F550 tests: zoom range

Here is a four-panel zoom sequence arranged clockwise, with no particular spacing attempted within the range. The equivalent FL shows as 25-370 in Picasa rather than the advertised 24-360; close enough in my book, too close to measure.

That's not bad, especially considering that it all fits in a jacket or cargo-pants pocket.

---

Oh why not one more, zoomed in just between the buildings & in front of the gold tree: look closely and you can see the red car in the left image, and easily read the clock on the right one.

F550 proof of concept - panoramas

OK, other than leaning a bit (corrected here) I've now managed a click & spin panorama.

This is not something I expect to use often, but times will reveal themselves once one has the tools. Certainly on the far left one can see some distortion; this is not fully wide but nearly so, therefore no surprise. Exposure looks good and my cursory look shows not massive disconnects in the stitching. I've stitched no more than five panos in my time (using PS Elements), so it wasn't a huge sales point on the F550 - just another interesting feature for the great price break I saw on a day of weakness.. :^)

proof of concept: Raw recovery from a small (EXR) sensor

I now am test-driving a Fuji F550exr. Why? Several reasons:

• available for $175 'used'
• 24-360 equivqlent FL
• EXR modes to provide expanded dynamic range or better signal/noise performance
• Raw capture
• manual mode + P/A/S automation*
• back-side illuminated CMOS
• HD + a few hi-speed video options
• instant panorama mode
• multi-shot NR mode
• and a great price for all the above. 

 Yes, the price was good enough to mention twice - this was a 'used-very good' grab at Amazon's marketplace, their version of the Land of Misfit Toys - some times they're merely misunderstood, of course, so people return them without an objective reason.  Price alone is nice but I do not buy a camera just because it's under $200; this one is here because it's pretty much unique at that price for the features it offers.  For me, if a sub-$200 raw-image-capable camera if available, it's worth considering! This dense, pocketable camera also has GPS if you're into that - but bring a spare battery or two in that case.

 

This collage is both images from a Raw+jpg, clearly a harshly-lit scene (expecially for a 1/2.0" sensor) - but Raw processing nearly pulled out a miracle here. This was less than 5 minutes' work in PS Elements 9. It nearly brought back every washout, and detail came back in the wreath - and in both cases the larger print on the lower part of the door is legible. OK, I'm impressed.

* If one seeks the down sides, note that this is a 2-aperture camera with a third via ND filtration. It should also be noted that Fuji's EXR modes are accessible in several ways, only few of which are made clear in the virtual owners' manual - check forums and blogs for best settings. This complexity probably results in indifferent online reviews (and returns to the Amazon Marketplace!)  I must take the word of bloggers and forum members for now, as it's really quite baffling.. makes one wonder if even Fuji knows what their sensors can do!  


Right now I've gone with the common wisdom of M image size, 400% DR recovery and P setting, but occasionally go to auto-EXR and watch what it selects.  Sure, now I've 'crippled' it to mostly 8Mpxl shooting in M mode - but it's great there, and it's shooting Raw!  If you think this is stupid, the camera is not for you.


Note - here is a great source for Fuji real-world info, linked especially to a post on what M image size brings to the table over the full 16Mpixel shots.  Kim has tested many different cameras over time and has taken the time to see what works, documented or otherwise.  Worth browsing his site (and his site has an index... why don't I? :^).

what's wrong with this picture?

Surely something is wrong - definitely from a technical standpoint, valid points can be made. But it's not bad: given the low light and strong wind it's fairly sharp.

  Really though - what is wrong? Let me put it another way - this shot used an 18-200 Sigma zoom lens. Ah, now we know what's wrong: not only is it an oft-reviled "superzoom", it's an 18-200. For reasons that elude me the 18-200 is less liked than the 18-125 that it replaced - and prices reflect that. It's also downgraded by its new cousins, the larger, creepier & expensive 18-250 and 18-270 models. Sure this one has no HSM and no IS, but Pentax has focus and stabilizers enough for my satisfaction.

This is the third time I've owned the Sigma 18-200. The first time was on my A200, and among other things it beat out the 17-70 Sigma as my backpacking lens on our 2009 Sierra hike. An even greater heresy is that it outdueled a Tamron 18-250 - they were to my eye a draw on IQ, and the 18-200 was lighter and did not creep. (Another factor was the resale value on the far-less-reviled 18-250 - in fact the 18-250 sale paid for the 18-200 and most of the 17-70!)

Last year I got a very good deal on a Pentax-mount copy, but like much of my gear it was sent to new owners during a budget crunch. I didn't expect to pick up another, but my recent life has been unexpected in more ways than I can count. Because this is the 18-200 its former owner was forced to cut prices to make a sale, at which point it reached my point of no return. The previous copy was a very good price, but this one was $60 less! With a few more good tests it could put the DA50-200 on the block, at which point this lens could cost me under $40 net.

