1200mm: Digital Teleconverter

Started 7 months ago | Discussions
OutsideTheMatrix
OutsideTheMatrix Senior Member • Posts: 7,347
Re: Downsizing internally?

Instead if downsizing, what if I used it in connection with M size 8 MP or M size 5 MP? That way, the computer does it!

Also what JPG compression would you recommend for the x2 TC?  When downsizing to either 8 MP or 5 MP I found that there was very little to no size difference between Super Fine and Fine so I opted for Fine.  Can you experiment and see if it's the same with your camera SF vs F at 8 MP?

-- hide signature --

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

 OutsideTheMatrix's gear list:OutsideTheMatrix's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix S9900W Nikon Coolpix P900 +9 more
OP Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 18,791
Re: Downsizing internally?
1

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

Instead if downsizing, what if I used it in connection with M size 8 MP or M size 5 MP? That way, the computer does it!

Yes, I suggested that in another post in this thread:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64241372

Also what JPG compression would you recommend for the x2 TC? When downsizing to either 8 MP or 5 MP I found that there was very little to no size difference between Super Fine and Fine so I opted for Fine. Can you experiment and see if it's the same with your camera SF vs F at 8 MP?

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Dale108
Dale108 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,851
Re: 1600mm: Digital Teleconverter on G9
3

Here is a shot from yesterday using Panny's version with the G9 and PL 100-400.  Works for me.

Dale

Henry Richardson wrote:

Sometimes just for grins I use the Olympus 75-300mm II with the 2x digital teleconverter function for fun jpegs. What it does is take the central 25% of the image (5mp in the case of the 20mp PEN-F) and then interpolates it up to full size. The EVF shows the image you will get. At 300mm it would be equivalent to a 600mm field of view. Of course, the quality is not the same as a real 600mm, but I have found that if I then downsize the 20mp photo to 10-12mp on my computer it usually looks pretty darn good. For some images even the full 20mp looks good. Just a few years ago 10-12mp was living large. Big enough for most uses still. Note, that if you shoot raw instead of jpeg you can still see the pseudo 600mm view in the EVF, but then you will have to crop the raw on your computer to the central 25% and then upsize. Remember, 600mm on m4/3 is like 1200mm on FF. Pretty awesome.

Remember that you must have excellent support to shoot at the pseudo 1200mm. I have shot in good light handheld though and by holding very steady (elbows on a support) and the IBIS I have managed some pretty good results.

And, yes, I know, this sort of thing gets some people's panties in a twist. Only the best, most expensive gear that has been blessed by the pixel peeping, techno geek, measurebators is good enough for them! For the rest of us though it is a fun thing to do and the results are often pretty good.

I will post a few examples. 1500 pixels on the long side. Some have a bit of cropping so more like 1300mm, 1400mm, or even 1500mm! EXIF included.

Please feel free to post your telephoto shots using the Olympus or Panasonic digital teleconverter function in this thread.

Click on original to see a better, sharper image. The photos in a dpreview thread are highly compressed and soft.

Sapporo, Japan

Kyoto, Japan

Sapporo, Japan -- electronic shutter

Sapporo, Japan

Sapporo, Japan

 Dale108's gear list:Dale108's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Olympus TG-5 Pentax K-1 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9
OP Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 18,791
Re: 1600mm: Digital Teleconverter on G9
1

Dale108 wrote:

Here is a shot from yesterday using Panny's version with the G9 and PL 100-400. Works for me.

Dale

Wow, pseudo 1600mm-efl!

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

OutsideTheMatrix
OutsideTheMatrix Senior Member • Posts: 7,347
Re: 1600mm: Digital Teleconverter on G9

Henry Richardson wrote:

Dale108 wrote:

Here is a shot from yesterday using Panny's version with the G9 and PL 100-400. Works for me.

Dale

Wow, pseudo 1600mm-efl!

I saw Sony's alpha cameras have a 2x "smart" digital zoom and a 4x option, I wonder what the difference is (other than the magnitude of the magnification) and how Sony's 2x "smart" digital zoom compares to Olympus's 2x

-- hide signature --

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

 OutsideTheMatrix's gear list:OutsideTheMatrix's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix S9900W Nikon Coolpix P900 +9 more
OP Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 18,791
Sony & Olympus DTC
1

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

I saw Sony's alpha cameras have a 2x "smart" digital zoom and a 4x option, I wonder what the difference is (other than the magnitude of the magnification) and how Sony's 2x "smart" digital zoom compares to Olympus's 2x

2x uses the central 25% of the pixels so 4x would use the central 12.5% of the pixels.  Wait, is that right?  12.5%?

I'm sorry, I do not know the answer to your question. Probably a bit of searching will find the answer though. I suspect that Olympus, Sony, etc. when doing in-camera uprezzing do it on the raw data so it is possible they get slightly better results than doing it later on a computer using a regular tiff or jpeg file.

