I see your camera is a panasonic lumix, which one? I am thinking of getting the fz5, wanted to know how people like it and if noise is a huge issue at high iso.
hmm, that's not horrible, but i wonder if u printed that to 8.5 x 11 if that would be very noticeable. what about indoor people photography? what were some other cameras that u considered before buying?
don't really shoot indoor too often. here's the first one I found : http://www.vzasade.com/lj/0606/flazhki1.jpg And have not printed any pictures yet :) cause what's the point? Wanted to buy Cannon PowerShot S2. Prefered Lumix because PowerShot is too heavy, and I'm ultra light backpacker :)
believe me it is true. it's just facts known from quantum physics (how photons of lights interact with camera sensor). usually there's an algorithm used to reduce noise and the difference between camera models comes in this part. but these algorithms have artifacts too (like the harder you reduce noise the blurrer image becomes), so usually it is some sort of tradeoff between quality of image and how much noise you leave. personally I like working with raw images and applying noise reduction settings manually along with other post-processing parameters, so I fully control and preserve image quality.
this camera does not give u raw images, and i don;t think i would go that deep into editing, no time or patience..... although, if i take a class on photoshop i might..
Athough it's true that some noise is unavoidable ('cos of abovementioned quantum effects) however: not all sensors are created equal. Some are just ... well ... bigger (and this is were size таки does matter), and have less pixels.
Less pixles on a larger area = bigger pixel = more photons have time to be registered during exposure = quantum noise is statistically smoothed out.
still, if you use high iso, i.e. you multiply the signal taken from the sensor, that means you multiply the noise that is unavoidably present in this signal. now back to my original statement - any camera will have considerable noise at high iso. period.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-07-18 03:46 am (UTC)I miss you guys
Please, please take me home!
:)
no subject
Date: 2006-07-18 04:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-18 04:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-18 10:46 pm (UTC)thanks!
no subject
Date: 2006-07-18 10:50 pm (UTC)Here is the noise : http://www.vzasade.com/lj/0606/venus.jpg
no subject
Date: 2006-07-18 10:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-18 11:03 pm (UTC)And have not printed any pictures yet :) cause what's the point?
Wanted to buy Cannon PowerShot S2. Prefered Lumix because PowerShot is too heavy, and I'm ultra light backpacker :)
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 12:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 01:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 11:05 pm (UTC)Less pixles on a larger area = bigger pixel = more photons have time to be registered during exposure = quantum noise is statistically smoothed out.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 11:09 pm (UTC)now back to my original statement - any camera will have considerable noise at high iso. period.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 11:43 pm (UTC)however, for the same ISO number results will vary.
see graph at the end of this article for the illustration of BOTH our points.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 07:26 am (UTC):)
no subject
Date: 2006-07-19 09:54 pm (UTC)