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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 2, 2003, 2:56 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 19
Default How to get more power of FZ2+Tcon17?

FZ2+Tcon17=20.4x
How to power up?

Regard
Attapol
:?:
attapol is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 2, 2003, 5:05 AM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 37
Default look at this

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=6809954

is a friend from Barcelona.

In the samples you must consider that the curch is far some Km. Shooting at 100-200 meters the pictures are a lot sharper.
setsan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2003, 11:52 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 253
Default Re: How to get more power of FZ2+Tcon17?

Quote:
Originally Posted by attapol
FZ2+Tcon17=20.4x
How to power up?

Regard
Attapol
:?:
Wouldn't the math actually be FZ2 (12x) + Tcon17 (1.7x) = 13.7x ?

I don't get 30x out the combination of my FZ1 and my 2.5x telephoto add-on lens -- it looks more like the 14x that I used to get from my Sony FD91 (which had a 14x optical zoom).
EffZeeOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2003, 11:56 AM   #4
Member
 
Jimmie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 98
Default

It's times not plus 1.7x In other words 12x1.7x = 20.4 x optical zoom or 714 mm's or to get real technical it's actually 14.28 power not to be confused with times....
Jimmie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2003, 10:07 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 253
Default

Okay, I'm a pretty sharp guy -- maybe not so much all the time when it comes to math, but definitely when it comes to common sense. I just don't get how adding a teleconverter multiplies the zoom instead of adds to the zoom, and here are some of my common sense reasons:


The above is a picture of a house across the street that will just
be a point of reference for the rest of the pictures. This is at 0x
zoom (35mm) and without the 2.0x teleconverter.



The above is of the same house with the FZ1 at 12x optical zoom.



The above is of the same house with the FZ1 at 12x and with the
2.0x teleconverter (which would supposedly be a total of 24x).



The above is of the same house with the FZ1 at 12x optical zoom
and 2x digital zoom (a total of 24x).


FYI, I know for sure the last image is at just 2x digital zoom instead of 3x because I put the camera in burst mode which only allows for a maximum of 2x digital zoom.

Now, I don't care what kind of math anyone uses -- there's no way that the last two pictures are both 24x. So what gives here? What am I missing? I'm beginning to feel really stupid or thick with everyone talking about a teleconverter multiplying the total zoom instead of just adding to it. That's what I keep getting told, but as the above shows, it makes absolutely no sense.
EffZeeOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2003, 10:06 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Charlie46227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 295
Default

Without getting 'into it', I would say the window in the last picture (using the 2x) does indeed look twice as large as the one above it, so if the first was at 12X, I would say the second one using the 2x would mean it is indeed at 24X.

Charlie
Charlie46227 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2003, 10:24 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Charlie46227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 295
Default

Oops. My bad. I'm a little 'slow' tonight. I see your point and I think the explanation is probably in the 'viewing'. IOW, I think the confusion is in the 'digital' aspect in that the optical zooms are maybe being displayed differently than the digital zoom pic; check the ppi (pixels per inch) of each image. I'd bet the 'optical zoom' pic is about double the 'digital zoom' in ppi. Digital zoom is strictly interpolation and may be displaying differently than the optical on your monitor. Again, this is just me 'thinking out loud' so take it for what it's worth.

Charlie
Charlie46227 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2003, 11:07 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 253
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie46227
Without getting 'into it', I would say the window in the last picture (using the 2x) does indeed look twice as large as the one above it, so if the first was at 12X, I would say the second one using the 2x would mean it is indeed at 24X.
But that doesn't explain the last picture which is definitely 24x (12x optical zoom + 2x digital zoom). The difference between the last picture (24x combined optical and digital zoom) and the second picture (12x optical only) definitely looks twice as big, but the third picture doesn't look the 2x teleconverter is truly 2x.
EffZeeOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2003, 1:15 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Charlie46227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 295
Default

You would think that the file sizes would be close to the same on all three 'windows', but they are not. The 2nd and 3rd pics are close and the resulting image of the third pic looks twice the zoom of the 2nd to me. The 4th pic however has only about 16k file size. That's why I think the ppi needs to be examined. I'd bet the 2nd and 3rd pics are very close in ppi, but the last pic isn't. I think they all need to be the same to have any visual 'answers'. Plus I don't know how the pics were 'handled' for display purposes via software. Again, just me 'thinking out loud'.

Hoosier Charlie
Charlie46227 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 2003, 11:41 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 253
Default

All were simply resized via PaintShop Pro 8 and then saved at the same JPEG compression (probably 5 or 10%).
EffZeeOne 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 6:19 PM.