Stylus 1, 1s: ....2X feature? ....Use it? .....Tried it, ..... Comments?

This is related to the 'Stylus 1 Best Compromise?' thread, but, that thread is going to fill up, so I made this a separate thread. Use of 2X is a compromise itself.

Many cameras have variations of in-camera extra zooms, with in-camera upscaling, processing, etc. (not digital zoom). They were crap in the past, but, I use Oly Stylus 1 2X, and Sony's variation called Clear Image Zoom. Both of these are an in-camera crop combined with in-camera creation of extra pixels, upscaling, back to full resolution: Oly 12mp.

After using Sony's 'extended optical zoom', and 'clear image zoom', I was hoping Oly had a similar feature, happily Oly Stylus 1 has 2X. Sony is Jpeg only, Oly 2X is Jpeg, and also available when shooting RAW, (not sure how that works)

I find them both 'effortless, good enough, for occasional, not frequent use'. They are primarily for Jpeg shooters, limited PP skills.

How about you?

use it? tried it? like it? tried it, ok, but don't use it; hate it, hate anyone who uses it? I'm looking for your opinions after trying it, not necessarily samples.

.......................................................

A bunch of blab

Keeping 'occasional use' in mind

Visible limitations: majority of people today view on monitors and hardly print, (if so, 8x10 on a home printer). My 23" monitor, full height is only 11" high, +/- 100dpi. If not pixel peeping, is it ok?

Related to compromise: a camera with limited range, with very good 2X, can compare favorably to a longer range camera with less successful, or non-existant 2X. That might let you get more out of a smaller camera. Or, like Stylus 1, use 2X to get more reach, thereby having the advantage of a larger sensor than typical superzooms. Or, in lieu of buying the tele 1.7X. I do both, 1.7x optical to 510mm, 2X to 1,020mm

Optical Crop: I know, and have seen many comparisons of optical, raw, subsequent PP cropping, out of camera upscaling, using 'real' computer and dedicated software. Most are equal, some are better, a few are worse. The better out of camera versions usually are combined with excellent PP skills, CIZ and 2X is not for those folks, and, they would use a real optical lens at that zoom anyway IF IT MATTERED.

Focus, Metering, Framing: One potential advantage of 2X or CIZ, over a subsequent optical crop, is that when the camera is 2X zoomed, both focus and metering are taken at that area, and you can see and frame something you might not even be aware of.

When comparing cameras, I always wonder: does Pany, Canon, Nikon, (whatever model a poster mentions), have a matching feature, and, if so, is it any good?

Implementation:

Sony's is 'on or off, progressive, beyond optical only'.

If on, it starts at the end of optical. You see an indicator scale, and, it starts after the lens stops moving, so you 'hear' it start. You can leave it on, but stop before using it easily, or occasionally use it.

Olys is on or off, instantly doubling any zoom length.

So, if at optical full wide 28mm, 2X on gives a 56mm start, progressively doubling any zoom length, i.e. 200mm becomes 400mm, to max of 300/2x600mm. A disadvantage is you may leave in on inadvertantly, (stays on when powered off/on) and use it unnecessarily within 28 to 150mm, or unwanted within 28 to 300mm. However, it has a great advantage of toggling on/off. When finding a bird in a far tree for example, you instantly zoom 'out' with a button press (turn 2X off) a larger field of view to find the bird, then a button press to engage 2X for the closer shot. I like that a lot. Instant, no motor noise, ..

There is a 2X symbol on screen, top left, I try to remember to check upon power on. I have taken many a mix of optical and in-inadvertent shots with 2X left on. They are so good I have to check the detailed exif to know. It shows the optical 35mm equiv, then you look for the digital zoom line, in Oly's case 1 for optical, 2 for 2X (n sony's case, progressive X numbers 1.1, 1.7, to max 2.0)

............................................

at this point, I should cancel the thread, but, here it goes, hope some will have something to say

I've used it several times and find it quite acceptable, though I'm typically not a pixel peeper.  I've also left it on accidentally and didn't really notice for a while, until I wanted a wider angle shot.

I think it's a great feature.

Paul

FWIW, I use it on both my Olympus Stylus-1 and Olympus E-M5 cameras, when I want more zoom. It beats having to crop the center of the image.

Hello, I was following the other thread with great interest and am interested still.

I am an Oly E-3 user shooting mostly landscapes and occasional sports/portrait (rare) and sometimes I do professional product shooting for painters to submit images to their galleries (I use the hot shoe and Alien Bee lights/softboxes for this)

I have been diligently trying to save my pennies to upgrade to the EM-5ii... not sure yet if I would rather the EM-1 or 5ii.

As typical household disasters set me back financially, I am wondering if I can possibly get by with a bridge camera for my work... I probably could as I never print larger than 16x24.... and by editing my landscapes in LR and OnOne Perfect Effects 9, I typically end up with a 6~10mb file.

I have been seriously looking at the Stylus 1s.... it is becoming more tempting to get the all in one and use it to the best of its abilities and live without the other rarely used features of its bigger siblings. Anything panoramic I can do with WA and stitching software.

I am concerned whether what I am thinking - that this will be a viable alternative - for my work (that nobody ever really buys - but if they do I want it to print at a decent size if needed) so I can save money and still have an effective camera to use at half the cost.

I know it's hard for all of you to determine if this will work for me with this little information, but any opinoins on this would help.

ALSO! - more importantly, I would love to see some examples (photographically) of what is being talked about in the processing of images with what has been discussed so far... please.

Cheers

elliottnewcomb wrote:

After using Sony's 'extended optical zoom', and 'clear image zoom', I was hoping Oly had a similar feature, happily Oly Stylus 1 has 2X.

On the SH-50, SH-1 and SH-2 it is called Super-Res Zoom.

How about you?

use it? tried it? like it? tried it, ok, but don't use it; hate it, hate anyone who uses it? I'm looking for your opinions after trying it, not necessarily samples.

Here is Super-Res zoom on the SH-2 -

Most of the crop was done in the camera. This image is reduced to 1600x1200 pixels.

This is the same image recovered from the RAW camera original -

'NeatImage' against noise and for sharpening, cropped in PSE13 RGB. This image 1600x1200.

On all my current pocket travel P&S jobs I consider that super-res zoom is for emergency use only - you must have that image, and you could not get it any other way. But on the SH-2, having RAW enabled gets me an end result with less pixellation.

Henry

WirenL wrote:

Hello, I was following the other thread with great interest and am interested still.

I am an Oly E-3 user shooting mostly landscapes and occasional sports/portrait (rare) and sometimes I do professional product shooting for painters to submit images to their galleries (I use the hot shoe and Alien Bee lights/softboxes for this)

I have been diligently trying to save my pennies to upgrade to the EM-5ii... not sure yet if I would rather the EM-1 or 5ii.

As typical household disasters set me back financially, I am wondering if I can possibly get by with a bridge camera for my work... I probably could as I never print larger than 16x24.... and by editing my landscapes in LR and OnOne Perfect Effects 9, I typically end up with a 6~10mb file.

I have been seriously looking at the Stylus 1s.... it is becoming more tempting to get the all in one and use it to the best of its abilities and live without the other rarely used features of its bigger siblings. Anything panoramic I can do with WA and stitching software.

I am concerned whether what I am thinking - that this will be a viable alternative - for my work (that nobody ever really buys - but if they do I want it to print at a decent size if needed) so I can save money and still have an effective camera to use at half the cost.

I know it's hard for all of you to determine if this will work for me with this little information, but any opinoins on this would help.

ALSO! - more importantly, I would love to see some examples (photographically) of what is being talked about in the processing of images with what has been discussed so far... please.

Cheers

16 x 24 from a 1/1.7" sensor? Henry prints larger than that from a smaller sensor, sooo...

all the superior work from the stylus 1 that I have seen, I think is from people who know the best camera settings for their workflow, and superior PP skills (not me), especially noise reduction which I would think would be a big part of that size print's success. You may shoot RAW, which can give more room for PP. I have seen some amazing Jpegs as well.

You could hop about the forum, finding work you think is quite good, and send those members a private message asking if they ever tried a large print.

