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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 9, 2005, 8:31 PM   #11
Member
 
tswill2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 94
Default

From past experience with polarizers, I almost think you have the captions reversed! Try it again in manual and take notes for us! :-) Tom
tswill2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2005, 8:32 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

I think you have the pics mixed up. The first seems to be min. polar and the second max. Judging from the shutter speed this seems to be the case.
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2005, 10:03 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

I have same issue in "P" mode: the camera makes the choice to expose longer at different F-stop. I took these two pix at the Colorado River near Blythe, Ca.

The first one has just a UV filter. FZ5 picked 1/800, F6.3
Attached Images
 
trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2005, 10:04 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

2nd one with a polarized filter.
I think biggest difference besides the contrast is in the water, not the sky.

FZ5 picked 1/500 and F4.5
Attached Images
 
trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2005, 11:29 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

Troop your shots show that pschooley's shots were posted backwards. A longer exposure for the polarized shot which is what you need to do so the camera was" thinking" correctly.
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2005, 12:07 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
pschooley1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 207
Default

Maybe I had more beer than I remember
pschooley1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2005, 12:14 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2005, 12:09 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

trooplewis wrote:
Quote:
2nd one with a polarized filter.
I think biggest difference besides the contrast is in the water, not the sky.

FZ5 picked 1/500 and F4.5
Now that looks even better.


LoveLife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2005, 1:12 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
trooplewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 578
Default

NO question, it looks much better.

Interesting, I can't read the EXIF on my original post with Opanda, but Opanda can read MY camera setting in the EXIF on the last one that you (Lovelife)did the PP on.

Makes no sense.
trooplewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2005, 1:30 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
LoveLife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,288
Default

indiawala wrote:
Quote:
The actual diameter of the lens is a lot smaller than 52mm and therefore i don't think you will be hurt by havinga 52mm lens in front of the camera lens. Also from tests conducted I think I remember reading that the raynox adaptor puts the other lens closer to the camera lens, more so than any other adaptor. This is good as well. I personally prefer the raynox

seth
Yes and no, a 52mm filter on the Raynox, will not cause any vignetting, but add a lens hood and there are problems. This camera needs a lens hood. I have not seen any examples where one adapter is better then another when no step rings are used. The Raynox is a better 52mm adapter because to my knowledge, no one else makes one. This may change next month.


LoveLife 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 1:37 PM.