Rawtherapee

[RonH]

I guess that we don't always have to agree
The TZ70 I have is very satisfactory and most (never all) reviews support this fact. True, I have only owned it for a couple of months but it does everything I find useful in a travel camera. Good that it can shoot in RAW where necessary, has excellent image stabilisation even at max zoom but bad is the fact that you need to take care not to cover the flash as mentioned ... but then I try to avoid flash as much as possible.

Picture quality can be an issue with small sensors of course but to get a range of a range of 24-720mm is in my book pretty good. Taking a look at e.g. this review http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Pa...e_images.shtml
and scrolling down to image 3 or 5 ... I think I would be happy with these results.

But my use is basic ... pc viewing and 15x20cm prints for my lady's photo albums! Though when I get past learning about RawTherapee I might just have a crack at some comps
Cheers Ron

[RonH]

Quite day at home so I snapped these ... one wide the other max zoom ... you can see the yellow house in the distance looking to the flag pole. I cropped the wide angle slightly to eliminate our window frame at top Very new to using RawTherapy but I think that the Panasonic TZ70 camera quality is pretty good for such a small sensor.

[Donald]

Look good, Ron. Good feeling of clarity, though maybe the bracing air up there is contributing to that. I know that it feels distinctly wintry here today.

[RonH]

Thanks for your comment Donald.

I have been studying a number of RAW/JPG processing software's recently and although RawTherapy presently appears complex I will work with it, plus using GIMP where appropriate. My Photoshop Elements 8.0 is ageing and not supported in Windows 10 which I plan to install soon ... though I have read that some users have managed to get it to 'sort of' function.

These two pics posted, though not best sharpened etc (lack of current knowledge!) certainly show to me that the TZ70 travel camera can capture quite reasonable pics across a very wide range of zoom ... certainly OK for 15x20cm prints. Need a lot of practice but great for those holiday snaps and keeping my lady happy

Yep, very cool here today with more promised. Days are rather short
Cheers Ron

[RonH]

Just for information ... I raised my query with Panasonic about the TZ70 lens surround plastic showing in RW2 files, shot wide angle and this is their reply:

Regarding your inquiry, I would like to inform you that the TZ70 has a 24mm wide-angle for JPG files. The value is increased slightly when shooting RAW. Since RAW is an unprocessed, untouched image, the lens barel may get captured if shooting at the widest angle.

Seems you do not loose any of the 24mm angle specified for the camera. Only certain RAW processors actually show the lens barrel ... most are set up based upon camera manufacturer specs. RawTherapee is an exception, showing everything

Cheers Ron

[Donald]

... and this is their reply:

Interesting. Thanks for keeping us informed about this, Ron.

[george013]

Just for information ... I raised my query with Panasonic about the TZ70 lens surround plastic showing in RW2 files, shot wide angle and this is their reply:

Regarding your inquiry, I would like to inform you that the TZ70 has a 24mm wide-angle for JPG files. The value is increased slightly when shooting RAW. Since RAW is an unprocessed, untouched image, the lens barel may get captured if shooting at the widest angle.

Seems you do not loose any of the 24mm angle specified for the camera. Only certain RAW processors actually show the lens barrel ... most are set up based upon camera manufacturer specs. RawTherapee is an exception, showing everything

Cheers Ron

Strange answer. When I understand it as I do.
A camera can only shoot RAW. When I read " the value is increased slightly" I think of getting 24+mm. It's impossible to get 24mm out off 24+mm.

The JPG is anyway a crop of the RAW. The question still is to which belongs the angle of view belonging to 24mm.
If the physical position of the lens and its AoV is 24mm , then a crop can only be 24+mm.
If the physicall position of the lens and its AoV is 24-mm, then a crop can be 24mm. But why to go physicall to 24-mm?



George

[RonH]

No worries George ... 'whatever' is the 'wide angle', it's wide enough for me. Though it is probably only useful maybe for landscapes or pictures in the rooms of houses up for sale I am not a fan because of distortions relative to what we see with our own eyes. But then again, I am not experienced so maybe a bit of practice would be worthwhile to get to grips with the benefits.
Cheers Ron

[xpatUSA]

Strange answer. When I understand it as I do.
A camera can only shoot RAW. When I read " the value is increased slightly" I think of getting 24+mm. It's impossible to get 24mm out off 24+mm.

The JPG is anyway a crop of the RAW. The question still is to which belongs the angle of view belonging to 24mm.

If the physical position of the lens and its AoV is 24mm , then a crop can only be 24+mm.

If the physical position of the lens and its AoV is 24-mm, then a crop can be 24mm.

But why to go physical to 24-mm?

George

Good question, George.

Having owned a couple of Panasonic m4/3, it is not necessarily the case that the sensor is exactly the size of the image circle from the lens. Nor does any lens have an image circle exactly equal to the sensor active area diagonal (higher quality lenses have more, I've read). Therfore, it is almost certain that the OP's lens real focal length is not exactly 24mm, IMHO, and the said length is quite probably stated in equivalent terms (sensor diagonal used for JPEG images) so as not to confuse the point-and-shooters.

So, Panasonic's statement . .

. . the TZ70 has a 24mm wide-angle for JPG files. The value is increased slightly when shooting RAW. . .

. . . does make sense if "The value" (in mm) is referring to the diagonal amount of the sensor used in JPEG versus the amount used in raw.

Of course by expressing a linear quantity for an angular parameter (AoV), photographic confusion rules supreme in this thread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_of_view

If only we were all Scientists and actually wrote in a lingua franca

[george013]

Having owned a couple of Panasonic m4/3 is not necessarily the case that the sensor is exactly the size of the image circle from lens. Nor does any lens have an image circle exactly equal to the sensor active area diagonal. Therefore, to my mind, it is incorrect to express an angle of view in mm as opposed to degrees. It is almost certain that the OP's lens is not exactly 24mm, IMHO, and is quite probably stated in equivalent terms (sensor diagonal used for JPEG images) so as not to confuse the point-and-shooters.

Therefore, Panasonic's statement makes sense if "the value" in mm is referring to the amount of the sensor used in JPEG versus raw. By expressing a linear quantity for an angular parameter, photographic obfuscation rules supreme in this thread

Since a sensor is not circle shaped as the image circle is, they never can be the same.
The angle of view is calculated from the sensor size and nominal focal distance. You can use the horizontal, vertical or diagonal size's. They are all different but typical for that focal length and sensor size/dimension.

From my former post

If the physicall position of the lens and its AoV is 24-mm, then a crop can be 24mm. But why to go physicall to 24-mm?

George

[RonH]

Isn't it interesting how a question around 'edge distortion' can generate such enthusiastic response. Thanks CiC for helping my understanding.
Cheers Ron

[xpatUSA]

Since a sensor is not circle shaped as the image circle is, they never can be the same.

As William Jefferson Clinton might have said: "it all depends on what 'the same' is"

The angle of view is calculated from the sensor size and nominal focal distance.

Thank you for the information. And do we agree that the units for "The angle" are degrees? Like for example, SLRgear quotes "Diagonal Angle of View (Based on image circle) 84.1 degrees". It is notable that, unlike here, they actually say what angle is being defined and the basis of it's definition - folks after my own heart . . .

You can use the horizontal, vertical or diagonal size's. They are all different but typical for that focal length and sensor size/dimension.

Note that SLRgear uses the diagonal measure for the example Sigma lens - but also please note that the said lens is manufactured for at least Sigma, Pentax, Nikon and Canon cameras - so what is the AoV of that lens expressed in millimeters?

As usual, we are talking at cross purposes, so I hope that you understand the point I'm trying to make. But at least, from our discussion, I now know that image circles are round and sensors are rectangular

Actually, George, I think we are saying the same thing in our different ways - but our responses always imply that the other said something wrong . . .

So, for the record, I agree . . . . . . . . .

[george013]

Back in the kindergarden.

As William Jefferson Clinton might have said: "it all depends on what 'the same' is"

Do you mean this guy?

Thank you for the information. And do we agree that the units for "The angle" are degrees?

You may call it degrees, radials, centigrade or whatever. As long you don't switch.

Like for example, SLRgear quotes "Diagonal Angle of View (Based on image circle) 84.1 degrees". It is notable that, unlike here, they actually say what angle is being defined and the basis of it's definition - folks after my own heart . . .

What's that. A diagonal based on image circle?

Note that SLRgear uses the diagonal measure for the example Sigma lens - but also please note that the said lens is manufactured for at least Sigma, Pentax, Nikon and Canon cameras - so what is the AoV of that lens expressed in millimeters?

It was written "If the physical position of the lens and its AoV is 24mm". Bold added for clarity.

As usual, we are talking at cross purposes, so I hope that you understand the point I'm trying to make. But at least, from our discussion, I now know that image circles are round and sensors are rectangular

If you've owned several Panasonics, then you must know that their sensor is rectangular.

Actually, George, I think we are saying the same thing in our different ways - but our responses always imply that the other said something wrong . . .

So, for the record, I agree . . . . . . . . .

That ok for me.

George

[xpatUSA]

Thank you for the information. And do we agree that the units for "The angle" are degrees?

You may call it degrees, radials, centigrade or whatever. As long you don't switch.

Actually, the question was "do we agree?".

But, since you're being cute, "radials" are what pilots fly to/from directional beacons and are therefore lines, paths, or tracks, not angles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radial

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radian

Like for example, SLRgear quotes "Diagonal Angle of View (Based on image circle) 84.1 degrees".

What's that? A diagonal based on image circle?

I think you should be able to work that out for yourself.

Note that SLRgear uses the diagonal measure for the example Sigma lens - but also please note that the said lens is manufactured for at least Sigma, Pentax, Nikon and Canon cameras - so what is the AoV of that lens expressed in millimeters?

It was written "If the physical position of the lens and it's AoV is 24mm". Bold added for clarity.

Sorry, your bold adds no clarity at all because "it" could refer either to "the physical position" or to "the lens".

I now know that image circles are round and sensors are rectangular

If you've owned several Panasonics, then you must know that their sensor is rectangular.

There seems to be a "kidding" smiley missing from your response, so I'll take that last sentence as being deliberately provocative and just ignore it