Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Resolution test with the X20 in the field  (Read 4261 times)
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« on: July 07, 2013, 03:15:27 AM »
ReplyReply

In the field, in this case was the Oakland A's stadium. I usually find it difficult to gauge resolution performance with landscape, nature or portrait photos. Human faces just on the edge of resolving power definitely make a noticeable impression.



It seems this little fixed (permanently affixed zoom) lens camera will provide reasonable 11"x14" prints, and I may need to limit it to 8"x12" for close up viewing with fine detail. I did recently make a couple prints at around 16"x24" that turned out very well after up-rezing, but one was a simple head and shoulders portrait, and the other was an abstract landscape. At least with the techniques I am aware of, that seems to be about the limit for this 12mp sensor.

My blog post has more detail regarding the processing, but here are 100% crops before and after increasing resolution to about the maximum I would normally attempt.

« Last Edit: July 07, 2013, 01:21:43 PM by gerafotografija » Logged

RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2013, 06:01:13 AM »
ReplyReply

I thought the X20 had a built-in zoom lens.  Huh
Logged
OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 433


WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2013, 11:54:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I thought the X20 had a built-in zoom lens.  Huh
Where did it say it didn't? The post referred to a "fixed" lens. Of course maybe it actually meant a repaired lens...
I've recommended this camera for someone who'd like something better than a phone-cam. I handled it a couple of days ago and shot a few quick snaps (RAW & jpeg) and I must say it's a very attractive example of this market sector. The pix don't look bad at all either.
Roy
Logged
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2013, 01:00:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry for the possible confusion, I meant non-interchangeable lens, it's an equivalent to FF 28-112mm f2.0-2.8 (at maximum focal length for this pic).

I've been pleasantly surprised by its all around good performance (moving up to great at around f/4 in good light). I'm hoping to see something very similar, with slightly lower noise levels and slightly more resolution at extreme apertures, from the X30 when it comes out.
Logged

RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2013, 02:46:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Where did it say it didn't? The post referred to a "fixed" lens. Of course maybe it actually meant a repaired lens...
I've recommended this camera for someone who'd like something better than a phone-cam. I handled it a couple of days ago and shot a few quick snaps (RAW & jpeg) and I must say it's a very attractive example of this market sector. The pix don't look bad at all either.
Roy

Yes, it referred to a 'fixed' lens.  When I think of 'fixed' lens I tend to think single focal length.  Gerafotografija clarified.  Issue resolved.
Logged
OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 433


WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2013, 05:23:07 AM »
ReplyReply

I frequently forget to add a ;-). Humour was intended, if not actually achieved: apologies.
Roy
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad