Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Newbie Help

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 27, 2008, 7:56 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46
Default

I bought a Panasonic DMC FS5K for $180.00. I was at a music festival and I was taking pictures of my favortite band. I was about 15 ft from the stage and I had to take the pic with the normal zoom and digital zoom (4x and then whatever the digital zoom is) maxed out. I also had it ethier on ISO 400 or ISO 800(I was experimenting). My camera saids it can take pics of moving objects without blur, but 85% of the pics I took came out with motion blur. Why is this? Would I of gotten better image stableization if I bought a camera between 250-300?
dman777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 27, 2008, 8:09 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

I saw the images you posted in Lighting changes signifacantly. I presume those are some of the images you are referring to.

The image stabilization in the Panasonic FS5, indeed all image stabilization systems in all cameras, prevent image blur due to camera movement. They don't (can't) do anything about motion blur due to subject movement. The images you posted in the other thread were shot with shutter speeds of 1/13 second and 1/8 second. Someone playing a guitar will move their hand(s) some distance during the shutter speeds you were using. Certainly during a live performance, the performers would move enough to cause motion blur during that time. The only way to prevent motion blur due to subject movement is to use a faster shutter speed.

The FS5 has a relatively small aperture ( f/5.8 )at the focal length you were using (35mm equivalent: 133mm), and with an ISO setting of only 800, in those conditions, a slow shutter speed would be necessary to obtain proper exposure.

I can't answer thequestion you posted in the other topic, but I can tell you that concert photos are a challenge for better cameras and for experienced photographers. I think you might be expecting too much from your camera and yourself.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2008, 8:40 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46
Default

wow! that was what i was thinking also. i was thinking about selling this camera and buying a more expensive one(my limit is $300.00). would i get a fast shutter speed with those same settings? and if so, would it be significant improvement in shutter speed?
dman777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2008, 9:01 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Reanimator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huddersfield
Posts: 1,347
Default

i dont think you will get anything that will do the job for just $300

what you gotta remember is when you zoom the aperture changes too letting in less light, seeing as you cannot change lens you will need higher iso to get faster speed but this will lead to noise on the image (itll look grainy), wedding photographers have similar probs shooting in church with no flash..........most use high end nikons which are very good at high iso but are way way out of your range

Gary
Reanimator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2008, 10:53 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

There are three factors that affect exposure:
  • Aperture: the amount of light that passes through the lens to the image sensor [/*]
  • Shutter Speed: the length of time the image sensor is exposed to light [/*]
  • ISO Setting: the sensitivity of the image sensor to light[/*]
The images you captured were at small apertures ( f/5.8 ), slow shutter speeds (1/8" and 1/13"), and an ISO setting of 800, with a 35mm equivalent focal length of 133mm.

In order to get faster shutter speeds for that exposure, you'll need to increase the ISO setting or the aperture. An ISO setting of 800 is high, but still not so high that it produces a lot of noise. So let's take a look at aperture first.

In order to double the shutter speed, you need to increase the aperture by a full f-stop. You used an aperture of f/5.8. That isn't an even f-stop, so for now, let's work with f/5.6. Addinga full f/stop to that would get it to f/4.0, That would still only double the shutter speed; that would be 1/25 second. You'd still see a lot of motion blur, so to double aperture again to f/2.8 would get you a shutter speed of 1/50".That should prevent motion blur due to subject movement in these types of shots (or at least keep it at a reasonable level.) Your camera is capable of using an aperture of f/2.8 but only at it's shortest focal length of 30mm (35mm equivalent.) That's not going to get you the kind of image you seem to be after.

So to do this type of shot, you'd need a lens with a 35mm equivalent focal length of 133mm and a maximum aperture of f/2.8. Adorama.com lists the Tokina 50-135mm f/2.8 as it's least expensive telephoto lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.8. It is available for Canon and Nikon dSLRs, and costs $650. That would be more than double your budget, and doesn't include a camera!

So let's revisit the ISO setting. In order to double the shutter speed, you need ot double the ISO Value. You used 800, so going to 1600 would let you use a shutter speed of 1/25", and 3200 would let you go to 1/50". Your FS5 has a High Sensitivity (HIGH SENS.) Mode which permits the use of ISO settings up to 6400 (See page 52of the Operating Instructions.) But when in HIGH SENS. mode, the resolution of the captured image is 3MP instead of the regular 10MP.

So, you can do that kind of shot with the FS5, but you'll have to give up a lot of resolution.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2008, 5:24 AM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46
Default

wow, thanx for the information. i think that is really cool my camera has that mode. but there is a downfall to this mode that bothers me. it's not the pixel count degration, because i don't need my pics very big. it's the that in this mode i am forced to compress the pics. in a lower jpeg qaulity rather than a higher quality. i don't suppose there is a way around this, huh?


dman777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2008, 11:42 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

I've never found a way around compression quality versus image size in cameras that bundle them. You might be blaming your photo quality degradation on compression quality when in reality most of it is caused by the noise from the high ISO. Take some outdoor photos at 3Mp and ISO 100 at the lower JPG quality. You will probably find them better than you expect.

Your best bet might be to use ISO 800 and take a LOT of photos. There are always times of null motion and you will capture some good photos if you take enough of them.


slipe 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 8:57 AM.