Reading mode: Light Dark

Post your Sharpest 3 Images

Go to last post
I have PSP 8 too, I have used all the Algorithms and some work better than others. Bi-cubic is PS is probably the cleanest but some might argue this. But Lancos3 seems to work quite a bit better in my opinion. But I have only used it with 10D images. I Don't have my FZ10 yet to try it out on.
Jan in CA said:
Jan
kirk said:
Try this software: http://www.fookes.com/ezthumbs/ and use Lancos3
for the Algorithm. If you haven't used Lancos3 I guarantee you that
you will be pleasantly pleased at how much cleaner and sharper your
images are after they are downsampled. You can also batch process
which is nice. It's one of the best tips I have picked up on the
DSLR forums. I'm always shocked at how much detail comes out when
my images are downsampled using this software. Don't worry the
software is free.
Tels said:
bobbyz said:
Here are two taken yeterday. Handheld FZ1 with 12x zoom & tcon-17.



Click to expand...
Woooooow! That is sharp! I love them!

Cheers,

Tels

Sorry, I dont have any sharp ones.

--
You will be offended by my photos*:

http://bloodgate.com/photos?c=black
  • If not, I'll refund your money and try again.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Jan in CA

http://purrcat1.smugmug.com/Photography

Panasonic DMC-FZ10
Olympus C -21OO UZ
Click to expand...
 
Here's one, with full-zoom TCON-17 @ 1/250: http://www.usefilm.com/image/308651.html

Here's one at 1/5 of a second, half-zoom: http://www.usefilm.com/image/273003.html

Here's about my sharpest, at full zoom, 1/1300 sec: http://www.usefilm.com/image/191207.html
All shots handheld.
saaketham1 said:
Hi All,

Please post the Top 3 SHARPEST Images you've ever taken with a
Panasonic Digicam. Also,if possible, please include EXIF and also
whether you used a tripod or such. Thanks.

Here're 3 of mine - all reposts
Hhopefully will do better in the coming months







Anil
Click to expand...
--
John Reed

Nikon CoolPix 4500 Panasonic DMC-FZ1 (w/FZ2 upgrade)
 
Having seen all these photos - so whats the conclusion so far?

1. Is the FZ10 sharp enough?
2. Is it worth the extra cash and weight to carry a DSLR and quality lenses?
3. Is the Leica lens as good as it seems on paper?

Anil
 
Well I can only speak for fz1 (upgraded).

1. I see that fz1 is sharp at full zoom & even with tcon-17 but in good light outdoors. If subject is far away, I don't get that sharp pictures. I haven't tried using tripod to make sure it is not my hand shake but even at speed fast enough to rule out camera shake, I don't get that clear picture if subject is far off. Maybe it is just the 2mp in my camera.

2. This fz-1 has got me interested in taking pictures of birds. After seeing some of the shots taken with dSLR and quality lenses, I will say there is no comparison. But then again those lenses costs thousands of dollars and are heavy (I saw one Nikon lens with IS which goes for $10k). I might buy a dSLR next year, after seeing how new Nikon D70 is and what Canon does to upgrade their Rebel. But I will still keep the fz-1.

3. Tough to judge here (IMHO). To really know, one would have to rule out the sensor in the test. If somehow this lens is mated with a quality sensor (low noise), I think we will get much better pictures. I think companies need to work on their CCD chips to reduce noise, than shoving more mp on them. Can't believe it should be that tough to make a low noise small CCD sensor. Dr. Mead (Foveon) should look into this mkt.

Also Panasonic need to provide a super fine jpeg option, memory is cheap.
saaketham1 said:
Having seen all these photos - so whats the conclusion so far?

1. Is the FZ10 sharp enough?
2. Is it worth the extra cash and weight to carry a DSLR and
quality lenses?
3. Is the Leica lens as good as it seems on paper?

Anil
Click to expand...
--
Bobby

http://bobbyz.smugmug.com
 
Hi:

My 3 all taken with the FZ-10 all hand held.



1/400 F4 ISO 50 Focal Length 10.4 - Circular Polarizer - Temp 12F



1/400 F4 ISO 50 Focal Length 12.9 - Circular Polarizer - Temp 12F



1/400 F4 ISO 50 Focal Length 47.9 - Circular Polarizer - Temp "cold"

I keep my sharpness, contrast and saturation on high.

CC

--
3D and Frame Gallery
http://www.pbase.com/otfchallenge/george_mocks_3d_frame_gallery.jpg

Give what you can: take what you need: and smile: for every day is a good day!

Canadian Club (with a chaser)
 
Canadian Club said:
I keep my sharpness, contrast and saturation on high.
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting these! They're closer to my personal preference for 'sharpness' and 'saturation' - it's good to see what the camera can do in this area, although 'low', 'medium' and 'high' are a bit poor - how about providing us with a slider Panasonic? (yes, I know it won't happen...)

Cheers,

Phil
 
Anil,

I did not post although I have "sharp" images. First of all, it is relative. How should we define sharpness? My sharpness criteria may not be sharp to others. For bird shots and macros, it may be a big factor but maybe not for landscape, portrait, etc. shots. Should we spend time confirming the technical limitations or should we spend time enjoying and reflecting on our visions? Should we give more attention to a flat but technically superior image than to a bit flawed but with high impact? Just thinking out loud.

I can't afford DSLR (not probably until my two kids graduated from college and the prices goes down some more), I am mostly a weekend shooter and so far, I can capture what I want to do for now from the FZ10. Since it is all I have with long affordable zoom, I will make the most out of it.

Anyway, thanks for your leading an inquiry in this area as it confirms again the capability in this price range.
saaketham1 said:
Having seen all these photos - so whats the conclusion so far?

1. Is the FZ10 sharp enough?
2. Is it worth the extra cash and weight to carry a DSLR and
quality lenses?
3. Is the Leica lens as good as it seems on paper?

Anil
Click to expand...
 
DSLR users often use USM to bring out the best in their images. So why cant we P&S shooters get away with NeatImage to get the best in ours.

Anything goes, as long as its not digital art. Any photograph taken of the real world and processed without adding any effects is what I count good photographs.

I have heard film buffs say that digital photography is only about software and that digital imaging artists (I prefer that term to photographer since we do a lot of software stuff :) ) are less talented than film photographers.

All I can say is, pro film shooters get professional labs to push their negatives any way they can, use dodge and burn and all the techniques available to get the best out of their prints. Now if they had more options, I am willing to bet a lot of money they would use all those techniques as well - only, there's only a limited amount of post-processing you can do without scanning the images and working with their digital versions. Digital is so much more flexible, especially shooting in RAW.

So, NeatImage, ImageNinja, PS, PSP 8, whatever, post your sharpest images without worry. :) :) :)

Anil

--------------------------
Jacques321 wrote:

Here's a couple I posted a while back. Does it count if I ran them through NeatImage ?? They had a little noise before I processed them, but not much.
 
kirk said:
It looks like some the images I see are sharp but could possibly be
improved quite a bit from a better downsampling Algorithm.
Click to expand...
I always use unsharp mask after downsampling (its done automatically via a script).

Cheers,

Tels

--
You will be offended by my photos*:

http://bloodgate.com/photos?c=black
  • If not, I'll refund your money and try again.
 
Tels said:
kirk said:
It looks like some the images I see are sharp but could possibly be
improved quite a bit from a better downsampling Algorithm.
Click to expand...
I always use unsharp mask after downsampling (its done
automatically via a script).
Click to expand...
Btw:
  • Windows 95/98/2000/NT4/Me/XP
  • 32 MB of RAM, 1.4 MB disk space
  • Intel® Pentium processor
I have Linux, and an AMD CPU. LOL.

Tels

--
You will be offended by my photos*:

http://bloodgate.com/photos?c=black
  • If not, I'll refund your money and try again.
 
gil said:
How should we define sharpness?
Click to expand...
My definition:

How close one can get to clearly define an object in an image without introducing or after removing blatantly visible noise. If you print mostly, then the print should look clean and defined. For web, downsampling should be best suited for low pixellation, noise, etc.
gil said:
Should we give more attention to a flat but technically superior image > than to a bit flawed but with high impact?
Click to expand...
Whatever your clients want. By clients, I mean a real client, spouse, friends and whoever else you intend to please or wow by showing the images. And of course, yourself - whichever you prefer is what you should give attention to. I personally like sharp images, but prefer technically superior images that are not too soft. :)
gil said:
Anyway, thanks for your leading an inquiry in this area as it confirms again > the capability in this price range.
Click to expand...
I enjoy taking photos a lot especially after getting the FZ10 and my G3, while going around with my Canon D60 was a real pain. But the high-ISO low noise images were sometime worth it. But with all these sharpening and noise-reduction algorithms available nowadays, its all the same for me since I dont shoot commercially.

Anil
 
Hi Anil,
Thanks for your input/views.
saaketham1 said:
saaketham1 said:
How should we define sharpness?
Click to expand...
My definition:
How close one can get to clearly define an object in an image
without introducing or after removing blatantly visible noise. If
you print mostly, then the print should look clean and defined. For
web, downsampling should be best suited for low pixellation, noise,
etc.
saaketham1 said:
Should we give more attention to a flat but technically superior image > than to a bit flawed but with high impact?
Click to expand...
Whatever your clients want. By clients, I mean a real client,
spouse, friends and whoever else you intend to please or wow by
showing the images. And of course, yourself - whichever you prefer
is what you should give attention to. I personally like sharp
images, but prefer technically superior images that are not too
soft. :)
saaketham1 said:
Anyway, thanks for your leading an inquiry in this area as it confirms again > the capability in this price range.
Click to expand...
I enjoy taking photos a lot especially after getting the FZ10 and
my G3, while going around with my Canon D60 was a real pain. But
the high-ISO low noise images were sometime worth it. But with all
these sharpening and noise-reduction algorithms available nowadays,
its all the same for me since I dont shoot commercially.

Anil
Click to expand...
 
On the two pros (meaning they make money from photography) I know, one has embraced digital totally. The other one still uses his Nikon/other accessoties but scans negative in his film scanner (which cost 3 FZ10s), do computer manipulation and prints 11x17 in his Epson 1280. For standard image sizes 5x7 or 4x6, he uses an outside lab. Nicolo M. once said, the end justifies the means (analog or digital means).
saaketham1 said:
DSLR users often use USM to bring out the best in their images. So
why cant we P&S shooters get away with NeatImage to get the best in
ours.

Anything goes, as long as its not digital art. Any photograph taken
of the real world and processed without adding any effects is what
I count good photographs.

I have heard film buffs say that digital photography is only about
software and that digital imaging artists (I prefer that term to
photographer since we do a lot of software stuff :) ) are less
talented than film photographers.

All I can say is, pro film shooters get professional labs to push
their negatives any way they can, use dodge and burn and all the
techniques available to get the best out of their prints. Now if
they had more options, I am willing to bet a lot of money they
would use all those techniques as well - only, there's only a
limited amount of post-processing you can do without scanning the
images and working with their digital versions. Digital is so much
more flexible, especially shooting in RAW.

So, NeatImage, ImageNinja, PS, PSP 8, whatever, post your sharpest
images without worry. :) :) :)

Anil

--------------------------
Jacques321 wrote:
Here's a couple I posted a while back. Does it count if I ran them
through NeatImage ?? They had a little noise before I processed
them, but not much.
Click to expand...
 
kirk said:
Try this software: http://www.fookes.com/ezthumbs/ and use Lancos3
for the Algorithm. If you haven't used Lancos3 I guarantee you that
you will be pleasantly pleased at how much cleaner and sharper your
images are after they are downsampled. You can also batch process
which is nice. It's one of the best tips I have picked up on the
DSLR forums. I'm always shocked at how much detail comes out when
my images are downsampled using this software. Don't worry the
software is free.
Click to expand...
Nice software! However Irfanview can also resize using lancos filter and is a good viewer too!
http://www.irfanview.com
(sharp pictures coming later! :-) )
 
Here are three of my sharpest. I have also uploaded a few anima, birds and sunset shots from pre-digital days, which you can see at http://www.alcorn.smugmug.com if you are interested. The sharp ones below are all out of the camera (squirrel cropped) and all handheld. The EXIF info is on the sugmug site mentioned above. Comments welcomed.







Giles
saaketham1 said:
Hi All,

Please post the Top 3 SHARPEST Images you've ever taken with a
Panasonic Digicam. Also,if possible, please include EXIF and also
whether you used a tripod or such. Thanks.
Click to expand...
 
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