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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 7, 2004, 2:00 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Nancy Gabby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 662
Default

Hey all,

I was doing a trial makeup run for my bro's wedding so I decided to photograph everyone. I noticed that the FZ20 was very unforgiving on skin tones, so I used my brother's olympus (I think it is the c-765 but I am not sure, it is one of oly's top ultra zooms). In order to make the comparison equivalent I used my FL-28 and on the Olympus I used the external FL-20 which has to be made by the same manufacturer b/c they look exactly alike. I set both cameras on manual and opened the shutter to about 1/10th. I also set the cameras on daylight white balance b/c the FZ20 was coming up way to orange in comparison to the Olympus. In all fairness, the pics I am posting of the bride's sister had excellent skin and in the FZ20 shot it doesn't look that way take a look:


Attached Images
 
Nancy Gabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 7, 2004, 2:00 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Nancy Gabby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 662
Default

now here is the shot with the Olympus:
Attached Images
 
Nancy Gabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 2:03 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Nancy Gabby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 662
Default

I know a flash isn't too flattering, but if you look at the foreheads you can see a big difference. I am just a bit upset because I am liking the way the Olympus deals with skin tones better than the FZ20. And the pics were just resized and nothing else. Let me know what everyone thinks.
Nancy Gabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 5:12 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Jake D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 205
Default


Jake D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 5:50 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Nancy Gabby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 662
Default

Haven't had a chance to print them yet. Being that I set both cameras to the "sunlight" setting (which should be @ 5500 degrees kelvin, or 5200, who can remember all of this stuff!) so technically it should be the same, or the pictures should be in the same white balance. But I don't think you can set the white balance with a flash, if you can let me know. Here is that pic, and what was too orange was the background, but now that I look at it I think it is good. I was just upset before:
Attached Images
 
Nancy Gabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 5:59 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Raghu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ambattur, near Chennai, India
Posts: 3,656
Default

Don't you think the FZ20 picture is sharper in all respects?

Raghu
Raghu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 6:15 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Nancy Gabby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 662
Default

Well....maybe it is sharper but have you ever worked for a pro photographer? They have an arsenal of filters to reduce sharpness esp. for headshots. One photographer told me he couldn't use Hasselblads on models unless he had the top makeup artists b/c it showed too much of the persons skin (and blemishes etc.). He used a Pentax 67 b/c he said the lens wasn't that good (by that I think he meant sharp, but I don't think the glass was nearly the same quality as Zeiss or Leica). and on top of that he used different softening filters.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"I am just trying to figure out if I am just doing simple shots of people, maybe I should borrow my bros camera b/c I usually just send my point n shoot stuff to shutterfly, and I have already gotten back my FZ20 pics from them and I didn't like them as much as the Olympus. Plus most of my family is fairly dark and the skin tones come out worse than this white girl, quite frankly. It is a close call, and both pics are excellent in their own right, I am just nitpicking (which is what people usually pay me a hell of a lot of money to do!).
Nancy Gabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 7:27 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

I prefer the second picture, personally though not by much. It's one of those "only cause you pointed it out" kinda things. I think it's because it's not as sharp, and what that photographer mentioned about the 'blad might apply here. Sharpness is good, but you don't necessarily want to see every pour, blemish, and fine line in portrait shot - obviously. (Odd that s/he wouldnt shoot portraits with such a fine camera. Didn't he ever hear of retouching? There's also light diffusion filters...)

As far as subtle differences in tone... I'm not the one to ask. Totally colorblind, I don't see a difference. Could that have something to do with those "Standard-Normal-Cool-Warm" settings?
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 7:49 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Jake D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 205
Default


Jake D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2004, 7:59 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

...forgot to mention. I use the Vivitar DF200 slave flash (you don't need a slave with the 20 obviously) and bounce it at a 45 degree angle when shooting people indoors. Big improvement. Red-eye, gone. Harsh shadows, minimized. Much better than just using the on-board. Come to think of it, I never only use the on-board flash anymore.
NickTrop 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 11:13 PM.