G
Guest
Guest
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)
P-P. Henneken wrote:
> As mentioned I ordered an H1, beforehand I downloaded some DPReview
> sample images to be printed as a photo. The ISO400 pictures coming
> out of the H1 I also consider "very bad". So I ordered some 6x4 inch
> photo's with ISO400 and ISO200 shots. The noise of the ISO400 shots
> was very obvious, even on the 6x4 photo's. ISO200, on the other hand,
> was fine, while on screen it's also quite bad.
>
> So what you're saying sure makes sense. A bit of noise on screen will
> not be seen on the actual photo. But some pictures of the FZ30
> contain that much noise that I find it hard to believe (considering
> the tests I just did) that it will not show on the actual photo. Let
> alone an enlargement! Okay, it's an 8mp image so the actual
> "noise-pixels" will be smaller but still. That being said, it's the
> result of the less-than-perfect 8mp sensor.
My own take with these cameras is to stick with the minimum ISO, unless
the "atmosphere" of a grainy photo would add to the image - a candid or
night shot for example.
> I really do believe that the 7mp sensor would have been a better
> choice. I wonder what Fuji will release soon, the F10 images are
> really, really outstanding in this respect (actually wanted that
> camera before the H1 but the total lack of manual controls bothered
> me). If they can bring out an image stabilized 6 (or 8, or 9...)
> megapixel camera with the same low-noise as the F10 and with
> comparable specs/options as the S2 IS, H1, FZ5/20/30 it will be quite
> some camera!
If their camera/sensor is truely as good as the reviews have reported, and
the lower noise is not simply achieved by image processing, then it would
indeed be a stunning combination. Why some manufacturers don't have image
stabilisation escapes me - it is such an advantage if you need a long
telephoto. It would be great to have ISO 400 as a usable setting rather
than a "high-grain scene" mode!
Cheers,
David
P-P. Henneken wrote:
> As mentioned I ordered an H1, beforehand I downloaded some DPReview
> sample images to be printed as a photo. The ISO400 pictures coming
> out of the H1 I also consider "very bad". So I ordered some 6x4 inch
> photo's with ISO400 and ISO200 shots. The noise of the ISO400 shots
> was very obvious, even on the 6x4 photo's. ISO200, on the other hand,
> was fine, while on screen it's also quite bad.
>
> So what you're saying sure makes sense. A bit of noise on screen will
> not be seen on the actual photo. But some pictures of the FZ30
> contain that much noise that I find it hard to believe (considering
> the tests I just did) that it will not show on the actual photo. Let
> alone an enlargement! Okay, it's an 8mp image so the actual
> "noise-pixels" will be smaller but still. That being said, it's the
> result of the less-than-perfect 8mp sensor.
My own take with these cameras is to stick with the minimum ISO, unless
the "atmosphere" of a grainy photo would add to the image - a candid or
night shot for example.
> I really do believe that the 7mp sensor would have been a better
> choice. I wonder what Fuji will release soon, the F10 images are
> really, really outstanding in this respect (actually wanted that
> camera before the H1 but the total lack of manual controls bothered
> me). If they can bring out an image stabilized 6 (or 8, or 9...)
> megapixel camera with the same low-noise as the F10 and with
> comparable specs/options as the S2 IS, H1, FZ5/20/30 it will be quite
> some camera!
If their camera/sensor is truely as good as the reviews have reported, and
the lower noise is not simply achieved by image processing, then it would
indeed be a stunning combination. Why some manufacturers don't have image
stabilisation escapes me - it is such an advantage if you need a long
telephoto. It would be great to have ISO 400 as a usable setting rather
than a "high-grain scene" mode!
Cheers,
David