you might not want to try it yourself! Bradly said that the first time he ran the PM routine it made things worse (the sensor was cold).
Sounds like yours was defective. What do you base this last comment on, though? Did the problems you described result from bumping the camera or something?
Everyone on here has been very helpful, thanks for your suggestions and help!
As it stands now, I've tried all the ideas that people listed, and even under ISO100 with pixel mapping, etc.. The pictures just don't look good. I'm getting a lot of blue edges on white objects too, and even in a room with a flash, i'm not getting sharp photos.. As i've found out the "Auto" mode on this camera is the biggest joke...
So the camera is boxed up and headed out to Olympus.. if they can't fix it, I'm not sure what I'll do. Possibly sell it and go with something else. Disspointed though, the 10x zoom would come in so handy on our upcoming trip to Australia...I'm a casual photographer, and I'm not much for constantly fiddling with the thing just to get a decent photo. Not to say I need "Auto" to actually work, but when my 1.6MP Kodak is out shooting this one in terms of quality.. something is wrong...
For comparison, here is a portion (cropped, not rescaled, so you are seeing the true size) of a photo I took over the weekend at ISO 100.. the exif info is missing so here it is:
Exposure time: 1/30
F-stop: 2.8
ISO speed: 100
Focal length: 5.9000
Flash: 25
Orientation: Top-left
Light source: Unknown
Exposure bias: 0.0000
Metering mode: Pattern
Exposure program: Normal
Digitized date/time: 2002:11:28 14:18:11
Modified date/time: 2002:11:28 14:18:11
Image description: OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Compression: 6
Camera make: OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD
Camera model: C730UZ
X resolution: 72.0000
Y resolution: 72.0000
Resolution unit: Inches
Camera version: v556u-77
Colorspace: sRGB
File source: DSC
and another i had done at iso100
As it stands now, I've tried all the ideas that people listed, and even under ISO100 with pixel mapping, etc.. The pictures just don't look good. I'm getting a lot of blue edges on white objects too, and even in a room with a flash, i'm not getting sharp photos.. As i've found out the "Auto" mode on this camera is the biggest joke...
So the camera is boxed up and headed out to Olympus.. if they can't fix it, I'm not sure what I'll do. Possibly sell it and go with something else. Disspointed though, the 10x zoom would come in so handy on our upcoming trip to Australia...I'm a casual photographer, and I'm not much for constantly fiddling with the thing just to get a decent photo. Not to say I need "Auto" to actually work, but when my 1.6MP Kodak is out shooting this one in terms of quality.. something is wrong...
For comparison, here is a portion (cropped, not rescaled, so you are seeing the true size) of a photo I took over the weekend at ISO 100.. the exif info is missing so here it is:
Exposure time: 1/30
F-stop: 2.8
ISO speed: 100
Focal length: 5.9000
Flash: 25
Orientation: Top-left
Light source: Unknown
Exposure bias: 0.0000
Metering mode: Pattern
Exposure program: Normal
Digitized date/time: 2002:11:28 14:18:11
Modified date/time: 2002:11:28 14:18:11
Image description: OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Compression: 6
Camera make: OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD
Camera model: C730UZ
X resolution: 72.0000
Y resolution: 72.0000
Resolution unit: Inches
Camera version: v556u-77
Colorspace: sRGB
File source: DSC
and another i had done at iso100
For comparison, this is a portion of a ISO 100 shot from my fathers Olympus C-3000.
No grain.. looks good.. EXIF info:
Exposure time: 1/30
F-stop: 2.8
ISO speed: 110
Focal length: 6.8000
Flash: Fired
Orientation: Top-left
Light source: Unknown
Exposure bias: 0.0000
Metering mode: Pattern
Exposure program: Normal
Image description: OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Scene type: Photograph
User comment:
Compression: 6
Camera make: OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD
Camera model: C3000Z
X resolution: 72.0000
Y resolution: 72.0000
Resolution unit: Inches
Camera version: v353u-74
Colorspace: sRGB
File source: DSC
No grain.. looks good.. EXIF info:
Exposure time: 1/30
F-stop: 2.8
ISO speed: 110
Focal length: 6.8000
Flash: Fired
Orientation: Top-left
Light source: Unknown
Exposure bias: 0.0000
Metering mode: Pattern
Exposure program: Normal
Image description: OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Scene type: Photograph
User comment:
Compression: 6
Camera make: OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD
Camera model: C3000Z
X resolution: 72.0000
Y resolution: 72.0000
Resolution unit: Inches
Camera version: v353u-74
Colorspace: sRGB
File source: DSC
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum