Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Sony

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 23, 2004, 11:24 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11
Default

I'm going to round up some Brach's Star Burst hard candies and Werther's Originals so that when my camera arrives I can take some macro shots with flash. Sony sent me the shipper tracking information by e-mail, so at least I know the camera has been sent back to me.
Steve, what was the room lighting like when you took the macro photo of the candy? Maybe the room lighting was too dark when I tried taking my macro photos. Also, I'm presuming that the camera flash setting was on the default ("Auto") rather than forced flash, or any other setting?
GWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 6:50 AM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28
Default

If you want a great macro shot. Get the DSC-T1. Because of
its small lens and many prisms inside that absorb light.
Bright image would not appear so bright. I can take a photo
of my fingerprint at 1 inch with flash and the image comes
out just right. I can see the inner canals of the fingerprint
when I zoom in and even see microscopic dirt in between
the micro lines in the finger print. When I take shot of 5
inches away. It is as great. The T1 is designed for very
bright liight like direct sunlight and macro shots with
flash.

matt
mestleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2004, 9:11 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11
Default

The DSC-T1 sounds like it is a marvel of electronic and optical technology, at least regarding its miniaturization. Matt, you have evidently been able to capture excellent macro shots with yours. However, I don't think that it's short flash range (max. 5 feet) would be suitable for me. Also, according to Steve's recent review of the T1 (http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/t1_pg5.html) "the close proximity of the lens and flash on the camera body resulted in red eyes in nearly flash image".
I've said before that there is no digital camera that is perfect. You have to look at the features, advantages, and disadvantages then make a choice.
GWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 29, 2004, 11:38 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11
Default Macro photos from my DSC-P92

My DSC-P92 survived the return trip from the Sony Repair facility in California. It arrived today. On the Workorder it just stated "no
fault found".
I popped a fresh pair of Eveready Energizer AA alkaline batteries in it and took a few macro photos. The room that I took the photos in had moderate incandescent lighting, but the flash did activate for the photos.
There is absolutely no way that I could obtain a photo in Macro mode that is not severely overexposed if I take it from a distance of 7" or 8" from the camera lens to the subject! However, I was able to back the camera off to a distance of about 15" to 18" in Macro mode then zoom in slightly and the exposure turned out pretty decent.
Here is a link to a couple of the photos I took today:
http://home.comcast.net/~qsch/wsb/ht...tos.html-.html.
I still can't help but wonder why there is such a huge difference between the results from my DSC-P92 compared to the DSC-P92 that Steve used for his Review??
GWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2004, 5:39 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28
Default

I downloaded the complete candy picture taken by Steve
(as shown above) and the one taken by Gwiz. If you will
look at the Exif information in ACADsee of the pictures. It
can tell the case clearly. Steve uses the Zoom function that's
why you can see a focal length of 18 and focal ratio of 4.5.
In Gwiz picture, you can see the focal length is 8mm and
focal ratio is 2.8. In steve picture, the aperture is smaller,
so less bright. In Gwiz picture, it's full aperture, that's
why the light is so strong.

Anyone who doesn't agree can correct the above
observation. I just learned the birds and the bees
of digicams after I got the T1 and found out how I
was so unsatisfied with it. After losing $120 selling
it. I want to learn all technical details to make my
next purchase perfect.

matt
mestleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2004, 1:01 AM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11
Default Focal Length=Aperture X Focal Ratio

Mestleman (and everyone else), please bear with me. I haven't learned this optical information yet, but I do realize that it's important to know.
From what I understand, the Focal Length=Aperture X Focal Ratio.
Conversely, the Aperture should equal the Focal Length divided by the Focal Ratio.
In the photos that we are referring to, the Aperture (diameter of iris opening) in Steve's photo would be 4.0mm [18mm divided by 4.5].
The Aperture in my first photo (the one that is overexposed) would be 2.857mm [8mm divided by 2.8].
According to this, the Aperture was smaller in the photo that I took.
Please clarify this--someone?
GWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2004, 4:26 AM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28
Default

Maybe the formula Aperture=Focal length divided
by Focal Ratio is only valid for fixed lens?? I just
found out a couple of days ago that in SLR lens
with rating of for example, 50-200mm f/2.8. the
f/2.8 is maintained from 50-200mm while in
small digicams... as we increase the zoom, the f/2.8
increase to let's say f/4.0. So the formula may not
work in small digicams (?)

I really think users must be familiar with basic
formula, calculations and table. For example,
JRichmond. He is incapable to explaining what
he observed in terms of formula and table. And
I have to get a sample of his F55 unit just to evaluate
what he is observing because my T1 experience
is so bad that I'd be glad to hear of any camera
that can beat it and produce satisfactory results.

matt
mestleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2004, 10:52 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11
Default Calling all "Experts"!

