Trick question…the unzoomed shot should be better because there’ll usually be less camera-movement blur. 😛
Probably not the answer you’re looking for though.
Okay, what if it was on a tripod? I’d take the zoom and rely on the quality of the lens rather than the quantity of pixels. This may vary from one camera to another. You might want to run a test but downsampling is probably not going to be perceptible with a web image. This question, I think, has more relevance for prints. And I’d still vote for zooming in.
Seriously, I don’t think there’s a one-size-fits-all answer with all the possible variables. Most zoom lenses don’t provide the same image quality over their entire zoom range, so that could be relevant. Of course, depth-of-field can also shift.
I’m probably making this way too complicated, so I’ll shut up now. Bert is probably just looking for optical vs. digital differences.
Trick question
Well, I didn’t mean it to be trick, but I realized that there were other issues…like camera shake exaggerated by the zoom…that can muddy the water.
The tripod, of course, would solve the camera shake problem, but with the wildlife photography that I’m doing, there usually isn’t time for that.
If we ignore the camera shake issue and just talk about downsampling a hi-res image to a low-res image vs. cropping out the low res image, which do you think will give better results?
My usual choice was to zoom…because I thought I might want to print some of the images, and then I needed the high resolution. But I’ve been going thru the images from my last trip and in many cases I just used the Rectangular Marquee and cropped…they look great. Of course, I used the USM on all of them anyway as a last step.
You’re probably right, Mark. It may not matter much for monitor viewing anyway. But I thought it was an interesting question. Let’s see if we get any more opinions…
Thanks to both of you for your quick response.
Bert
Of course, depth-of-field can also shift.
That’s a good point, and something I hadn’t thought of. DOF should be narrower with the zoom, so if selective focus is desired, zoom is the way to go. With wildlife photography, though, I often like to have the background in focus…to show other animals, interesting plants or trees, etc.
Bert
Bert,
If it were me I would always choose to shoot at the highest resolution and then downsize to whatever size you want for the web. Since most of what I’ve seen about this subject suggests that maximum monitor resolution is somewhere in the neighborhood of 96 ppi it wouldn’t seem it would make much difference either way. But, if you ever wanted to print them then you would certainly want the higher resolution available.
Hmmmm…..
Dick
Bert, I’m inclined to agree with Dick and trust the zoom to capture the maximum number of pixels. You can always throw away those extra pixels, but if you have that once-in-a-lifetime photo (and you have LOTS!) that you want to print, you want all the ‘real’ pixels you can get!
Chuck
I’m inclined to agree with Dick and trust the zoom to capture the maximum number of pixels
Me too … then when the editors of National Geographic see it on your web site and offer you megabucks for the full-sized original, you’ll have a full-sized original to give them.
Stu,
Can’t you see the $$$ rolling in?
Dick
then when the editors of National Geographic see it on your web site and offer you megabucks for the full-sized original, you’ll have a full-sized original to give them.
Yeah, right. I’m not holding my breath…:)
Thanks to all of you. I really appreciate your inputs.
Bert
There is no difference in camera shake when zooming in with a lens or digitally in PSE. The amount of shake will stay the same.
Nevertheless I would always go for the bigger file and use a monopod or a beanbag.
Leen
Lo Bert.
fwiw, I find that my Oly CZ700 with 10 optical -unstabilised – in the sport mode returns tack sharp pics even at 10x and my hand is not particularly steady so at 4x there should be no problem. If shake is a problem the Panasonic FZ10 12x with the stabilised lens would be the answer, I fancy one of these.
Regards
Malcolm
There is no difference in camera shake when zooming in with a lens or digitally in PSE. The amount of shake will stay the same.
Oh…I hadn’t thought that one through. Cropping an 800×600 piece out of a 2560×1920 image and then displaying it on a big monitor will magnify the shake. Ooops. Thanks, Leen.
Malcolm, my Oly E-20 doesn’t have a "sport mode" but I would guess that what it does is select a fast shutter speed to minimize blur in action photos, and that would also tend to minimize blur from camera shake. Unfortunately, a lot of my wildlife photography is done in fairly low-light conditions…game drives in Africa are done around sunup and sundown, for example. So, I often don’t have the "luxury" of using short shutter speeds. Two things help me minimize camera shake: The E-20 is a tank…the extra mass helps. Also, I use a battery pack on the camera, which includes a very nice grip with leather strap and a second shutter release button for portrait-format shots. With the battery pack it is a REALLY HEAVY camera, but nicely balanced and very stable. Since the game drives don’t involve much walking around with the camera…just riding in Land Rovers, carrying the extra weight is really not a problem.
Bert
Bert,
A good steadying tip I picked up for wildlife videography some years ago is the use of a 6 or 7 foot length of 1/8 to 3/16 nylon rope (parachute cord works well). Use a spare tripod quick release or an eye bolt with the proper thread to attach the line to the tripod socket. When that target of opportunity appears drop the line, step on it lightly, bring to camera up to position and step down hard. The upward tension produces a pretty stable shot when there isn’t time or room for a ball head tripod. Word of warning: Don’t pull too hard or you can pop the tripod socket.
I’d enjoy seeing that web site if you are willing to share.
Bob
Bob,
Yes I know about the "rope trick." Most of my pix in AFrica were taken from the seat of a Land Rover, and I was usually able to steady the camera on a knee or something.
My website is:
<
http://community.webshots.com/user/bigelowrs>
Note that there are two pages of albums. The latest shots from this year’s trip are on page 2…called Madikwe Hills Lodge and Madikwe Hills Wildlife. The other albums are all from previous years’ trips. Just click on an album to open it, and then hit the View Slideshow button to see them all (you have to hit the "Start" button to get it going) If you’re on a dialup and that’s too slow, you can click any thumbnail to see single full-size images.
I usually post the website after I get all the images up, and I’ve been a little slow this time. I still have two more albums to post…one with pix of the Garden Route, a scenic highway that goes right across the bottom of the continent. The other one has shots from a Mediterranean cruise we did on the way home…Greek Islands, Greece and Turkey. Lots of spectacular ruins. Those will be posted in the next week or so.
Bert
