Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 31, 2007, 8:20 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
tcook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,703
Default

I am posting this because I have seen some discussions about the extended zoom capabilities on some FZ cameras and I believe there is some misunderstanding about what it does. It is nothing more than the equivalent of an internal crop in the camera. If you take a shot at each of the extended zoom settings and then crop each one to 100% all images will then be the same size. It does not replace a Teleconverter.

Here are some shots I took at the standard setting (10mp), the first (8mp) and second (5mp) extended zoom settings and the standard setting (10mp) with a TCON-17. All shots have been cropped to 100%. Disregard the quality because they were taken in dim light and only to show what the settings do in regard to image size.

Standard setting (10mp)


First extended setting (8mp)


Second extended setting (5mp)


Standard setting (10mp) plus TCON-17

tcook is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 31, 2007, 8:38 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
D.Ann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,932
Default

I didn't realize it was like a crop. I thought it was magnified like a telescope. Donna
D.Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2007, 8:59 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
annie57's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,613
Default

I thought what Donna did. Interesting to know!!! Are u better to take zoom photos at less megapixels?
annie57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2007, 10:07 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
tcook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,703
Default

Annie, the only way to get more "true" magnification of the image above the 12X zoom of the camera is by adding a teleconverter. I think if is best to shoot zoom photos at the 10mp setting both with or without a teleconverter and then crop if you need to.
annie57 wrote:
Quote:
I thought what Donna did. Interesting to know!!! Are u better to take zoom photos at less megapixels?
tcook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2007, 9:28 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
genece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,111
Default

I do not want to argue the virtues of the extended zoom and I believe it is pretty much a crop....... But I do not believe you get a better photo with a teleconverter.....Thats only my opinion and if you feel differently thats fine.....But IMHO the optical zoom does help frame and meter the subject and again in my opinion digital zoom gives a result much more like a crop than the EZ does but I only am posting so some do not get scared away from the EZ as I feel it gives very nice results.....I understand your examples but I have a different opinion of EZ.

Here is a 5EZ photo from a FZ30 with about a 25% crop done to the photo and I feel the result is very nice. I have 100s of photos taken with various teleconverters and I would still use them but my wife took control of the FZ30 and she will not use a teleconverter so she uses the EZ and it has opened my eyes, to what a nice feature it really is. Not to mention you do not have to find the teleconverter and add it to the camera, by that time the bears would have been back in the forest.




genece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2007, 11:18 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
tcook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,703
Default

What I said is that, the extended zoom does not in truth make the picture any larger than the standard setting which can be proven by just cropping each of the settings to 100%. If you feel that an extended zoom is better than a crop of a standard zoom then that's fine, whatever someone likes is what they should use. What some people are thinking is that the extended zoom negates the usefulness and the need for a teleconverter and that is just not true. I think the benefit's of a releconverter are clearly shown by the images I posted above. If the distance one is shooting and the framing of the subject does not require additional magnification then a teleconverter should not be used because all it then does is add additional glass in front of the lens.
genece wrote:
Quote:
I do not want to argue the virtues of the extended zoom and I believe it is pretty much a crop....... But I do not believe you get a better photo with a teleconverter.....Thats only my opinion and if you feel differently thats fine.....But IMHO the optical zoom does help frame and meter the subject and again in my opinion digital zoom gives a result much more like a crop than the EZ does but I only am posting so some do not get scared away from the EZ as I feel it gives very nice results.....I understand your examples but I have a different opinion of EZ.

Here is a 5EZ photo from a FZ30 with about a 25% crop done to the photo and I feel the result is very nice. I have 100s of photos taken with various teleconverters and I would still use them but my wife took control of the FZ30 and she will not use a teleconverter so she uses the EZ and it has opened my eyes, to what a nice feature it really is. Not to mention you do not have to find the teleconverter and add it to the camera, by that time the bears would have been back in the forest.



tcook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2007, 12:36 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Telecorder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 490
Default

Quote:
It is nothing more than the equivalent of an internal crop in the camera.
Not really.. there is a bit more 'value-added' aspects to it, IMO...

I liken Pany's design for EOZ to modifying the inherent 'base crop factor' of the lens' cone of light onto the sensor. Just as my Nikon D50's base crop factor of 1.5X the lens 35mm focal length, the Pany FZ30 has a base crop factor of ~4.73X the lens' 35mm focal length. (420mm EQ / 88.8mm lens = ~4.73X base crop factor)

Pany's EOZmasks the sensor edgesto modify this base crop factor to afford an 'apparent' increase in the base crop factor...


