Photocameras

Well, what can I say, the pictures themselves are normal, it seems better than with Ixpirii, normal exposure and focus, but here's how, of course, it's really not very good, look for ISO adjustment and set it to 100, turn off noise reduction, but in general it's probably better to buy Kenon A5XX BU

For example, I took a photo on my Olympus SP510UZ on ISO 100 , the first two photos on it, the last on panas on ISO 400.

Pictures:

2P1031608.jpg — (206.25к)


P1031609.jpg — (101.18к)


P1270871.jpg — (202.73к)

For example, I took a photo on my Olympus SP510UZ on ISO 100 , the first two photos on it, the last on panas on ISO 400.

Is it with flash?

No, no flash, just the camera on the stop

Then the question is, what kind of lighting?

The wasp is illuminated with a flashlight, and the cacti are also illuminated with a flashlight from a long distance at low power to distribute the light. I do not really like flash, it is needed sometimes, but only if everything is really bad )

It is clearly visible that without. Pan Stepova is generally afraid of an outbreak. Panas, of course, is weird with the "parquet", even on such a monstrous resize it can be seen. If you do not pay attention to this, you get approximately parity in noise with the ISO100 superzuma, which is not at all rosy. In addition, a lens with such a aperture and an EFR at the long end, like the UZ, and even an autofocus lens, pan can hardly buy for panas. So now Pan will have to pull two bags across the steppe: one with a mirrorless camera for landscapes, the second with a bird's eye, and another small case with a "windless box" for macro.

Oh, I see.
In fact, the flash helps well against the wiggle. But here's the thing, the flash power needs to be reduced, in DSLRs it is, for example, I put on 1/16 or so. On soap dishes, this is not usually possible, but with the flash at full power, it turns out nonsense.
Well, you can also make all sorts of diffusers.

The SP510UZ also has flash correction. But vsetki without a diffuser vpyshka-evil. With a piece of paper before the flash, of course, it turns out fine, and there are also sheets of LCD monitor matrices - they are essentially real diffusers with high efficiency, but still the flash is more for party photos)

Here with a flash on Olympus 510, IMHO worse than without )

Pictures:

P1010001.jpg — (205.71к)

It would be better to see them in full size. And what is ISO in the photo with a stickman?

If the forum loads, then I'll try it in full.
I set the ISO to 100, but some of the photos are on auto.

but here's how, of course, it's really not very good, look for ISO adjustment and set it to 100, turn off noise reduction, but in general it's probably better to buy Kenon A5XX BU

There is no "noise reduction" item in the settings. There is a stabilizer. It or not it? Turn it on or off? All photos with the stabilizer turned off.
I just don't want to buy anything. It's not so important to spend something on photos.

Pictures:

P1011236.JPG — (6.02мб)

The stabilizer is not the same. I wonder where they put it there. Photos through glass and water are not very informative, it was necessary not to be too lazy to get a stickman. No terrible noises. there is no trace of the ones you mentioned, and the color difference is generally suppressed to zero. There is an oversharp, and not by the best algorithm. Is there a"sharpness" setting? If yes, then put it at 0, and if already at 0, then in minus. Well, the lens is very soapy, but there's nothing you can do about it. And the matrix is quite nothing.

Camera Model: Sony RX-10M3 Lens-Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 24-600 mm F2. 4-4
Original Date / Time: 2017-08-07 T12:22: 26
ISO: 320
Exposure Time: 1/10000
F-stop: f/5.6
Focal Length In 35mm Film: 598 mm
Hand-held from 1.5 meters away
Natural, sunny lighting

Pictures:

Gonepteryx_rhamni.jpg — (640.52к)

The stabilizer is not the same. I wonder where they put it there. Photos through glass and water are not very informative, it was necessary not to be too lazy to get a stickman. No terrible noises. there is no trace of the ones you mentioned, and the color difference is generally suppressed to zero. There is an oversharp, and not by the best algorithm. Is there a"sharpness" setting? If yes, then put it at 0, and if already at 0, then in minus. Well, the lens is very soapy, but there's nothing you can do about it. And the matrix is quite good.

There is no sharpness.
What is an oversharp?
The photos are not clear. I don't like it.
The minimum settings, alas.
Stickman as it did not think to get, do not bother them. Although I recently found a huge fat one on a baobab tree. In general, they attack my plants quite actively.
I already wanted to sleep last night, so I'll play with it later. With the old battery, I didn't even want to take the camera in my hands, it immediately turned off, now the situation has been corrected.

Peresherp is just excessive sharpness, but only software (all sorts of "high-frequency filters" and so on). Well, the clarity is normal, but only at the expense of artifacts.

gumenuk, for such a cool camera, something did not impress. Expopara and ISO raise the question " Why?". After all, it would be quite possible to do with a minimal ISO, and the background should be blurred better. Or does the lens get too soapy when it's open? The colors are also somewhat lifeless. And the resize could have been done better. All IMHO.

