Olympus XZ-1 with FAST f1.8 lens
- Thread starter faisalee
- Start date
Got mine from tkfoto at $539 including case, auto cap, 2nd original battery...
I bought the third party external battery charger, it's ok to use, but I definately won't recommend charging the original battery with it, but charging third party batteries are fine (*third party battery in ebay cost like $6 to $8, so expendable, haha*), try not to use the third party external charger to charge overnight, I think I spoiled one of the third party battery doing that, haha QUOTE]
I managed to find an original olympus battery charger from ebay at under $30, i have placed my order
Totally Agreed... Take some flowers and spider shots, very sharp and nice color under good sunlight...
You have to bear in mind that XZ-1 is a small sensor high-end compact. Depending on how you would use XZ-1 to take images, to me, this little camera can yield good image quality.
For exchange of views and opinions...
Different photographers have different definition and understanding of low light. I'd taken some images at a concert. Image taken at ISO400 can yield good image quality. ISO640 is still decent. ISO800 is the max I would go for indoor. I usually shoot RAW and do exposure adjustment and light noise reduction in post-processing. Otherwise, other settings are left untouched. I printed 8R for images taken up to ISO800. The output, in my opinion is good. It is definitely more than decent for web sharing in Facebook.
The following image was taken at ISO400.
Lr-8303282.jpg by diCam, on Flickr
Why would you want to compare XZ-1 bokeh with a dSLR? What constitute good bokeh? It's 2 different class of camera.
The following image was taken at about 1 metre away and not with super macro mode.
Lr-193822 by diCam, on Flickr
Yes, the super macro mode is darn impressive. The following photo was shot with the subject already touched the front end of the glass.
Lr-193767 by diCam, on Flickr
For exchange of views and opinions...
Different photographers have different definition and understanding of low light. I'd taken some images at a concert. Image taken at ISO400 can yield good image quality. ISO640 is still decent. ISO800 is the max I would go for indoor. I usually shoot RAW and do exposure adjustment and light noise reduction in post-processing. Otherwise, other settings are left untouched. I printed 8R for images taken up to ISO800. The output, in my opinion is good. It is definitely more than decent for web sharing in Facebook.
The following image was taken at ISO400.
Lr-8303282.jpg by diCam, on Flickr
Bokeh in XZ-1 is overrated in portrait photos it is not anything close to bokeh in good light or low light compare to DSLR most of the time unless you use Aperture mode at 1.8 and try to get your subject to fill up the whole LCD display and provided the background is a few metre away from your subject then you get some bokeh from it, but the Super Macro focus mode takes really good bokeh picture when you macro in on a toy, food, or small accessories, under good decent lighting, the bokeh looks pretty impressive
Why would you want to compare XZ-1 bokeh with a dSLR? What constitute good bokeh? It's 2 different class of camera.
The following image was taken at about 1 metre away and not with super macro mode.
Lr-193822 by diCam, on Flickr
Yes, the super macro mode is darn impressive. The following photo was shot with the subject already touched the front end of the glass.
Lr-193767 by diCam, on Flickr
Viewer 2 represent the true standard for images taken with Olympus camera. The software take awhile to load the image if you are accessing the ORF file. JPEG is slightly faster.
Yes this is a good bokeh photo, but I seem to have a hard time getting bokeh on XZ-1 taking portrait photos be it indoor or outdoor, maybe is just me and I don't really like the noise level at 400 to 800 iso when I pixel peep on the photos, haha
So I am thinking of upgrading to a mirrorless camera for better iso handling to get me some nice portrait photos indoor or outdoor with maybe a portrait lens after I learn how to use the camera? hehe
Yes this photo from 1 metre away is good photo, but I seem to have a problem getting good bokeh from this kind of distance indoor or outdoor most of the time. So I guess my solution is to look at a camera with a decent portrait lens? Anyway somehow my post don't get posted in clubsnap, it seem only "elites" are allow to post in this forum..... feel so sick posting stuff here having to wait for so many hours just to get it posted.
I don't know what is going on, but if this post doesn't appear, I won't waste my time posting anymore, this forum is sooooo weird, everything have to be moderated for a new user, how to encourage new user that would like to discuss about equipments to join the forum??? Seem like this forum is turning into some forum that just sell camera equipments???? Time to move on to some other place/forum that encourage discussion....
I do not think CS practice elitism. The moderators are volunteer not full-time staff.
Since you are a newly registered member I advise patience. If the moderators are not responding you can always write to the Admin to provide your feedback.
As I mentioned earlier, XZ-1 is a compact with small sensor. Practice, inquisitive and keen interest can make you a better photographer.
Happy shooting!
I see, thanks for the explanation on the moderators.
I do enjoy taking photos in XZ-1 and the picture turn out pretty nice too, this is actually the first camera I have that take picture in raw format, been training myself to take picture in raw so that I can edit them, so far I do enjoy the flexibility of editing the picture in raw using the viewer 2 software.
But I do notice that a lot of people takes picture in raw and they like to use lightroom or adobe photoshop? Does Viewer 2 and Lightroom have a lot of difference? e.g. if I use Lightroom, will the raw conversion to jpeg give me lesser noise? or some other things that lightroom/photoshop can do that Viewer 2 can't?
I do enjoy taking photos in XZ-1 and the picture turn out pretty nice too, this is actually the first camera I have that take picture in raw format, been training myself to take picture in raw so that I can edit them, so far I do enjoy the flexibility of editing the picture in raw using the viewer 2 software.
But I do notice that a lot of people takes picture in raw and they like to use lightroom or adobe photoshop? Does Viewer 2 and Lightroom have a lot of difference? e.g. if I use Lightroom, will the raw conversion to jpeg give me lesser noise? or some other things that lightroom/photoshop can do that Viewer 2 can't?
Last edited:
Some one has dumped one in Cash Converter already. Tried it out. Thoroughly un-impressed.
In short,
Viewer 2 is provided free by Olympus and can render original Olympus color profile. It's clunky and to a certain extent not user-friendly.
Lr and PS are third party software. These software cannot render original Olympus color profile but it is efficient, have better and advanced features and much more user-friendly.
That's my opinion.
There are some threads that discussed Lr and Viewer 2. Do a search on my nick and read up from there. Read first and attempt to understand then ask question after that.
awyymatthew
New Member
anyone know any places that sell good third party leather cases for xz-1?
I brought my xz1 to chinatown on saturday for some casual shooting, in fact I am quite impress with the details it rendered... Color and sharpness quite close to e3 except the 3D effect.... e3 feels more 3D for close up shooting....
hi, lao jiaos..
am choosing between the oly xz-1 and pana LX-5.. price is not an issue. am shooting alot of kids photos, so the F1.8-2.5 is really attractive to me, compared to the F2-3.3. however, that is on specs, and having read the comments on this and the pana threads, seems like the IQ of the LX-5 is so much better? esp noise and sharpness? any comments to help me along? what good is the F1.8 when the noise is sooo bad?
am choosing between the oly xz-1 and pana LX-5.. price is not an issue. am shooting alot of kids photos, so the F1.8-2.5 is really attractive to me, compared to the F2-3.3. however, that is on specs, and having read the comments on this and the pana threads, seems like the IQ of the LX-5 is so much better? esp noise and sharpness? any comments to help me along? what good is the F1.8 when the noise is sooo bad?
xz1 and lx5 is still using 1/1.63" and 1/1.7" ccd sensors which will never give u good noise control if you shoot above iso200..... x10 should be a better option, the noise control is better than above 2 if you shoot at 6mp....
Like JimmyJim commented, photos looks good under good lighting condition but when trying to take night photos, the dark area start to breakup even at iso100 when view at 100%.... So this is not a low light camera as advertised
I have been very happy with my XZ-1. Yes, there is serious smearing at ISO 800 and above so i always shoot raw when i use high ISO.
Here's a screen grab from dpreview on how XZ-1 jpeg (upper left) is compared with raw (upper right), and how its jpeg is compared to other cam of the same league (lower two).
XZ-1 Raw image does retain a lot more details and allows me to pull back the clipped highlight / shadow region. Just apply some noise reduction using Neatimage/Topaz, etc and you can still get decent images even at high ISO.
Enjoy!
Similar threads
