FZ-20 and time-lapse photography

[Divine_Madcat]

So, i am under the impression that the FZ20 can do timelapse photography, correct? If so, any advise on how to do it?

Over the summer, i am going to go around with the camera, and i know some lovely places with really scenic streams/rivers. And, i would like (to try at least) to get them time-lapsed, so you can see the flow effect.

Anyway, any advice would be great, thanks!

EDIT: ok, i am now even more confused. According to Steve's, the camera can: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/fz20.html

but according to DPreview, it cannot:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Panasonic/panasonic_dmcfz20.asp

Help!

[Tangomango]

I think DPREVIEW defines time-lapse as a series of pre-programmed shots at predtermined intervals. Whereas your desire to capture streams (or even traffic trails) can be achieved via a slower shutter speed. FZ20 allows a maximum of 8 seconds and does not have the much missed bulb function (i.e. an option that allows shutter to remain open for infinite periods of time).

All sai, I think you can some great pictures of steams and traffic trails with your FZ20. Good Luck.

[Divine_Madcat]

I think DPREVIEW defines time-lapse as a series of pre-programmed shots at predtermined intervals. Whereas your desire to capture streams (or even traffic trails) can be achieved via a slower shutter speed. FZ20 allows a maximum of 8 seconds and does not have the much missed bulb function (i.e. an option that allows shutter to remain open for infinite periods of time).

All sai, I think you can some great pictures of steams and traffic trails with your FZ20. Good Luck.

Hmm.. see, i tried the 8sec shutter, and everything either came out pure white, or (using exposure compensation), painfully bright. Now, my test subject was a fountain, but i really didnt expect it to overexpose like that (on an 8 aperature as well).

Any extra advice?

[ajay67]

you mean you did 8 sec on a bright day? i thought those longer than 1 sec are only for night photography, not for blurry/moving image capture. for water flow effect, a fraction of a sec will do (1/25 or may be a little slower? not too sure) becoz water falls faster than that!

[Divine_Madcat]

Except a fraction of a second didnt see do to. Sure, it may be because of it being a fountian, it it still just seemed to capture it, rather than it flowing...

[jaynads]

Except a fraction of a second didnt see do to. Sure, it may be because of it being a fountian, it it still just seemed to capture it, rather than it flowing...
Part of your problem is definitely the light. It is best to photograph at the start or end of the day; the light is rosier and saturates most colors warmly, is bright enough to provide ample illumination, but also soft enough to allow for longer shutter speeds. You should always "trust" your cameras meter to a point. Use it to determine the amount of light in your shot, and then adjust. For a longer exposure, play with shutter priority. Slowly decrease your shutter speed and watch your aperture open. When it hits f2.8, don't go any slower, as you'll start blowing out your highlights. You want no faster than 1/25 to make flowing water look smooth. Anything much longer than that (1 second is about as slow as you want to go) will cause other problems as background elements blur from the wind. Another option is a program like image stacker that allows you to take several pictures and create a time-laps exposure out of them. I've never used it, but the examples were amazing. It's mainly used to show star trails (by combining, say, 10 - 8 second exposures), or to combine several exposures of a dark setting to brighten it without any noise. http://www.tawbaware.com/imgstack.htm . If it's too bright to get a long exposure, you could combine a few sharp exposures and should get the results you're looking for. Otherwise, wait for an overcast day.

Good luck!

[genece]

I think your term timelapse may be not what you want to do.
It seems you are trying for the silky or milky water look.
If that is correct you need a ND filter and for medium light maybe a ND4 will work but for brighter conditions a ND 8 may be necessary, it seems like something in the area of 1/4 second is enough shutter speed.
I have used a ND4 and a polarizer at times.

http://www.betterphoto.com/article.asp?id=26




.

[Divine_Madcat]

I think your term timelapse may be not what you want to do.
It seems you are trying for the silky or milky water look.
If that is correct you need a ND filter and for medium light maybe a ND4 will work but for brighter conditions a ND 8 may be necessary, it seems like something in the area of 1/4 second is enough shutter speed.
I have used a ND4 and a polarizer at times.

http://www.betterphoto.com/article.asp?id=26




.

Thanks for the link.. exactly what i needed.. :cool: