Advice on buying a lens for my camera

[Treehawk]

Hi,
I currently use a Pansonic DMC-FZ18 camera and I am looking to buy a lens that can turn pictures like this:

into something more like this:

I may be wrong in thinking that a lens can improve the sharpness and quality of photos and I just might have to buy a better camera. I am completely new to this.

[MartynA]

The lens on the FZ18 gives you the equivalent of 28-504mm in 35mm terms.

You could add a converter to the lens, but I frankly don't think it would be worth it.

I used to use (and still have) an FZ30 and for that I purchased a Raynox 2.2x converter, which I have rarely used. The reason being that, in the majority of cases, a cropped image taken with the camera produced a much better result than the camera with the teleconverter.

Eventually I came to realise that the best solution to getting good photos was not getting a bigger and bigger lens, but trying to get closer and closer to the subject!

Martyn

[Treehawk]

I have also been working on my approaching skills but the picture I posted above showed a Stonechat only about 3-4 metres away. Thanks for the reply. I am still not sure if its better to buy a lens or a new camera (I think my camera is the best it gets in the price range I can afford).

[Pete Collins]

I use an Olympus TCON 1.7 converter with my FZ18 and I'm quite happy with the results. As with Panasonic's own converter, you also need to buy an adaptor ring.

But I agree with Martyn that the best thing is to get as close as possible to the subject.

[billybob99]

I used to use a tcon1.7 on my kodak dx6490 before I got my dslr and used to get good results

[Treehawk]

I really do see what you mean about approaching the subject, I found some really tame White-crowned Sparrows a few days ago and the pictures just showed the details perfect (birds were about <1m away from me).

[DanJeffery]

Treehawk

When you say buy a new lens, I presume you are talking about an extra attachment that you attach to the front of your existing lens? This may magnify things, but extra glass between the subject and the sensor will only degrade image quality, the only question is by how much it will degrade it.

I quite agree that getting closer would help things. But there are a couple of other points. Your image is under exposed. Does your camera show histograms? If so, read up about how to use them to assess exposure.

Can your camera caputure in RAW format? RAW will allow for better correction of minor exposure errors, on computer.

And lastly, I have taken the liberty of fiddling with your image a little in Photoshop, but I won't post the results until/unless you give me your permission.

Firslty I corrected the under exposure and lack of tonal range with levels.

And then I used the plug-in Noise Ninja to help with the noise that is noticeable in the background.

[Treehawk]

I would be intrested to see what you did. Go ahead and post it.
Um, RAW format? Let me check *runs off*.

[DanJeffery]

The original image.


Levels applied in Photoshop (but you could use Photoshop elements which I believe costs under £100 or even something like GIMP which is free)


Levels applied and then noise removed with Noise Ninja, a plug in that I purchased for Photoshop.

So the photograph could be improved in four ways:
1. Getting closer.
2. Better exposure
3. Post production
4. A new camera (?a SLR/DSLR)

Some of the above options cost more than others!

[Treehawk]

I forgot to check the Raw thing Ok so the settings for pictures are:

v
---
---

v
---

RAW

and the last one is RAW +Jpeg I think. I normally use the first one. I already have Adobe Photoshop CS2 (which has never been used), not sure if this will still create a better effect? Oh and what you have done to those pictures is quite amazing I wonder what it would do to my best shots.