Especially with that in mind, I see nothing wrong with this picture! :^)

before.after

Sometimes one sees a photo, but not see it. This was a fine example - great color, decent leaf patterns, but lousy light & no tripod. The plant is nice, but only nice. The colors are the thing though, so why not zoom while that slow exposure is going on? And so I did. Amusingly, the EXIF says this was shot at 31mm; true, but only part of the story..

a fine, wet day..

and therefore the perfect day for the k200d and 18-55wr lens to take a walk!

The day was quite gloomy from start to end, and the last few days of rain brought many leaves to the ground. Made for great patterns above and below! It's very nice to have a camera in hand with no worries about where the drips land.

These shots in RAW were psychadelic in their colors; I desaturated them quite a lot here. Perhaps too much, but closer to what I saw in the gloomy grey of late day.

Coming home through the park I found an unoccupied bench.. what a surprise.

this is only a test.

I still wonder how Amazon can do this: sell a new camera, take it back, resell it as Used-VeryGood, and still allow easy returns! I try not to overdo this, fearing at some point it may not be available - yet here it is.

I have been thinking again about something more compact, a camera that can do it much (surely not all!) while fitting in a pocket. I have watched all the new tricks come out for better low-light imaging: backlit sensors, multi-shot NR and the like. Last year I tried a Ricoh CX model, but it was from the pre-backlit-sensor era, and images were not enough better than my six-yr-old Casio - so thanks Amazon, please take this one back :^)

Fuji had nearly disappeared from the advanced-camera scene after the E900 and S6000 cameras; I nearly bought each of those, but decided to hold off for their replacements. The E series died, and the S series went to non-Super CCDs - no thank you! For a while the SuperCCD became nearly extinct. Recently it was reborn as the EXR sensor, which uses a curious sensor array that allows pixel binning and multi-level chip readout to make images in new ways. I was considering the F300, but with the 500 model the SuperCCD was replaced by an EXR CMOS design now. While CCD images are special, CMOS brings new things to the table like fast burst speeds, a range of video options and less energy drain - and the EXR design is backlit too, bringing improvements to higher-ISO images. The F550 and F600 even allow for RAW shooting, with a bit of a speed penalty. They are 16Mpixel chips, which I feel is way too many pixels on a pinkie-nail sensor.. but they can mutate into 8M superpixels with the EXR binning.

Anyway, a few appeared on the Amazon site in 'used-very good' shape. I tried this before and found what appeared to be an unused camera in front of me - so I am willing to try again! An EXR F550 will arrive in a few days for my testing pleasure. No, it cannot sub for a K-5 in many conditions, but it will fit in far more pockets - and since I have not been in situations lately where the absolute best camera is needed, this just might do. And if you want more info on real-world uses for the EXR cameras, you cannot do much better than to visit this site!

old dog, new trick: L.a.b. color space?

Someone at AlphaMountWorld pointed out this link as another way to process images. It's interesting to try a new thing, and my copy of Elements has the SmartCurve plugin which allows for L.a.b. processing - so I gave it a tryout.

Here's the before/after image of a recent shot with the k200d. I really liked the leaves, but clearly the image was too warm judging from the bark. The L.a.b. setup allowed me to preserve the color balance in the leaves yet adjust other parts of the scene. Interesting!

Could I have done as well using RGB or another color space? Most likely.. but this was pretty quick. It definitely pays to try different methods of processing, just as it does trying different cameras before buying; the next one could fit you far better than the current one, and you'll never know for certain without trying.

edit -- I find the Y·Cb·Cr color space to be very similar, and that is one I had used in my early days of digital processing with LViewPro.  For quick manipulations I still use 1.D2 of that software, a great feature set for such a tiny package.

test every lens (no matter how many times you own a copy)!

Sure, I admit it: this is at least my third Pentax 18-55 lens. Each time the purchase, and the sale, made sense within its context. This time I own a WR camera with no WR lens.. so the DA 18-55WR makes plenty of sense.
 
Each time I change lenses I enter a column in my Excel 'data base', so in many cases I've been able to copy a column from the dead file to the live one. And each time the parameters change a smidge, so I test where the minimum f/ratio changes through the focal range, and take a quick shot of a ruler to count the mm and determine the close-focus ability.

In this case I picked a real close-focus winner among the many excellent 18-55s: this is very close to .4x (I see 62mm at close focus, so sensor size of 24/62 yields 0.39x). The specs say .34 and my previous were closer to that value. I did lose slightly on the f/ratio, but if you can tell the change at 35mm instead of 40mm you're better at it (and more concerned about it) than I.

Later tests against the DA 50-200 are less glowing, as the 50-200 at 50 bests the 18-55 at 55 when both are f/5.6 aperture. Also curious is that the FL values aren't quite aligned - so do I have a 55-200 or an 18-50? No big deal, just a curiosity.

k200d, autumn

Back in business, and on a more sensible budget! No more shooting an hour after dark with no tripod like the k-r, but when I can shoot I know the results will be excellent. A cool but fine day allowed me to bike home from work among the colors - here is a great example, trimmed and tweaked from jpeg.

An 18-55WR is coming soon, so weather beware: I'll be coming out rain or shine!

(note the later post on L.a.b. processing; I prefer that shot to the one here)