True, there is no additional image data being imparted/captured but the increase in the subject's imaged-size, relative to the reduced LxW of the image canvas, is 'equivalent' to havingimaged the subject with a longer 35mm lens' focal length when using a 35mm film camera system.

The inherent, value-added,advantages of utilizing the Pany's EOZ over later, post-image cropping on a PC, IMHO,are:

>>WYSIWYG Composition at time of imaging;

>>AF & Exposure metered areas cover more of the subject in the EOZ mode and afford for a better exposed image at the time of the image which can't usually be accomplished by post-image cropping/processing on a PC;

>>Better ability to preview the IQ/sharpness in the field of an EOZ image over post-image PC cropping of the image --since one can step-zoom deeper/closerinto the image just after the image was taken.

Like any add-on lens, the use of a TC (or filter, for that matter) will degrade the image quality to a larger or lesser extent since the light passing through any additional glass will lose some %. Some of the better UV(O) filters claim a 99+% transmissivity of the light through its glass... add in a few more glass lens elements in a TC and there is a potential for loss of more % of available light being lost. Keep in mind that the Leica lens' glass elements are 'tuned' for the best IQ through its zoom range. Adding a TC's additional lens elements won't equal or improve on this 'finely-tuned' set of integrated glass lens elements.

So, I agree,if one is able to get the reach with the EOZ approach, it will usually have a better exposure/IQ than achieving the same reach by virtue of using a shorter focal length + TC. (ie -- IQ for an image taken using EZ 5-MP at ~15X zoom for ~510mm reach > 300mm focal length x 1.7X TC for same reach)
Telecorder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2007, 1:38 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
d-sr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Abilene. TX
Posts: 1,486
Default

So, to make a long story short, everyone is pretty much in agreement that you get better IQ using the EZ mode at whatever lessorMP's to getthe same shot as using a TCON 17,14b or anyotherteleconverter lens. Am I understanding this correctly? I have not even tried the EZ mode on my V-LUX 1 because I thought it was the other way around.

Don
d-sr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2007, 3:20 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
genece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,111
Default

My wife used 3EZ almost 100% of the time on our vacation.......I tried moving her up to 5EZ and a teleconverter and she would make me take it off......She got some wonderful photos ....it would have been nice if she would have used 8mp when possible but she only knows 3 things on the camera The On/Off switch....The shutter button and the zoom ring.

I think what I was trying to say I prefer the EZ mode but if a TCon is also used so much the better.

Here is a bunch of her photos mostly taken in 3 EZ.

http://imageevent.com/grc6/fz30/fz30goestoalaska
genece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2007, 4:49 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Telecorder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 490
Default

d-sr wrote:
Quote:
So, to make a long story short, everyone is pretty much in agreement that you get better IQ using the EZ mode at whatever lessorMP's to getthe same shot as using a TCON 17,14b or anyotherteleconverter lens. Am I understanding this correctly? I have not even tried the EZ mode on my V-LUX 1 because I thought it was the other way around.

Don
Maybe yes, maybe not...

Think about it -- when in EOZ mode,the exposedpixel sites/dataare exactly the same asiflater cropped from thefull 8-MP non-EOZ mode (since only the non-masked sensor sites are exposed in the EOZ-mode and the OEM lens is the only optical path).

When one uses the full 8-MP + TC, non-EOZ mode, the TC-magnified image is exposed onto the full 8-MP sensor pixel sites. The degree of IQ obtained when using a TC is directly related to the quality of the TC and how it matches up to the OEM lens' optics. Consider the Oly TCON-17 to the Nikon 17ED version. Its quite apparent that the Nikon affords a much greater IQ. Compare either of these to a cheap, poorly made 2X TC....

Depending on the degree of degradation/loss of light/distortions due to passing through the additional TC optics, the resultant 8-MP + TC image [glow=red]may[/glow] (since one has more photo-sites being exposed per unit area of the magnifiedimage), [glow=red]or may not[/glow] (since the image data is distorted/compromised by the additional optical elements of the TC), have more IQ/image-data

I would imagine that there are instances/circumstances where a high quality optical TC, that's a good match to the OEM Lens' optics andused in full 8-MP 'could' produce a higher IQ than merely cropping of the 8-MP image without the TC....

Of course, others may have their own opinion/insight into the complex topic of optics that I'm over looking here...:?But that's my story and I'm stickin' to it..:-)
Telecorder 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 6:56 AM.