Perhaps the lens is sharper than we thought??

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
Dak on cam
Dak on cam Senior Member • Posts: 5,223
Re: Perhaps the lens is sharper than we thought??

ANAYV wrote:

Dak on cam wrote:

ANAYV wrote:

Speaking of the FZ80....I'm now wondering if the lens isn't the weakest link in this feature rich, but I.Q. limited camera?

Here's two images taken more recently...the first yesterday , second from last month, both shooting RAW and using DXO PhotoLabs 2 with PRIME NR:

Notice the really slow for 1200mm shutter speed (1/60th). Most images came out blurry in the last hour of light.

It's also underexposed by quite a bit.

As always , handheld.

I think there's plenty of details in these perhaps the sensor is really the main issue with this camera.

O.I.S. might also , at times give blurry images.

Then again , at 1200mm...nothing comes close in the Panasonic family to reach this range.

FZ200/300 , of course has better I.Q. but at only half the reach at the telephoto end (600mm vs. 1200mm) . So not a camera in the same league, zoom-wise.

The Canon SX70...Nikon P610/B700 are the real competitors..and now the P950 seems to be the super duper far away subjects zoom camera to get.



How is one supposed to judge image sharpness and detail with pictures reduced to perhaps 2MP?

I seem to be , as others are.

Can you see difference in these two ?

But OK.

Here's the first image from OP, full size:


Thanks.  I find the results to a good degree inconclusive: according to the EXIF you exposed with -2.3EV, presumably because the light did not allow much more without reverting either to higher ISO or slower speed.  Personally, I'd rather raise the ISO instead: that tells the camera "I don't have enough light, do the best you can".  If you tell the camera "don't worry about the light" and then raise it in postprocessing, you are not letting it participate in making the best of a bad situation.

According to EXIF, the picture has been taken raw.  If after raw processing an 18MP image takes up 2.5MB, there is a severe lack of detail.  That can be from lens unsharpness, it can be from aggressive noise reduction.  You pushed a -2.3EV picture on a small sensor cam and there is very little apparent noise.  There are also watercolory splotches.

But all-in-all, I would not fault the camera here since it was used in light conditions that are problematic by principle for a small-sensor camera at F5.9 and at 1200mm EFL there just is not much leeway for larger apertures.  The camera was told at -2.3EV and ISO80 not to worry about lack of light and the unavoidable noise was then flattened along with detail.

It's a great photographic subject and nicely caught, but it would not work for larger prints.  And in this case, I'd not even blame the camera.  Next time I'd try cranking the ISO up instead of lowering EV.  You get the same kind of light to the sensor, but the camera tries harder to help with preserving detail.  Yes, this will add noise, but less noise than pushing underexposure will, so you can go somewhat lighter on the noise reduction in post-processing.

 Dak on cam's gear list:Dak on cam's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-P52 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H2 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H5 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow