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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 31, 2006, 3:56 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

ofcourse Im aware of the association between higher iso and noise
so lets say thats a given
then theres the high density sensors and the impact they have, but my feeling is there has to be more to it than that

myself, I see it in indoor shots, beyond the reach of the flash, in shaddows and underexposed areas.

* so for instance, more even light = less noise ?

and for high density sensors

* does using a lower than available resolution reduce noise ?

usually I just deal with it with pluggins like noise ninja or the basic tools in Paint Shop Pro, I dont worry about it unduly because most of my images are for the net and just 800 x 600, so you cant sensibly say that it ruins the image. But I do billboards from time to time, and that requires a little more work.

EDIT to Add: feel free to add your own unassuming unfounded suspicions or comments, Im sure someone will appear that knows more about this than me, and perhaps you. Could be worthwhile for many of us.

Riley
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 31, 2006, 8:31 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
genece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,111
Default



IMHO

You are correct... more light less noise.

And a properly exposed photo is the surest way to cut down on noise.



And no ,using a lower resolution helps nothing.....the pixels are still the same size and spaced the same... you just are not using all of them.



And if your doing large prints use the maximum resolution and strive for a perfect exposue......less PP also = less noise.
genece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2006, 5:23 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

genece thanks
I guess I was hoping against hope that a lower res would assist
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2006, 8:39 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
bmccoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 362
Default

Rriley,

I see you mentioned doing "billboards" from time to time. I don't know how big that is but is sounds pretty large. For a large print like this you could try taking several images, say four of them. Stitch them together and then do your noise reduction. Then you may be able to actually down-sample the combined image and still have a very high pixel density. The higher the density, within reason the smaller the grain and therefor the less noticeable the noise.

At least that is my unfounded and untested theory.

-Brett
bmccoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2006, 8:42 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 71
Default

Genece, as usual, has given dead on advice. Exposure is critical. Yes, there can be noise issues at time with this camera, but it is an amazing piece of equipment. I investd in the Noise Ninja plug in for photoshop, it has been a worthwhile investment to say the least. Post processing is just part of moving into digital, I suppose. My wife and I have produced some shots that have looked great as 11x14's currently hanging in our living room. In fact, they have impressed some people enough that they have resulted in paid work for us.
Vol Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2006, 8:44 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

Bret
actually they arnt that large, and surprisingly the signmakers only require 300 dpi resolution, the process dictates that and is greatly automated. Sometimes we do insets of other images but thats about as complicated as it gets.
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2006, 8:55 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
genece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,111
Default

I am not sure of your requirements ....but the two cameras I use most are a FZ30 and a D50.....and while the D50 has less noise without a doubt.....for normal use....viewing up to 1024 X768 pixels (my Desktop size) and printing up to 12 X 16 inches....I can tell no difference in the noise or quality of the photos from either camera.

At 100% viewing, that is much different...and I can usually get a much better crop from the D50 ....but as I said for normal things the noise of the FZ30 is not the problem some make it out to be.

And I should add the difference is much greater if I need to use ISO200 or 400 on the FZ30.....that is the area I hope the FZ50 can address, but from what I have seen so far I do not think it has. I have seen some good high ISO photos from the FZ50 but who knows how they were achieved.
genece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 1, 2006, 9:24 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

ah now maybe I should clarify something here
At this time Im using an Olympus C7070 for my real estate work, and my comments are laregly based on my experience with that camera. But clearly I need to update this to something superior.

To many that would seem a simple decision, why not just get an E 330 where I can use all the Oly accesories I already have some investment in. Its a good camera, and a good solution, despite the price of the 11-22mm lens that I also would require. In the interests of adequate research I decided I needed to look further. I was initially impressed with the LC 1 and L1 but sort of fell over the Panasonic FZ series while reading parts of this forum. So I included FZ 50 on my list, because it is the version of the FZ series cameras that has TTL.

The fact is, the FZ 50 will do all I need if adequately accesorised with wide adapter, remote shutter, additional batteries, polarising and UV filters. I can still use my Oly flash equipment in TTL mode and my flash cards. The E330 will always be a better camera, but for twice the money of the FZ 50 all I the only additional functionality would be higher available iso, where I never go beyond iso200, and 1/2 an inch additional LCD which is undeniably usefull. I would however forgo OIS which is also useful to me for interiors.

Still there is this issue of noise on FZ 50 images, my feeling is its probably about the same as the C7070, but I wanted to check out the possibility of workarounds to reduce or eliminate it. Hence my questions of late about the OIS and noise.


Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2006, 9:35 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
genece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,111
Default

Over the last year I have seen many that came from the 7070 to the FZ30 most were very happy with the move but there were a few that were not.....so that must be a personal opinion ....my guess is the noise I would think the 7070 has less.



You make no mention of anything that leads me to believe you have a use for an ultrazoom...if you do not I think the dslr with a wide lens would suit you better , but if you want an ultrazoom.....IMHO the FZ30 was the best made....now maybe its the FZ50,I am not sure.



If you decide on the dslr route the D50 with a wide kit lens should do what you want and maybe your flash will work, I am not sure.....but it should be easy to sell now if it does not.



One other option perhaps the Sony R1.



But I gave too many opinions and I may be way out of line ..if so I am sorry.
genece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 2, 2006, 10:41 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

genece
no need to apologise, and your opinions are most welcome
fact is I dont need a long zoom at all, maybe the ocassional atmosphere shot or vantaged view.

I did look at the R1, looks kinda weird to me, but the images are nice and sharp and it has a flip LCD which I require. The FZ 50 is not as sharp but more than acceptable.

And yes a dslr would suit me fine, but I would need some expensive glassware because the cheaper ones are quite slow, except for the Oly 11-22. Since the E 330 has a flip LCD thats on the list too.

I have found that indoors, I need to shoot wide open, and the faster the lens the better. Somewhere around 22 to 24mm is required. I can achieve that with the FZ 50 and the Raynox 6600.

The core of the issue is shooting indoors, I gain most of a stop on the average competition at 2.8, and I get one or two more with OIS. That means I dont really need to raise the iso past 100, I know this because I shoot at F2.8 iso 200 all the time right now. With the shutter at 1/30th on an ultra wide thats fine. More iso would be a benefit yes, but I still have iso 200 up my sleeve.

Riley

Edit to add: that said, Im looking into your ideas

Rriley 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 4:02 PM.