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Sranang Boi Senior Member • Posts: 2,290
Re: 3000mm or 4000mm
1

I have seen a video on an adult site that was supposedly taken with a long lens zoom compact. I was amazed that the IS and image quality was still so good at a considerable distance from the action.

 Sranang Boi's gear list:Sranang Boi's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DC-FZ1000 II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic G90 Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Leica 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 ASPH +1 more
OP Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 18,791
6.25% of central pixels?
2

Henry Richardson wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

I saw Sony's alpha cameras have a 2x "smart" digital zoom and a 4x option, I wonder what the difference is (other than the magnitude of the magnification) and how Sony's 2x "smart" digital zoom compares to Olympus's 2x

2x uses the central 25% of the pixels so 4x would use the central 12.5% of the pixels. Wait, is that right? 12.5%?

Or would it be the central 6.25% of the pixels? 2x uses 25% so 4x would be like taking the 2x 25% and then taking the central 25% of it, right? If so then that would be 6.25%. And then Sony would interpolate that up to full size. Am I right?

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

JakeJY Senior Member • Posts: 5,009
Re: 6.25% of central pixels?
2

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

I saw Sony's alpha cameras have a 2x "smart" digital zoom and a 4x option, I wonder what the difference is (other than the magnitude of the magnification) and how Sony's 2x "smart" digital zoom compares to Olympus's 2x

2x uses the central 25% of the pixels so 4x would use the central 12.5% of the pixels. Wait, is that right? 12.5%?

Or would it be the central 6.25% of the pixels? 2x uses 25% so 4x would be like taking the 2x 25% and then taking the central 25% of it, right? If so then that would be 6.25%. And then Sony would interpolate that up to full size. Am I right?

Yes that is correct.

2x is 50% the height and 50% the width, so area is (50%)*(50%)=25%

4x is 25% the height and 25% width so area is (25%)*(25%)=6.25%

 JakeJY's gear list:JakeJY's gear list
Nikon Coolpix S9300 Nikon D5000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR +6 more
OutsideTheMatrix
OutsideTheMatrix Senior Member • Posts: 7,347
Re: Sony & Olympus DTC

Henry Richardson wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

I saw Sony's alpha cameras have a 2x "smart" digital zoom and a 4x option, I wonder what the difference is (other than the magnitude of the magnification) and how Sony's 2x "smart" digital zoom compares to Olympus's 2x

2x uses the central 25% of the pixels so 4x would use the central 12.5% of the pixels. Wait, is that right? 12.5%?

I'm sorry, I do not know the answer to your question. Probably a bit of searching will find the answer though. I suspect that Olympus, Sony, etc. when doing in-camera uprezzing do it on the raw data so it is possible they get slightly better results than doing it later on a computer using a regular tiff or jpeg file.

no it's 1/16 (inv square of 4) so that is 6.25% lol.  I was just wondering if they use some kind of AI algorithms to make good predictions on what the data should look like vs what superzoom cameras like the Nikon P900/950/1000 do.

-- hide signature --

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

 OutsideTheMatrix's gear list:OutsideTheMatrix's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix S9900W Nikon Coolpix P900 +9 more
OutsideTheMatrix
OutsideTheMatrix Senior Member • Posts: 7,347
Re: 6.25% of central pixels?

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

I saw Sony's alpha cameras have a 2x "smart" digital zoom and a 4x option, I wonder what the difference is (other than the magnitude of the magnification) and how Sony's 2x "smart" digital zoom compares to Olympus's 2x

2x uses the central 25% of the pixels so 4x would use the central 12.5% of the pixels. Wait, is that right? 12.5%?

Or would it be the central 6.25% of the pixels? 2x uses 25% so 4x would be like taking the 2x 25% and then taking the central 25% of it, right? If so then that would be 6.25%. And then Sony would interpolate that up to full size. Am I right?

yes 1/16 or 6.25% I wonder if they use AI smart algorithms to predict what the data should look like, the Nikon superzoom cameras do a pretty good job there

-- hide signature --

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

 OutsideTheMatrix's gear list:OutsideTheMatrix's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix S9900W Nikon Coolpix P900 +9 more
dbelling Contributing Member • Posts: 687
Re: 1600mm: Digital Teleconverter on G9
1

I have experimented using both 2x and 4x with my PL50-200 mounted on my G9 and using test charts. The ptotos using 2x turned out to be quite sharp, but the 4x photos were definitely not sharp at all. At least now I know to never use 4x.

Regards, Dave

OutsideTheMatrix
OutsideTheMatrix Senior Member • Posts: 7,347
Re: 1600mm: Digital Teleconverter on G9

dbelling wrote:

I have experimented using both 2x and 4x with my PL50-200 mounted on my G9 and using test charts. The ptotos using 2x turned out to be quite sharp, but the 4x photos were definitely not sharp at all. At least now I know to never use 4x.

