Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Konica Minolta

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 15, 2004, 2:09 PM   #21
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 18
Default

Here is a picture taken today


www.evolp.de/PICT0215.JPG unchanged from Cam

12x Tele in Automodus
Handshot over a bridge with AS
Standart JPEG Mode (wich produce artefacts easily i think now)

The Air was a bit dusty today but i think its ok.
Allanon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2004, 3:29 PM   #22
Member
 
Clive Egginton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 43
Default

Allanon, nice shot - you've really captured the moment here. I think that the stabilization is doing a great job too.

But there's something wrong with the image quality.

There is no sign of a truly black pixel and I would expect at least the dog's eyes to be black and there is a whole lot of red in there. Blow up the picture to 200% and look at the dog's face.

Have a look at the histogram below for the red channel. There's one hell of a peak at the top end - where's that come from?

As far as colour balance in general is concerned, well it's a very sandy looking picture anyway, it looks ok but it does so too if you take out some of the yellow - how muddy was the water?

I can't believe that KM have a problem that can't be solved - it's no doubt a simple judgement call in the software design. Perhaps the Japanese prefer this colour balance.

Cheers,

Clive
Attached Images
 
Clive Egginton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2004, 3:40 PM   #23
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 6
Default

Microsaft here.

The picture was taken around 17.00 in the afternoon.
The internal clock on the camera was not correctly set.
Don't believe every Exif you read.

The picture shows the warm afternoon sun on one of the hottest days of the year here in Sweden.

The first images that day were taken about 05.25 according to the Exif and you can better believe that I'm not up and running at that time of day.

The colors reproduced by the Z3 are really neat actually.

It is ok to ask me questions before jumping into conclusions.

/Fredrik

microsaftcom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2004, 10:46 PM   #24
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 18
Default

The water is muddy, nobody wants to swimthere except dogs

I have done quite some pictures on a party in a dark room (Candles for the ambient light only) and will post my personal conclusion for this cam tomorrow after another trip in the nature with it.

Here another 2 pics from today (nothing serious only test/funshots)

http://www.evolp.de/PICT0351.JPG
http://www.evolp.de/PICT0356.JPG

12x +AS Handshots 17:30
Allanon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2004, 1:59 PM   #25
Member
 
Clive Egginton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 43
Default

Fredrik,

Thanks for theinfo on the golf-course shot.I am glad that this could be the explanation, Iwould still like to buy this camerabut there is no way that I could if it can't cope with such basic shots as that.

Allanon,

Both shots look good to me but there's a good mix of colours, high contrast and strong lighting so I would expect most cameras to do a good job in those conditions. Viewed at 100%the purple fringing is very noticeable in the shot of the bus howeverit would, probably,print ok.

Could either or both of you do me a favour? Take a photo of a person (medium to long shot) against a predominantly green background (trees/grass), one usingauto white balance and another usoingdaylight setting white balance and post the results.

Cheers,

Clive


Clive Egginton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2004, 10:21 AM   #26
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Default


Hi, Clive

I realy dont now what type of camera you wanna buy, but the z3 if you shot well it will reproduce natural good colors. If you are looking the best one try som SLR cameras.

Every photo can be manipulated in PS or Psp.

look at this link and here you will find som good and bad shots [http://www.pbasehk.com/rolexng/Cloud_z3]
whitout that yellow layer.

Only one think is in Z3 what i dont like is the EVF.


Zoltan
zoli223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2004, 12:27 PM   #27
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 18
Default

The automatic white balance often misjugde -especially indoor.

I think, this is the reason for "Sandy locking Pictures"

With Manual settings the output is fine (Colors) i think.

Now i almost allways using EVF. It isn't the sharpest one but doing his job well enough (I using glasses and its just fine)
Allanon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2004, 3:44 PM   #28
Member
 
Clive Egginton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 43
Default

Zoli223,

I want to buy a camera that can do what it claims. At the price it is, it is not a toy, it is not a throwaway novelty. I have been buying (film) SLRs for over 30 years and know whatthey can doand what to expect.

I have also had a 3.2Mp Kodak digital camera (DX37000) for nearly 3yrs, it has no optical zoom,no manualfeature at all, not even a self-timer but I reckon it takes constistently good photographs without the need to tweak the colour in PS or PSP.

There are a fewpictures (although most are just snapshots) fromtheKodakhere http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/kcegginto...ery/index.html (full sized images could be made available if anyone is interested).

Yes, every picture can be manipulated but not necessarily made good, some problems just cannot be corrected without an inordinate amount of time and effort.

My point is thatTOO MANYof the pictures I've seen from the Z1/2/3 camerasneed correcting.

I have tried a Panasonic FZ10 (my friend now owns one) andit gets the colour right much more frequently that the Z-series seems to going by the samples I have seen postedin these forums. If Panasonic can do it then why not KM? (Allanon: the evf on the panny is rubbish too)

Very few of the pictures I have seen from the Z3 make me want to rush out and buy one - it might be the camera, it might be the user - I'm not yet sure which. The FZ20 is starting to look a much better bet. Yes, it costs more but you know the old saying 'Buy expensive, cry once"

Cheers,

Clive


Clive Egginton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2004, 5:06 PM   #29
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5
Default

Does anybody know why the second image from Allanonhas quite easilly visible horizontal lines?

I am also very interested in the km Z3 untill I noticed the horizontal lines in a lot of images.




Peteur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2004, 5:26 PM   #30
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 65
Default

Clive- I understand exactly where you are coming from. I have had a large number of digicams (15+) over the last 5 years and before that I was an avid film based camera enthusiasts. Almost every digicam I've owned has had something that prevented me from wanting to buy another one.

I tend toward wanting "zoom" type cameras so the chromatic issues have normally haunted my pictures more than unwanted color casts. To make a long story short, this past year I bought both a Kodak 6490 and KM Z2. I ended up having them both for several weeks. I had bought the 6490 first and really liked it. Unfortunately I thought I had lost it (kids misplaced it) so when I went to buy a replacement there were enough things about it I didn't like that I bought the Z2.

Well turns out I found the 6490 and I was able to compare them back to back until as luck would have it the Z2 was stolen while on holiday. I loved the big LCD on the 6490 but the Z2 had a better lens, less chromatic issues but the color wasn't quite as good as the Kodak. I finally figured out in my case at least it was the crappy AUTO WB that was the culprit. Now the photos are much better. The Kodak focused better in low light than the Z2 but didn't have as much manual control and the movie mode was clearly inferior and compressed my images more than I wanted.

After having my Z2 stolen I was in the market again for another zoom. I still like the Kodak as a day to day camera but it didn't have the versatility I was looking for. So I was again faced with the decision of what to buy. After much wringing of hands and nashing of teeth I ordered another KM but this time the Z3. I looked at some more expensive cameras but while I gained pixels (that I really didn't need) I also lost the zoom I wanted. I have found that almost every digicam I've bought (including some very expensive ones) can benefit from some post processing work.

The advantage is now with many programs it is easy to batch the jobs once I determine the output that I am looking for. Since I almost never print bigger than 8x10 a 4MP gives enough info so my prints look good and I don't have huge file sizes. I seriously thought about the new Panasonic zoom models but I use the video enough on my digicams that the Pana's QVGA video just didn't do it for me (same as the Kodak). One thing I loved about the Z2 was its very fast start up time and time to focus and shoot. I do wish it had a LCD as good as the Kodak though. This will be the first time that when I had an opportunity to buy something different I still bought almost the same type of digicam.

So now I am waiting axiously for it to arrive. Time will tell if my choice was the right one for me or not. So far the early pics I've seen by others tells me the Z3 still can't choose the WB as accurately as it should but that isn't an issue for me. The bang for the buck on the Z2 was hard to resist and the IS on the Z3 pushed over the edge to buy it even if it has a slightly slower lens.

Tim

Wavshrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:30 PM.