Perhaps a few of them could email you their originals, and you can try printing something that will give you some answers.

Or, buy the camera from a source allowing returns, get it's settings right for you, see what you can do with it, keep it or return it.

Here is a 2X shot that came out well I think, its 3002X 600mm

That's JPEG, handheld, manual focus, settings per my setup suggestions thread. no PP.

Thank you for your reply and sample image Elliot, that helps. As an example of the work i've been doing over the last year.....

I am thinking that the Stylus 1 can handle the work load... and i'll have my E-3 to use for those rare times of sports shooting and portrait work (if I feel the Stylus isn't up to the task).

As much as I tell myself that I am almost there for the EM-5ii and how great it would be, it's been over a year of saving and setbacks and I feel if I don't pull a trigger, I may not see a decent upgrade anytime soon and the E-3 is getting to the point of soon needed expensive repairs.... so I would like to use it more conservatively instead of driving it into the dirt with hard use.

I'm seeing a bill of about $2300 for the EM-5ii with 12-40/2.8 Pro & 4/3 adapter for my longer lens and primes....., OR.... I could spend $600 on the Stylus and possibly discover I don't have to have all that the EM-5ii can offer.... until I can actually afford the EM-7..... lol

Well another path might be a used E-M5 or E-M10. Lets see at keh.com:

• Used E-M5 or E-M10, $379
• Used MMF-3, $126
• Used Olympus 12-50, $228 (if you want weather sealing)
• Used Olympus 14-150mm, $328 (if you want the zoom range of the Stylus-1)
• Used Olympus 14-42mm II-R (if you want a cheap but good micro 4/3rds lens)

Or $773 for the weather sealed combo, $604 for the basic combo, or $883 for the combo with the range.

Note, any camera except the E-M1 is going to focus your 4/3rds lenses slowly. So perhaps skip the MMF-3 for now, and just use a native micro 4/3rds lens.

Michael Meissner wrote:

Well another path might be a used E-M5 or E-M10. Lets see at keh.com:

• Used E-M5 or E-M10, $379
• Used MMF-3, $126
• Used Olympus 12-50, $228 (if you want weather sealing)
• Used Olympus 14-150mm, $328 (if you want the zoom range of the Stylus-1)
• Used Olympus 14-42mm II-R (if you want a cheap but good micro 4/3rds lens)

Or $773 for the weather sealed combo, $604 for the basic combo, or $883 for the combo with the range.

Note, any camera except the E-M1 is going to focus your 4/3rds lenses slowly. So perhaps skip the MMF-3 for now, and just use a native micro 4/3rds lens.

Thanks Michael, I was actually looking at the refurb options on the Olympus America website last night and asking myself if I would consider going even witt an EM-10..... I can see some OMD options that are certainly less expensive than springing for the EM-5ii..... but then it's an issue of lenses and GAS.... I would suffer from wanting the touch better the system could handle and then i'd be pixsing and moaning to my whits end...

Because of all that, I think it's either better to go with an all in one system like the Stylus, even with it's limitations and take pride in how well I can make such a "non-pro" system deliver, or get what I have been wanting and go all out for the EM-5ii

If I do the latter, I am trying to save up for at least the'

body itself

12-40/2.8 PRO

40-150/2.8 PRO

HLD 8-G grip

I would certainly want to later save up and add the;

7-14/2.8 PRO

300/4 PRO

and maybe a couple of primes

So, you see my dillema... I am at about $1600 point for savings, but in order to get the first setup, I will need about $2300... not sure if I go easy and live with Stylus 1 until I hit a windfall or keep plugging along until I have enough saved up to cover emergencies and still get my camera..... or choice....

I know, first world problems, but still a dillema for me... maybe I will go with the suggestion to grab a Stylus from somewhere that allows returns so I can test drive it for a bit.

Thanks for letting me use the forum as a sounding board, it's good therapy!

Lee

Jacque1 wrote:

I used also X2 on my stylus 1. And now I use X2 on my omd5II. This is a jpeg, no PP, 600mm with stylus1

1

Awesome!!