Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ7

[belgiumreporter]

Stephen said:"Is this a true optical solution or a digital method?" Well i guess you could say something inbetween. As the sensor of the DMC is so small the image is a cut out of what you would get on larger sensors. true macro is within the ratio of 2:1 or 1:1 ( 1cm real life= 1cm on the film plane or sensor) because of the small sensor size it may appear you are doing macro but you won't be anywhere near that 1:1 reproduction ratio.So in a way the magnification you get is digital.

does the stabilisation still work on the super macro setting? yes

"most digital bridge cameras the apertures appear "faked" below F8. They simply adjust the exposure on smaller apertures, a common practice." F8 is mostly the smallest apperture they can get on these cameras, if you would go smaller the physical opening of the diaphragm blades would become so small that light rays entering the camera would get difracted by the edges of the diafragmblades and you would get a "pinhole" kind of image.

Here's a pic with exif, so you can see it was made with the long end of the zoom, if i remember correctly i was about a meter away from the dragonfly, wich was just enough distance not to scare it away.




And here's a "true" macro at 1:1 of a much smaller species made with the nikon D3 and a 60mm macro nikkor




Hope this helps, i would probably be able to explain it better if only my English would be better.

[philbirch]

You explain it pretty good. No problems with your English.

I've tried to do a moon shot but as you say the aperture doesnt go down far enough. The moon needs f16 at least because of the brightness. The manual settings won't allow the right exposure combination to take a good pic. A pity really because its got a nice long lens - perfect for the moon.

[mickeyobe]

Dec 17, 2014 19:28:32 GMT -5 philbirch said:

You explain it pretty good. No problems with your English.

I've tried to do a moon shot but as you say the aperture doesnt go down far enough. The moon needs f16 at least because of the brightness. The manual settings won't allow the right exposure combination to take a good pic. A pity really because its got a nice long lens - perfect for the moon.

How about some neutral density filters?

Mickey

[Stephen]

Indeed neutral densities are the only solution possible, the light on the moon is equivalent to midday sun. A bit gets lost in our atmosphere, but to correctly exposure the surface the light may be overwhelm a digital, especially a modern one without slow ASA settings. (I think the DMC FZ7 has 100asa minimum.)
The Fuji 4900z was OK as it had 25asa equivalent and went to F22.
Stephen.

[Stephen]

Got the DMC-FZ2 in the post today, and after charging the batteries, which were so exhausted the charger took time to re-start the charge, it all works fine, I'll take it outside tomorrow. One thing is odd though, the manual settings appear according to the instructions to only work if there is enough light!...unless I am interpreting them wrongly.
Initial flash results looked a bit over exposed, but the flash output is variable, and -1 cures it. Flash also varies with the zoom setting, more than the Fuji 4900z.

The Lumix software does not like any SD card above 2 gig, but that's no problem, with 600+ shots per card at high res. It can return TIFF files as well, but only about 99 per card.

At least in 2008 the camera, and accessories were all marked Made in Japan....I wonder where the Leica Elmarit Zoom lens was made, not in Germany surely?

Stephen.

[Stephen]

Comparison between the older 2000, Fuji 4900z and the 2008 lumix DMC-FZ7, the Lumix obviously sharper, but Panasonic's processing adds a contrast edge to the lettering, the sharpening in the camera was off.

Both shots cropped about 1/3 full frame. The Lumix shot has greater depth of field, it chose one stop smaller than the Fuji.


Fuji shot is warmer tone, but not as sharp. File sizes are about the same as the Fuji uses Tiff as it's top setting, so the Lumix was set to tiff as well. the shots were converted to Jpeg in the gimp purely to save size for posting.


Lumix shot, much sharper.

If the light is OK tomorrow then some outdoor shots

[Stephen]

The Lumix can do better, I had assumed a factory reset would have reset the sharpness etc, but it appeared not, maybe the wrong button was pressed. Without sharpening or contrast it produces an even better clarity. All settings on defaults, Tiff converted to Jpeg. Still slight artifacts around the lettering, but very much less.

Despite losing the odd contrast edges the earlier shot does look brighter!! Anyway back to some real shots. I have a railway coach model to photograph, and will use the Lumix. I do not like using the Olympus PM-1 in the workshop, to much risk of dust etc!., if the lenses are changed.
Stephen.

[philbirch]

I think the Lumix lens is as sharp as mustard.

[Stephen]

The Image Stabilisation on the Leica zoom works well, shot at equivalent of 430mm handheld in falling light at sunset today.
Stephen.