Regards, Dave

ah should be the same for Sony then

-- hide signature --

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

 OutsideTheMatrix's gear list:OutsideTheMatrix's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Olympus C-7070 Wide Zoom Fujifilm FinePix S9900W Nikon Coolpix P900 +9 more
Eric Nepean
Eric Nepean Veteran Member • Posts: 5,655
Re: 1600mm: Digital Teleconverter on G9
1

dbelling wrote:

I have experimented using both 2x and 4x with my PL50-200 mounted on my G9 and using test charts. The ptotos using 2x turned out to be quite sharp, but the 4x photos were definitely not sharp at all. At least now I know to never use 4x.

Regards, Dave

I have the same result with the GX8 and PL100-400.

Not a surprise.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Eric
(Any image that I post in a DPR forum may be editted and posted in a DPR forum)

 Eric Nepean's gear list:Eric Nepean's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS7 Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M1 II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 +58 more
dbelling Contributing Member • Posts: 687
Re: 1600mm: Digital Teleconverter on G9
2

Eric Nepean wrote:

dbelling wrote:

I have experimented using both 2x and 4x with my PL50-200 mounted on my G9 and using test charts. The ptotos using 2x turned out to be quite sharp, but the 4x photos were definitely not sharp at all. At least now I know to never use 4x.

Regards, Dave

I have the same result with the GX8 and PL100-400.

Not a surprise.

Agreed. I was really surprised at how sharp the test chart photos were using 2x digital zoom with my PL 50-200, so I thought for fun I would try the same setup using 4x. I didn't expect those shots to be as good, but I was amazed at just how bad they were. Really soft and mushy throughout the frame.

Regards, Dave

MHshooter
MHshooter Senior Member • Posts: 1,010
Re: Used Canon 1200mm for $180,000
1

8 inch wide front element at f/5.6 means you are at the mercy of horrifically-magnified heatwaves over the distances that thing is meant for.  You'd be luck to achieve it's full resolution wide open a fraction of the time is was used.  I've got an SCT 8" telescope.  With a focal reducer/field flattener, that becomes 1250mm f/6.3.  But using such an optic in the daytime is pretty much a waste.  However, if the diameter of whatever optic you are using is reduced to 4 inches wide or less, it will produce on average steadier images.  So, the Canon probably works best around f11 most of the time.

OP Henry Richardson Forum Pro • Posts: 18,791
Upsizing with Lightroom, Photoshop & darktable
4

There was some interest and discussion of upsizing/uprezzing a raw photo on your computer as an alternative.  Here is an example I did using 3 different programs.  I uprezzed a raw file using Lightroom, Photoshop Preserve Details 2.0, and darktable:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64367958

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

MHshooter
MHshooter Senior Member • Posts: 1,010
Re: Upsizing with Lightroom, Photoshop & darktable

Henry Richardson wrote:

There was some interest and discussion of upsizing/uprezzing a raw photo on your computer as an alternative. Here is an example I did using 3 different programs. I uprezzed a raw file using Lightroom, Photoshop Preserve Details 2.0, and darktable:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64367958

Those are actually impressive, but I'd like to see it done with a resolution chart of some kind as well.

James Stirling
James Stirling Senior Member • Posts: 8,071
Re: Upsizing with Lightroom, Photoshop & darktable

MHshooter wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

There was some interest and discussion of upsizing/uprezzing a raw photo on your computer as an alternative. Here is an example I did using 3 different programs. I uprezzed a raw file using Lightroom, Photoshop Preserve Details 2.0, and darktable:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64367958

Those are actually impressive, but I'd like to see it done with a resolution chart of some kind as well.

With apologies to Henry for not getting back to my own thread . Here is the Gigapixel attempt at part of a resolution test shot from imaging resource Z7 raw. 1/8th crop , output to 18x12" at 300ppi, full image below and downsized original image to show where the crop comes from

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling:
It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true” Russell
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

 James Stirling's gear list:James Stirling's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Nikon Z7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 +11 more
MHshooter
MHshooter Senior Member • Posts: 1,010
Re: Upsizing with Lightroom, Photoshop & darktable

James Stirling wrote:

MHshooter wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

There was some interest and discussion of upsizing/uprezzing a raw photo on your computer as an alternative. Here is an example I did using 3 different programs. I uprezzed a raw file using Lightroom, Photoshop Preserve Details 2.0, and darktable:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64367958

Those are actually impressive, but I'd like to see it done with a resolution chart of some kind as well.

With apologies to Henry for not getting back to my own thread . Here is the Gigapixel attempt at part of a resolution test shot from imaging resource Z7 raw. 1/8th crop , output to 18x12" at 300ppi, full image below and downsized original image to show where the crop comes from

His use of programs to upsize appeared to increase resolution, which isn't really possible unless some kind of A.I. is at work.  Even if it appeared to show an increase in resolution, it would have to be verified by taking a normal shot (closer, with a better lens) that showed the same features the programs appeared to uncover.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads