dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Hi all I've recently started going out to take photos of the railways after being inspired by the many great photos on here and other sites. I currently own a panasonic lumix FZ38, which mostly I've loved since I had it, I wouldn't get rid of it either as its perfect for the everyday needs ( ie young famil and holiday snaps). The FZ38 is a bridge camera 12mpix f2.8-8.0 high zoom, iso 80-1600 (higher is availble in scene modes) it shoots RAW (well panasonics .RW2 format) Trusted reviews gives it 10 out of 10 and a number of other sites give similar scores too. http://www.trustedre...l-Camera_review However I'm wondering whether I'm getting to the edge of its limits with railway photos. Well moving trains anyway. So I was wondering whether some of you talented guys could cast your eyes over some of the photos below and see if its me not doing things right or whether the camera isn't coping well with what I'm looking for. My feelings regarding the photos are that even at low ISOs ie 80-250 there is quite a large amount of noise in the photos, most of the moving trains I use manual mode with the shutter speed at atleast 1/1000 if I have good enough light and and can use f5+ i can get up to 1/1300 (one of the restrictions is not being able to use the full speed range at all f stops). I tried shutter priority and aperture priority as well as manual and still seem to get similar results. I know the composition of some of the photos isn't the best, I have only just started again and in digital. I also feel that the colours aren't as vibrant even with a little play in pc software. Some of the photos were shot in RAW but some of the more recent ones I shot in high jpeg as it seems to produce slightly better images, ( I know this shouldn't be possible, either that or the camera colour adjustment system is better than I am on post processing software) You can view exif data one the flicker photos. xcHSTWichnorjn25-5-12mid by dave_long, on Flickr - 1/1000 iso125 f3.7 Voyagersthbnd by dave_long, on Flickr - 1/1300 iso250 f5.6 cl90RTV by dave_long, on Flickr - 1/1000 iso250 f5.6 350stationRTV18-5-12 by dave_long, on Flickr - 1/400 iso100 f5.0 XC Voyager by dave_long, on Flickr - 1/1000 iso200 f3.6 70005 lichfield jnc by dave_long, on Flickr - 1/100 iso80 f5.6 class86s Lichfield TV by dave_long, on Flickr - 1/125 iso200 f7.1 ( This wasn't a good shot too low on the shutter on my part resulted in bluring IMO) But then I can get some good shots of models: This was taken yesterday at the TVNAM show, but I quite like it: Then I also created this shot in combineZP (photo stacked) GP50 stacked border by dave_long, on Flickr You can click the images to go to larger versions on flickr. I suppose what I really want to get out of this post is should I grab myself a dslr although it would be an older second hand model, or am I doing something not quite right with this camera, or any tips for getting a better image. I have tried some noise reduction/sharpen settings but nothing seems to get things quite right. I used to work in a pro photo lab so have seen my fair share of good and bad photos. Whether its my personal satisfaction in thinking the images don't come out that well or not. Thanks in advance Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Dave They all look perfectly natural to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 Thanks John They do look ok when in smaller sizes, but if you see the larger images the noise seems to stand out: The virgin voyager for instance: and the 90 this was just trundling through the station road too: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Thing would be to do some test shots of static objects with large patches of colour and then enlarge. Any camera will have that sort of (what used to be called) grain at those enlargements. Mine does. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 By the way, are you using the setting for jpeg with the least compression? (fine) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 All the photos above except the class 86s and the XC voyager were shot in Raw, but I do use the highest jpeg setting. I know that if you go too big then your likely to get that grain, but I think it looks grainy/noisey even at 800pix wide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 This was taken while at Wichnor junction. wichnor junction feather rear by dave_long, on Flickr - This was taken at 1/800 iso200 and f3.4 This seems a lot less noisy even at the larger sizes: My feeling is that the fast shutter speed as something to do with, maybe its at the limit of the sensors ability? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Williams Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I notice that the Voyager is at 250 ISO which probably would start to give you a bit of noise. However looking at the largest size it looks more than acceptable to me. There is a very slight difference in sharpness between the train and the surroundings, but that is to be expected. I tend to leave my point and squirt Panasonic on 80 ISO for most things (stationary), but as soon as you start 'upping' the ISO, you start to notice the difference when viewing images at a large size. Have a look at some of my photos if you like and compare the noise. My camera was under £100 so obviously has limitations, but it does have a Lumix lens. I should say that I do use sharpening in Photoshop where necessary, plus other tweaks as required. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Williams Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 The Wichnor Junction signal looks fine to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katier Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Some of it WILL be a limitation of the camera. As per the DPReview, review :- The FZ38 has the same tiny sensor as all of its rivals in this test and therefore its images are never super-sharp (these cameras always apply some noise reduction, even at base ISO) but the Panasonic captures very good detail for this class of camera. At higher ISOs the FZ38 shows the mixture of noise reduction blurring, noise and other artifacts that is typical for cameras with such tiny sensors but the Panasonic JPEG engine manages to find a better balance between noise reduction and retention of detail than most of the other cameras in this test. In short, while the noise certainly isn't bad, at anything above 150 or so WILL result in some (and increasing) noise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacRat Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Your pictures don't look that bad. As they are RAW images the camera did not any image processing to enhance colours, to sharpen the edges and to reduce the noise. It is just that what the sensor sees. My impression is that RAW pictures require some post processing with the PC. Programs like Aperture or Lightroom do a good job in developing RAW images. If you choose JPEG format the camera will do some generic image processing and thus produce images that might look more rich in colour and sharper than the same image in RAW. If your camera supports to take pictures in RAW and JPEG at the same time you can compare both results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 Thanks for the replies guys, much appreciated. I've added more photos to my flickr account. As a comparison to the XC voyager above I have this one in almost the same spot but at ISO100 f3.6 1/1000 P1050973 by dave_long, on Flickr This one really does show the noise it at 400ISO I wasn't ready for this she took me by suprise hence the poor shot and she going away from me. But this was at 1/1600. P1060713 by dave_long, on Flickr The this was taken at iso125: P1050984 by dave_long, on Flickr So I think that although I'm taking fairly good photos, I think I'm looking for something better so that problem probably means a step up to dslr. I shall continue using the FZ38 as for what it is its a very good camera. I shall continue to learn the software I have, I don't have photoshop but use a combination of Panasonics silkware (need that because the Raw is .RW2) Gimp 2 and plugins and irfanview. Macrat I think however the raw+jpeg on this camera can only produce the jpeg image at the same settings it uses for raw so if I change the colour adjustments in the settings they are not applied in raw+jpeg mode because of the raw being taken first. Thanks Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I think you're missing the point. Given the same lens settings and same aperture you're going to get the same level of noise with a bridge as you will with a DSLR. Where the DSLR scores is that the maximum aperture will probably be larger so the speed will be the same for a lower nominal ISO rating. But with a larger aperture you're going to get a lesser depth of field. Bad burnt as scalded, really. I know you're taking moving targets and need a fast shutter speed - whatever you do will have the same problem. Don't think that spending (a lot) more money on different kit is going to give any noticeable difference. Neither is photoshop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Dave, Your pictures seem fine to me. Just one plea if I may as it's something which irritates me. I like horizontals horizontal and verticles, well er, verticle. Just my preference though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 I think you're missing the point. Given the same lens settings and same aperture you're going to get the same level of noise with a bridge as you will with a DSLR. Where the DSLR scores is that the maximum aperture will probably be larger so the speed will be the same for a lower nominal ISO rating. But with a larger aperture you're going to get a lesser depth of field. Bad burnt as scalded, really. I know you're taking moving targets and need a fast shutter speed - whatever you do will have the same problem. Don't think that spending (a lot) more money on different kit is going to give any noticeable difference. Neither is photoshop. John But wouldn't the larger sensor of a dslr camera remove more of the noise I'm getting below 400 ISO? I've trawled through flickr and seen other photos taken at high speed with much more clarity than mine even upto 400ISO and with a similar shutter speed sometimes faster. Dave, Your pictures seem fine to me. Just one plea if I may as it's something which irritates me. I like horizontals horizontal and verticles, well er, verticle. Just my preference though. Your quite right at least the horizon should be level! I'll try and do better. I think that because the camera uses a liveview rather than a viewfinder I end up looking at the real thing and having the camera away from my face thus making it easier to get away from horizontals and verticals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Bit of a reddish herring for the photography you've ilustrated. In lower light conditions it would matter. If you're going to print above A3 then it may matter, but see http://carnkiecameraclub.co.uk/photobasics/DemoDC/cccCameras.pdf for a good explanation. For a 12Mp sensor for normal light conditions it's not really going to make any difference. DSLR are much heavier - depends what you want to do. My 9Mp six year old bridge gives me excellent A3 prints - which is as big as I can go. I used a DSLR for a wedding (the groom's camera) and had quite severe arm ache for a couple of days - but that was 12 hours of photography and 2000 shots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Williams Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Dave, Your pictures seem fine to me. Just one plea if I may as it's something which irritates me. I like horizontals horizontal and verticles, well er, verticle. Just my preference though. I have that same aversion Dave. The trouble with so many cameras that aren't DSLR is that they don't have an optical viewfinder, thus making it much more difficult to ensure that the camera is upright. In my case, I have to stop and put on my glasses as well! I end up having to rotate mine to varying degrees in photoshop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 John Thanks I'll have a read of that later. Steve Thanks I'll look into the rotation tool in gimp. It is a pain as I tend to look at the camera LCD right at the last moment as the train approaches often too late to level the scene. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 John Thanks I'll have a read of that later. Steve Thanks I'll look into the rotation tool in gimp. It is a pain as I tend to look at the camera LCD right at the last moment as the train approaches often too late to level the scene. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Williams Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 John Thanks I'll have a read of that later. Steve Thanks I'll look into the rotation tool in gimp. It is a pain as I tend to look at the camera LCD right at the last moment as the train approaches often too late to level the scene. It's not such a problem if taking a stationary object or a scene, particularly as some cameras have a grid overlay option. However, when taking a moving object, it is very difficult when you have to hold the camera away from your body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombe Barton Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Dave Doesn't yours have a viewfinder? We use Fuji bridges because they do, and tere's much more stability when the camera's got the support of your head. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 An old book I have on railway photography suggest you fix your eyes on a point on the track - like a rail joint or lineside pole (hey it's a very old book), then when the train reaches that point you press the shutter. This has an application here. You mount the camera on a tripod (dealing with those wonky horizons), get the composition right. Then wait for the train. You're not looking through the viewfinder/screen. You're looking at the train. Then press the shutter when the train is at your predetermined point. Works for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 John I've read the article, and I understand what it and what you are saying, its just that my eyes dont agree if you know what I mean. for example the following images: From the same place by a different photographer: Canon 350D 221102 "James Cabot" - Catholme by Therosymole, on Flickr Canon D30 66132 by Tutenkhamun Sleeping, on Flickr Canon 450D IMG_6021 by MJ Wilson, on Flickr To me these seem much more colourful, the pictures are sharper. Even in the small on screen image. Their ISOs are all 200+. My photos even the ones in the 100iso bracket with higher f stops still seem noisy? From that article and to what your saying that I should be able to get that kind of image out of my bridge camera?? confused... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_long Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 Dave Doesn't yours have a viewfinder? We use Fuji bridges because they do, and tere's much more stability when the camera's got the support of your head. It does have a viewfinder but it is just a smaller image that is displayed on the LCD, the plastic moulding is very small and eyelashes do get in the way. An old book I have on railway photography suggest you fix your eyes on a point on the track - like a rail joint or lineside pole (hey it's a very old book), then when the train reaches that point you press the shutter. This has an application here. You mount the camera on a tripod (dealing with those wonky horizons), get the composition right. Then wait for the train. You're not looking through the viewfinder/screen. You're looking at the train. Then press the shutter when the train is at your predetermined point. Works for me. Tim, Thanks that is good advice, I do often take a tripod but have not got round to using it. Perhaps its because I like to get shots from both sides of the bridge and not using the tripod makes that easier, although tripods are not heavy are they, and yes it would certainly help the wonky horizons wouldn't it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katier Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 To me these seem much more colourful, the pictures are sharper. Even in the small on screen image. Their ISOs are all 200+. My photos even the ones in the 100iso bracket with higher f stops still seem noisy? From that article and to what your saying that I should be able to get that kind of image out of my bridge camera?? confused... Not surprised your confused as the noise aspect of that article is WAY to simplistic and at most levels completely wrong. Take two cameras, a 12mp DSLR full frame, a 12mp DSLR Crop sensor and your 12mp bridge... the bridge at ALL ISO's will produce more noise, the Crop sensor will be substantially better while the full frame will be better yet. Small sensors simply can't capture data anything like as well, especially at higher ISO's, as larger sensors - number of reasons for it but at the simplest level the smaller pixels on the smaller sensor have to work harder to capture data quicker. In doing so they will distort what they capture creating noise. Examples of my work with a DSLR included the 1600 because it's roughly the same image size so you can see that the lack of noise in the 200 is unrelated to the image size :- 1600 ISO, noise evident but still a good picture. 200 ISO, no noise noticeable. Pentax K200D DSLR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.