![]() Yes.but there is sharpening going on.and I never liked the results of the halos it sometimes gives. From what I read somewhere (can't locate source, sorry), the iZoom is processed in-camera using intelligent Resolution, so there's much less image degradation than simple DZ. I have been using this feature for almost 10 years now, with various FZ's. Thats why EZ zoom is crops, but does no interpolation.resolution stays at fixed lower setting. In PP, you just crop.without the degredating interpolation, scaling up the resolution. But, it's not immediately obvious to me why that produces a better result than simple digital zoom at the same magnification.ĭigital zoom is a simple sensor crop, same as if you'd cropped in PP to artificially 'zoom' a portion of your imageĪctually Digital zoom does interpolates the resolution back up to the original resolution. Image noise in the original file can be smoothed out in a few different ways, but in handling noise, we're probably best off using a good after-market noise reduction program, rather than relying on in-camera noise reduction or other software (or hardware) manipulations. Detail not captured in the original RAW file can never be manufactured. To me, the important part of this is that none of these non-optical "zooms" will add detail. But I have never thought that the detail and noise were improved, when compared to a cropped and edited RAW file, providing the images are displayed at the same size. One benefit of the cropped sensor approach is that I can frame the subject better, and I can sometimes get a more accurate exposure. But for best results, I've never found anything better than a carefully cropped and processed RAW file. This suggests that the i.ZOOM scaling up is the source of the enlarged noise that Graham doesn't like - but it is perhaps somewhat better than EZoom when used in the lower half of its addtional range extension.įor small prints, web displays, cell phone displays, and for images which don't rely on rendition of fine detail (buildings, distant landscapes, some portraits) cropped sensors and software generated fixes can be perfectly fine. "Now let's look at the case of I.Zoom or Panasonic's "intelligent zoom feature" In this mode of operation the image dimensions always remain the same 4000 x 3000, 3264 x 2448, 2048 x1536 etc for the 12M, 8M and 5M file sizes however in this mode the magnification is achieved by cropping into the image from the sensor and then re-sizing it to the original dimensions in software." How many of Panasonic's features truly work remain a mystery, so we're left to do as Graham has done and test them to see what they do rather than peeling back into how they do it. ![]() I sent him an email a couple of weeks ago but got no reply. Hook-and-loop fasteners, hook-and-pile fasteners or touch fasteners (often referred to by the genericized trademark velcro, due to the prominence of the Velcro Brand) consist of two components: typically, two lineal fabric strips (or, alternatively, round 'dots' or squares) which are attached (sewn or otherwise adhered) to the opposing surfaces to be fastened. It tells why and when to use is but doesn't really explain the mechanics of what's done in the camera. In other words, 8mp is the sweet spot if someone only looks at images at native 1920*1080 without zooming on the monitor.Yes, I've watched that video a couple of times. Looking at it from my monitor perspective all I need is a 3840*2040=7.8mp camera to see the zoomed 800mm resolution. My monitor is a 1920*1080 which is why I believe I am also happy with 800mm images. You have to monitor zoom beyond 2736*1824 to start seeing deterioration. Now a 27" MAC monitor at 2560*1440 has less resolution than the 2736*1824 jpeg so there would be no deterioration in viewing quality. That is the actual optical pixel count - never mind that that the jpeg says it is still 5472*3648, that includes interpolated fill pixels so the cropped image fills the sensor. Assume you are shooting in which is normally 5472*3648, i.e. Like the OP I prefer to frame the subject in the camera and do as little cropping as possible on the computer. My favorite subject is wildlife and I use the camera as if it were 25-1200mm, not concerned whether I slip into iZoom range when necessary. Not sure how it's done but the guys at Panasonic did it. I also use iZoom extensively and am quite happy with the results. I have now also looked at the photos on my Mac, you have to look VERY darn close to see any deterioration and they are super minor.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |