Separate names with a comma.
Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information
Discussion in 'Phantom 2 Vision Discussion' started by Jay, Sep 13, 2014.
What is the best format for A4 size picture printing JPEG or Raw ?
It depends what are you going to use the print for ? With Raw you use more memory ,but you have more data to work with in editing and it is lose less format ; in case you decide to print larger format you have the data. On another hand the quality of a picture depends mainly on LENS quality and how much quality data you got by taking the picture.
Most P&S cameras have JPEG curve preset in camera already ;that will give you easier way to shoot and print for decent results, With Raw you have to spend some extra time on post processing and make your own curves for best results.
My Pro Nikon cameras are set to soot JEPG and Raw at the same time ( JEPG is used for quick internet/Web use and the Raw is my valuable negative ). If you have more questions about this topic I am more than happy to help
Paul's got it.
The FC200's JPEG quality is pretty good. On an A4 print, you're not going to see a lot of artifacting unless you're really looking (or a professional).
RAW is going to be a little cleaner, but RAW isn't really about increasing resolution. Where RAW really shines is in post-production. You can literally "save" portions of a RAW image, manipulating tonal values and contrast to pull details out of the shot, that would've been lost in JPEG. RAW is also MUCH better for use with the lens correction filters to remove the fisheye of the FC200.
The compromise, of course, is the slower shutter on the FC200, and the fewer images you can fit on your SD card.
When in RAW mode, the FC200 will always save both a JPEG and RAW file for each photo. So set it to RAW and test which one YOU like better. Then you can switch it back if you're fine with the JPEG.
I'm surprised there has not been an aftermarket FC200 lens snap on adapter or some such thing for when you'd want less than the fish-eye view or photographs. I agree that the standard lens is not bad at all. Nothing like hanging a DSLR from a much more expensive rig and flying for only a few minutes. the Vision+ is a truly fine machine for the price, but I'm hoping some optical add-ons hit the market soon. I've wondered if any of those snap-on kits for iphones or such things might decrease the FOV and distortion from the wide view. Any thoughts?
Fisheye can be fixed in editing. Then there's the extra weight...
The major problem with Phantom/gimbal is limited weight . I have Phantoms with GoPro cameras , one has original lens and 3+ was changed for 5.4 aftermarket lens ( this one takes care of fish eye ,but still only standard quality, I paid prox.$ 300 US at Rage cams,but in my opinion it is worth $ 100 it dosn't' have antireflection coating as I was told and overall quality lower then most P&S cameras ) most of the videos on GoPro site are taken with modified cameras and/or very extensive editing. Recently I am working on ultralight camera shade with integrated polarizing -ND -and ND grad filters to eliminate reflections .
It can be fixed to an extent. But the Lens Correction filter seems to stretch objects in the corners of the image. The Adaptive Wide Angle filter does better in that regard, but it warps the edges of the images so a lot of cropping is needed, thus wasting a lot of pixels.
I long for a good quality but affordable non-fisheye lens.