Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 29, 2010, 12:30 PM   #11
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 29
Default Well, that's a little clearer to me...

...what got me with this photo, though, was the whiskers; they're on the same plane as her nose, but THEY'RE razor sharp and her little nose is a smear. Her claws are visible and sharp but the branch she's standing on is a smear.

I will admit, though, that I do have a lot more to learn about DOF with this camera than with my other camera, an Olympus SP570; its functional aperture/shutter range in manual is quite a lot smaller than this one (never got a shutter speed of 2400 with the Oly!!) and as a consequence, the HS10 is certainly much, MUCH more of a learning tool for me!! Which is a good thing, of course, in spite of the inevitable frustrations along the way From your detailed reply, I can see I've got much more learning to do

Originally Posted by JimC View Post
BTW, a camera with a larger sensor or film size would have a much shallower depth of field (even less of the image in focus as you get further away from your focus point when filling the frame that much with a smaller subject) for a given aperture setting.

So, the camera you have is going to be much better than many cameras if you want more depth of field with shots like that one (especially compared to cameras with much larger sensors like virtually all dSLR models). ;-)
AnniM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29, 2010, 5:34 PM   #12
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Portholland, Cornwall, UK
Posts: 42

I'm sorry to disagree but this is nothing to do with depth of field. It is caused by the way the HS10 compresses CERTAIN textures in JPEG. My examples are the same picture shot RAW + JPEG. The way the HS10 has rendered the JPEG has "mushed" details that are clearly there in the RAW file.

On another forum Fuji have asked individuals to send them examples of his phenomenon. It particularly affects foliage, grass and other finely textured surfaces.

It seems to occur only in certain pictures. Tomorrow I am going to shoot a scene that has mushed in the past to see if the effect changes at different apertures or ISO etc.
Cornwall David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29, 2010, 8:03 PM   #13
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 23

I looked at the photo in post 8, while the whiskers looked good in it, it looks to me like the branches a little further back aare more in focus then the branches the cat is on.

Perhaps the whiskers look good because they are just thin little lines?

I am no expert , but its what I see.
hoppingmad is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 AM.