Mestelman, when you said
Quote:
in SLR lens
with rating of for example, 50-200mm f/2.8. the
f/2.8 is maintained from 50-200mm
the Aperture varies from approximately 17.86mm at the shortest focal length of 50mm [50mm divided by f/2.8] to approximately 71.43mm at the longest focal length of 200mm [200mm divided by f/2.8]. Is this not true? At least, this is the conclusion that I draw using the formula, although 71.43mm sounds like a very large Aperture (iris opening).
Once again, I am not that knowledgeable about camera optics--just trying to learn more about it.
I don't see any reason why the formula would not apply to all cameras, including digital cameras--but I really don't know for sure.
Are there any "experts" out there who could help us out on this?
It doesn't make much sense if the Aperture was greater in Steve's photo with proper exposure compared to my photo which was overexposed.
I agree with you 100% that it is very important to be familiar with the optical factors including Exposure, Aperture, shutter speed, focal ratio, etc. They say that you can learn a lot about photography and how to take good pictures by studying and observing them.
GWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2004, 11:15 PM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 11
Default New photo added

I've taken several macro photos with flash at various distances (camera lens to subject) and different optical zoom levels since my camera was returned from Sony.
I have "added" a new photo to my photo web page http://home.comcast.net/~qsch/wsb/ht...tos.html-.html. The photo on the bottom is the new photo I just added.
The exposure on this photo turned out excellent. Interesting, because according to the EXIF information the camera settings had the same F stop (F/4.5) and lens focal length (18.0 mm) as Steve's "sample photo".
I didn't measure the exact distance from my camera lens to the candy in the dish, but it was somewhere between 15" and 18".
Take a look at the size of the candy pieces in relationship to the overall picture--they are very close in size to Steve's photo. So how could Steve's photo have been taken at a distance of 7-8"??
If the truth be known, I don't think that the DSC-P92 camera can produce a macro photo using flash that is not overexposed at a distance of less than 12" from the subject.
I'd like to hear from any other owners of this camera to find out if they achieve similar results when taking macro photos at close range, or if perhaps there is a problem with my camera.
GWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2004, 1:30 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2
Default

I've taken a series of photos on my P92 using macro and don't think there is a problem with my camera, the photos which have come out overexposed are I believe a result of the reflective nature of my subject (a half eaten box of Ferrero Rocher's), I can take pictures of less reflective subjects using flash like plants at 4 inches with no problems of overexposure. In the Sony manual is minimum recommended distance for using the flash is 0.5 metres, so you would expect OE on high reflective subjects at macro distances.

I had a good result with flash at 4 inches overhead and 6 inches at any angle to the subject, I believe this is all to do with the position as other shots have a high level of reflection from the flash resulting in overexposure in areas. My none flash efforts are excellent from natural light from an overcast british sky

My results are on par with Steve's, a very good camera.

Below is a link to the photos and details of the photo settings.

http://uk.f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/lakeuk/my_photos folder-sweets

All pictures taken 5 million on fine, Exposure - Program (auto), Metering Mode - Multi-segment.

Picture Number: 1
Focal length (mm): 8.0
Exposure time (sec): 1/30
Aperture: f/2.8
Flash used: No
ISO equiv: 160
Light Metering: 7.2EV
Zoom: None
Dist from subject (inch): 8
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: Excellent

Picture Number: 2
Focal length (mm): 8.0
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/2.8
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 160
Light Metering: 7.6EV
Zoom: None
Dist from subject (inch): 8
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: bottom half OE / top half perfect

Picture Number: 3
Focal length (mm): 9.2
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/3.2
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 160
Light Metering: 8.0EV
Zoom: x1.1
Dist from subject (inch): 8
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: bottom half OE / top half perfect

Picture Number: 4
Focal length (mm): 15.7
Exposure time (sec): 1/30
Aperture: f/4.5
Flash used: No
ISO equiv: 320
Light Metering: 7.5EV
Zoom: x1.9
Dist from subject (inch): 8
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: Excellent

Picture Number: 5
Focal length (mm): 15.7
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/4.5
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 200
Light Metering: 8.6EV
Zoom: x1.9
Dist from subject (inch): 8
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: Excellent

Picture Number: 6
Focal length (mm): 8.0
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/2.8
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 160
Light Metering: 7.6EV
Zoom: None
Dist from subject (inch): 16
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: Good

Picture Number: 7
Focal length (mm): 20.8
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/5.0
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 200
Light Metering: 8.9EV
Zoom: x2.6
Dist from subject (inch): 16
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: Excellent

Picture Number: 8
Focal length (mm): 8.0
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/2.8
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 160
Light Metering: 7.6EV
Zoom: None
Dist from subject (inch): 4
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: bottom half OE / top half so so

Picture Number: 9
Focal length (mm): 12.0
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/3.5
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 160
Light Metering: 8.2EV
Zoom: x1.5
Dist from subject (inch): 4
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: bottom half OE / top half perfect
Picture Number: 10
Focal length (mm): 12.0
Exposure time (sec): 1/30
Aperture: f/3.5
Flash used: No
ISO equiv: 120
Light Metering: 8.2EV
Zoom: x1.5
Dist from subject (inch): 4
direction to subject: overhead
Comments: Excellent

Picture Number: 11
Focal length (mm): 13.7
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/4.0
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 200
Light Metering: 8.3EV
Zoom: x1.6
Dist from subject (inch): 6
direction to subject: 45 deg
Comments: Excellent

Picture Number: 12
Focal length (mm): 12.0
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/3.5
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 160
Light Metering: 8.2EV
Zoom: x1.5
Dist from subject (inch): 4
direction to subject: 45 deg
Comments: bottom half OE / top half perfect

Picture Number: 13
Focal length (mm): 8.0
Exposure time (sec): 1/40
Aperture: f/2.8
Flash used: Yes
ISO equiv: 160
Light Metering: 7.6EV
Zoom: None
Dist from subject (inch): 4
direction to subject: 45 deg
Comments: bottom half OE / top half perfect
Lakeuk 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 5:10 AM.