2x zoom on camera

[Noa Put]

Perhaps in some fine detail subjects, degradation might occur

It will occur, not might, and it's painfully visible on a big screen. But mainly in shots where there is moire or aliasing going on, and I"m really not pixelpeeping, it's that obvious.

[Bert Bouwmeester]

The digital zoom looks quite ok for me, but I'm not very happy the way it's implemented on the EA50. Why didn't Sony add (as with most even dirt cheap camera's) the digital zoom at the end of the optical zoom. If I want to use the digital zoom with the kit lens I can't use the optical zoom using the rockers on the camera and are forced to use the zoom on the lens itself. Even when connecting a wired remote the same thing applies.

For the rest I'm very happy with the EA50, coming from a VG20, did my first choir shoot last saturday with almost stunning results, video and soundwise, but a bit more flexible zoom options would make this cam even better. Hoping for a firmware update...

[Noa Put]

Ok, for those that say the digital zoom is ok to use, look at below shots and tell me what you think. This is what I mean with that aliasing or moire is being magnified if it's there, as long as that's not the case you will only end up with softer images but it can surely be very nasty. You can also see at the rooftop shot at the horizon how much softer the trees are getting, all detail is turned into mush. Also the branches on the first shot show a lot of macroblocking at 2x digital zoom in the native format on a big screen, looks plain ugly, the vimeo compression doesn't show the real extent of the problem.

Now if you ask yourself why in the rooftop shot the optical zoom shot did not display any moire (since I said that the digital zoom only magnifies moire if it's there), that was because at first I zoomed out and I saw moire appear, then I zoomed in digitally which is making this mess. In order to get the same focal length optically I didn't use the digital zoom but zoomed in optically to get the same frame as the 2x digital zoom and in that case there was no moire visible.

Sony nex ea50 moire and aliasing on Vimeo

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Bert Bouwmeester

Why didn't Sony add (as with most even dirt cheap camera's) the digital zoom at the end of the optical zoom

Those dirt cheap camera have this function only for people that want to have a 200x zoom on their camera and don't care about image quality. A digital zoom will have a very negative impact on image quality and there is a reason why Sony only added a 2x magnification. The digital zoom was mainly added to give prime lenses a zooming ability and in that case the optical zoom is not relevant.

Originally Posted by Bert Bouwmeester

did my first choir shoot last saturday with almost stunning results, video and soundwise

Don't know if you are allowed to show but I know there are users here, inclusing me, that would be very interested to see some sample shots. :)

[Robert Moran]

I am not so sure about that. When done right DZ is fine but I agree it can be a disaster if not done carefully as there shots whereby you cannot tell if dz was used.

[Noa Put]

My tests only show one thing clearly, IF there is moire or aliasing in your image the DZ will make matters much worse, that's all I"m saying (and showing).

It also always has a negative impact on resolution like very fine detail that just "disappears" like my video also shows but for certain shots, like those that have been showed here as well, it can look ok to a general viewer but I am sure that if you let me show it in the native format on a big screen I will pick most shots out that you did with a DZ..

So my end conclusion is, yes, you can use the digital zoom but double check using the 4 or 8 x magnifier to verify it looks ok, there is no fixing in post if you get it wrong.

[Robert Moran]

You're absolutely right. You have to be real careful or it will not work. This is why I use the loupe, whenever possible, in looking at stuff I am shooting because if the material contains the artifacts stated in your post, DZ will emphasize them big time.

[Bert Bouwmeester]

Not all movies are focussing on rooftops with straight lines. It will probably work fine (but not perfect) on faces of people.

About the video I shot: I promised the choir not to share the movie with the rest of the world. But I used a few nice tricks on this camera that I never accomplished with my VG20. I recorded the sound with the internal mike and the external one, and the mixed sound came out far greater than expected. I also forced the zoom speed to the lowest speed (speed 1) which delivered filmish zooming in (during the many solo's) and out (when the choir was dancing and singing). I only struggled a bit with the buttons, not yet entirely familiair with the EA50, because I had forgotten to take a little lamp with me to light the side of the camera when needed.

[Noa Put]

It has nothing to do with rooftops, the video only illustrates that if moire and aliasing is present that the DZ will magnify it to a level that it's not possible to fix in post anymore. The video also illustrates that the video gets softer when you use the DZ.

If that is acceptable for your production will vary from shot to shot and can only be decided by yourself or by the client you are working for. Some people are very happy with the image quality of their 200x DZ camera and others won't touch the DZ if they know if will have the slightest negative impact on image quality.

If I would do an interview on a tripod, I would never, ever touch the DZ if I have a prime lens attached but move the camera to a position so the framing is correct. If I was doing a eng style interview going from person to person handheld I would probably would use it if I can't get into a position to get a good frame. I would however check for any aliasing or moire patterns (in clothing f.i.) using the magnifier to be sure I was not creating any issues.

[Robert Moran]

Attached is a 300mm DXed shot of the moon (2 X 300mm = 600mm) reduced from a 16mb still. AHAIK, there is no real artifacts in the pix.

[Robert Moran]

Here's another of a dead tree using the kit lens and DZ to the max.

[Tom Van den Berghe]

never tested the digital zoom on the stocklens. Next week a have a stage event to film.
I only have the panasonic hc-x920 with 25x intelligent zoom for closer shots.

For stage you need 20x zoom. In the past I had the sony hxr-nx5 I used for this (not mine) This worked great.

Just tested the digital zoom on the stocklens in low light against the X920. (with some light in the background, like a stage)
My first test says the sony has better low noise! Always thought (and read in reviews) the little panasonic was one of the best consumer camcorder in low light. The sony is a bit less sharper but less noise.

Will test this further but at this moment I will use the digital zoom for the close ups next week.

[Steven Digges]

Tom,

I hope you have enough light to stay away from the gain. Noa keeps saying it (and so do I) but some guys really seem to want magic from that DZ. The problem is in the gain. DZ magnifies everything in the image.

Steve

[Aaron Jones Sr.]

I did a test with the Sony 50mm Prim Lens. this is quite old but I hope it may help someone looking to see the difference using the optical zoom:

NEX EA50 Digital Zoom Test - YouTube

[Noa Put]

I have to disagree with you on this Aaron, the digital zoom on the ea50 is about as bad as it gets, especially on the stocklens, it is somewhat usable on sharp primelenses and in some case many might not even see but the digital zoom for sure magnifies any artifacts by a large amount, with artifacts I"m talking about moire and aliasing.

Here is a test I did a year ago which shows how bad it can get, my conclusion was, never use the digital zoom, unless you really need to.

start looking from 00:20 where you can how bad it can get

Vimeo