About the Sony RX-10M3-wow device! I didn't even know that there were such cameras, with a 13mm matrix, like the Nikon 1. But somehow it was a little noisy on ISO 320, although if the shutter speed was really 1/10000, then you could take a picture on ISO 200 and 1/3000, for 600mm in the equivalent of 35mm, even 1/500 shutter speed can be enough if your hands don't shake too much.

Alex, to check the sharpness, take a picture of something like a cactus, with a flash or in good light. In your photos sharpness was (ksttai where did the pictures go, really finally udaletsya all that is more than 1MB, so shidevry did not load the server? )) ), but a lot of artifacts, lighting and noise reduction.

Photographed a pigeon outside the window just now) on ISO 320, shutter speed 1/250, objective F2 / 92 eq. focal 180mm
By the way, on the topic of how glass affects the photo, but alas without the pigeon ) The aperture is always 2.0, the shutter speed is now 1/400, ISO is also 320)

This post was edited by Hierophis - 26.12.2017 09: 59

Pictures:

P1270883.jpg — (55.65к)


P1270881.jpg — (50.51к)

I deleted the photo myself, so as not to clutter both the forum and the number of MB allocated to the user. I left only one. At home, I'll take a photo with a flash. I have good lighting everywhere, only there are no cacti.

Ahhh ixpert

Only now I realized, having seen the strange vertical stripes on his picture, what kind of glass Pan Stepova had in mind - window, so I take my previous words back. It never occurred to me that he could have started such an idiotic experiment, and even put the already obvious result on display. It remains to conduct a series of experiments with different distances from that glass to the camera, and thus clutter up the server disk space so protected by Pan in words.

"Soap Vega" on the "non-switchable noise floor": https://sony-club.ru/threads/vega-11u-ili-s...j-makrik.63252/

Something tells me that it's time to change Pan khvotograhv's skis.

Here are more photos and they are terrible

Pictures:

PC261275.JPG — (5.64мб)

Alex, what's wrong with these pictures? If you do not take into account that this Olympus TG610 clearly makes a little more noise than the Olympus SP510UZ, otherwise the only thing that can be called terrible is the action of the flash, which was clearly there
There is such a cool thing as resize, this is the main photo processing that I use, in Russian - resizing, in this case in a smaller direction, for example, as this photo from 4000+ is translated into 900 pixels. And that's it-now the photo is perfect, no noise, small size, everything is clear, smooth tones, and no Photoshop, what else do you need?)

Pictures:

2PC261275.jpg — (163.56к)

Camera Model: Sony RX-10M3 Lens-Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 24-600 mm F2. 4-4
Original Date / Time: 2017-08-07 T12:22: 26
ISO: 320
Exposure Time: 1/10000
F-stop: f/5.6
Focal Length In 35mm Film: 598 mm
Hand-held from 1.5 meters away
Natural, sunny lighting

Well... with an exposure time of 1/10000, everything is much easier. I can imagine how much all this fun is worth
One thing is not clear - what is it sitting on?

In principle, yes, if the oversharp in that pause is not disabled, then only a resize will help him, although this is an extreme measure, like tooth extraction.

Well... with an exposure time of 1/10000, everything is much easier. I can imagine how much all this fun is worth
One thing is not clear - what is it sitting on?

This is one of the images taken during testing the camera's capabilities, studying its operating parameters, and developing skills in using it. In the future, I shot (based on my experience) in other modes: both at lower ISO and at apertures within 2-4. I made sure that you can shoot without additional lighting and in bad weather and under the canopy of a forest, while having the shutter speed consistent with the focal length used.
As for the plant: this is Campanula takesimana Nakai (family Campanulaceae) Bell Takeshima

Can I take a look at the picture after developing my skills? Judging by the description, the camera is a beast, the only question is the quality of the lens.

Can I take a look at the picture after developing my skills? Judging by the description, the camera is a beast, the only question is the quality of the lens.

Go ahead:
https://club.foto.ru/gallery/photos/2540418...hoto_id=2540313

https://club.foto.ru/gallery/photos/2540118...hoto_id=2540029

https://club.foto.ru/gallery/photos/2539935...hoto_id=2539831

https://club.foto.ru/gallery/photos/2539429...hoto_id=2539354

https://club.foto.ru/gallery/photos/2539354...hoto_id=2539260

https://club.foto.ru/gallery/photos/2539260...hoto_id=2539149

All images taken by this camera this summer

Aren't there any full-size ones? And then on these I see only artifacts of resizing and compression, but not the sharpness of the lens.

Since we are talking about super-duper zuma, I will also post photos from my cheap Kodak Z990, made without the help of macro attachments (I already posted them with attachments).

Swallowtail from a distance of five meters, EFR=840 mm, crop, resize:



Similarly the nimble lizard:



Wide angle (I don't remember how much, but it takes a long time to create an exif), super macro mode, uncut frame:



I can't say for sure about the birds and the squirrel either, but it's closer to the long end than to the short one:







In general, a good device for birds for your money, but only in sunny weather, because working only the minimum ISO (125), plus the lens at the far end is very dark. The optical stabilizer is made non-switchable, probably so as not to frighten users with the horror that would have been obtained without it. But it doesn't stabilize the birds. But at the short end, the lens is very light and wide, you can shoot good landscapes, and fit everything you need in the GRIP even on the hole /2.8, which large-matrix users can only dream of, they would have to stack to get such an image.:



And yes, Pan Stepov's much-loved Moon:



To take a picture of it on such a scale on a ponosonic, Pan will have to buy a lens suitable for self-defense.

What else I want to write down in the advantages of this device is power consumption. It is powered by 4 AA cells, as such, until now, the native Kodak NiMH batteries for 2000 mAh, which were included in the delivery package, are regularly used, despite the fact that they look terrible. All sorts of modern assholes don't live that long. One charge is enough for a couple of days of active fasting, given the frequent zoom of the massive lens, the long course of the focuser and the constantly working flock. But the flash quickly sits down. Designers can also be praised for the fact that the lens retracts even when the very minimum charge remains, and slowly and with an unusually quiet sound: whether there is a special emergency motor, or the main one runs at low speeds. I've never died with my trunk out. But Kenan's powershot does this regularly, and it drains the batteries by 2/3 at most, and that's all, and then they still work for quite a long time in any device where I put them, including this one-the same Kodak. But for what you need to express dissatisfaction along with bewilderment, so for a completely idiotic management. The apotheosis is the inability to turn on the camera even for viewing images without removing the cover and sticking out the lens trunk (and, accordingly, without exposing the front lens to the risk of dust).

Just took off on panas from the window, ISO 500, EFR 600mm, the object weighs 250g.
So think about what this ixpert is worth
Although this is a strong crop, to be fair, I will also add the original size.
But such beautiful circles Sonya Rks can take pictures? )

This post was edited by Hierophis - 27.12.2017 20: 22

Pictures:

P1280393.jpg — (37.83к)


P1280348.jpg — (40.84к)


2P1280392.jpg — (14.9к)

Big deal... I can do this too:

What's this for? )

Guess

Yes, it's like a photo expert club ) Well, judging by the size of the photo, it's probably also a crop that we see there - there are chromatic aberrations, not very high sharpness - but this can be attributed to a wiggle.
In general, I think that this is most likely an ultrazum, but less long-range than the kodak of our superphotographer ) My Olympus SP510UZ also has such a small blue border on the long position of the object.
Although, judging by the fact that there is little noise, maybe also some Soviet object 140-200mm on a DSLR?

This post was edited by Hierophis - 27.12.2017 20: 57

KM2200, the blue moon only happens in the song of Bori Moeseev. Red happens sometimes, but very rarely, so I'm more inclined to think that in the picture of Pan Stepoovgo with BB is also not all right. Although now I looked closely at my own - it turns a little green, and some kind of UFO comes in for landing next to it (and there is no remap in Kodak!) so, we will consider it a draw.

My photo on a DSLR with a homemade telephoto lens. There's a focal length of about 500mm, but the aberration is strong, yes.

Wow! My prototype here, I will test) I really like that it is light, if you put a duralumin tube, it will be even easier.

Pictures:

P1280399.jpg — (86.56к)

Yes, mine is also light. And it is clear why, there are few lenses in it )

Yes, mine is also light. And it is clear why, there are few lenses in it )

This is a very interesting point)
In fact, everything is more complicated, there are direct focus and retrofocus objects. The latter differ in that their focal length, the distance from the last lens to the matrix, is smaller (for long-focus lenses) or larger (for short-focus lenses) than their focal length.
Therefore, any long-focus lens that is more than 200mm is usually made with an afocal nozzle, hence more lenses, and their high cost, since in addition to the main objective, you also need the afocal nozzle to be at the same level, without introducing distortion.
Otherwise, the object will be very long, like mine, although it weighs 250g, but 37cm long If it was not 300mm but 500mm, it would be 50cm long with a plus)
But 37cm is tolerable, especially kropfaktor 2, in the end, as it were, 600mm, I will make a cover and put it in a backpack) And the closest available factory in terms of finances is a 300mm photoniper, it is slightly lighter, but weighs 1.5 kg ))

The stabilizer is not the same. I wonder where they put it there. Photos through glass and water are not very informative, it was necessary not to be too lazy to get a stickman. No terrible noises. there is no trace of the ones you mentioned, and the color difference is generally suppressed to zero. There is an oversharp, and not by the best algorithm. Is there a"sharpness" setting? If yes, then put it at 0, and if already at 0, then in minus. Well, the lens is very soapy, but there's nothing you can do about it. And the matrix is quite good.

Here is a nalochnik without glass. From the 146th attempt.


I can't look at these photos. I take photos and delete them. Annoying.
There is no sharpness setting or it is called something else.