The Panasonic TM900 Users Thread

[Andy Wilkinson]

Bottom of page 11 area for anyone wanting the details...

[George Taylor]

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

George - as nobody has answered directly your query about the 660PRO+900 I'd urge you to try before you buy or get a sale or return deal. This lens does have a hood thread at the front (note I don't call it a filter thread) which could be useful in Africa. Peter's HD7000 was Raynox's answer to those who wanted a full zoom-through, but it 's less powerful and distorts more.

Polarisors are so difficult to replicate in post that I'd admit that it's the one filter you could make good use of in your travels. As their effect is zilch on axis with the sun and max at 90 degrees from the sun you could well find that the pluses outweigh the minuses.

The downsides are:

1) It's very difficult to find multi-coated versions - and would you have bought the 900 if it was plain for all to see that the front element (THE most important one) was completely uncoated?

2) Continuity headaches. Shot A is fine, Turn 90 degrees and shot B looks like a different month, let alone day.

tom.

Thanks, Tom. This is good advice. Can you clarify your comment about the Raynox hood thread vs. filter thread? Do you mean the lens will take a hood but not a screw-on filter? That's important to me because I already own a B+H 72mm circular polarizer, which itself has an outside thread so that, presumably, I could also attach a hood, so long as I can attach the filter to the lens.

Thanks......George

[Tom Hardwick]

Hi George, what I mean about the Raynox having a hood thread and not a filter thread is that tom-here advocated using hoods at all times and in all places but using filters only when *absolutely* necessary.

Your TM900 has a min focal length of 3.45mm (1/8 inch). You add a 0.6x converter and your focal length is now a minuscule 2.27mm. Hold your finger-tips that far apart and marvel. At the same time realise that at those sort of focal lengths *everything* will be in focus, from here to infinity and beyond, almost regardless of the aperture used.

So what does this mean? I'll tell you - it means both sides of your polarising filter will be rendered pretty sharp on your footage. It also means any tiny imperfections on the Rayon's front element are likewise nearly in focus.

This is fine when the front element (filter or lens) are in shadow - well hooded or pointing away from light sources. So yes - you can physically fit your polarisor on top of your Raynox (beware vignetting) on top of your 900. But you've now added 6 extra elements to the what - 15? of the 900, an increase of 45%. The front element is most probably uncoated. Mr Leica would be horrified.

But if it gets you the pictures you want go for it.

tom.

[George Taylor]

Thanks again, Tom. It's good to know the filter on top of the w/a lens is possible. Since I already own the filter, I'll need only experiment to see if it's actually feasible. I'll report back on my results in due course.
George

[Barry Sampson]

Originally Posted by Mark Rosenzweig

Here is one more downloadable video. This uses a lot of zooming and panning, as is relevant for action sports. Also, Intelligent zoom is used at times, so that some shots are 700mm (equivalent). Harsh light conditions, -1 exposure and ND filter, 1/60th shutter, 108060p.

Good footage Mark, I did some yesterday in my garden and the colours over expose somewhat, had the camera in iA so must learn to use the adjustments!

In my footage, yellow & red flowers were really exaggerated and pink and white clothing lost detail so I think I'll try underexposing next time it is very sunny. You say you had a ND filter, is that an aftermarket one or the built in one you are referring to? If aftermarket, what one?

Regarding filters, does adding a CPL or ND filter interfere with the optics in any way; only 1 filter fitted, not both, and what does the ND filter do exactly [don't have time to look it up at the moment - just added that as it came to mind whilst typing so quick replies welcome]!

On a side note, I discovered that my old Panasonic charger for my NVGS5 charges the HS900 batteries too, so a saving for me there :0)

Thanks

Barry

[Tom Hardwick]

Your 'side note' Barry made me reach for the panasonic charger that came with my 1999 Panasonic MX300 MiniDV camcorder (it's a VSK0592 if you want to source them) and it too charges my 900's VBN battery quite happily.

All the pins line up which would suggest Panasonic are happy that these two components should be allowed to mate up, even though the BVN stipulates that it must only be charged with the specified charger (and therefore needs to remain on camera, disabling the cam from service).

tom.

[Barry Sampson]

That's good Tom,

My charger is the Panasonic VSK0581, I just happened to look at it when I had the "hang on a minute, I wonder" moment!

To be honest, I was wary at first but it did line up nicely and the charge light came on so I figured it must like it; I let it charge a bit and it was fine. I checked the measurements on the supplied charger and the only difference was that the one supplied has a slightly higher wattage output when charging, not sure what effect that has; maybe takes longer to charge with my old charger perhaps? [not a genius as you may guess by that last statement]!

Thanks

Barry

[Mark Rosenzweig]

"In my footage, yellow & red flowers were really exaggerated and pink and white clothing lost detail so I think I'll try underexposing next time it is very sunny. You say you had a ND filter, is that an aftermarket one or the built in one you are referring to? If aftermarket, what one?

Regarding filters, does adding a CPL or ND filter interfere with the optics in any way; only 1 filter fitted, not both, and what does the ND filter do exactly"

Yes, then TM900 overexposes in bright light, badly. As the optimal shutter speed is 1/60th of a second, one needs to really block out light. If apertures are closed down that can sometimes lead to diffraction problems. So, an ND filter basically blocks light allowing one to use wider apertures. That's all it does. One should use a good-quality filter. I used :
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/120431-REG/B_W_66011250_46mm_102_Neutral.html

In this video, mostly in very bright light, auto mode blew out all flowers. Setting manual iris to eliminate zebra stripes resulted in rich color (1/60th shutter):

A Short Trip to NYC using the Panasonic TM900 on Vimeo

[Roger Shealy]

Mark,

I used a regular polarizing filter on the TM900 and it worked beautifully. I'm sure a CPL will work fine also, although I read several articles that a standard polarizor is preferred if it doesn't interfere with the metering. I didn't see any negative effects and the interferance is typically due to a reflecting mirror as on a DSLR.

[Mark Rosenzweig]

This video was made with a cpl, exploiting its main advantage - dealing with reflections. I did not have any exposure issues, and it was really effective in minimizing reflection and glare through the glass cases that are the norm in museums:

One Day in London with the Panasonic TM900: The British Museum on Vimeo

[Peter Riding]

Just a heads up if you're looking to fix a polariser to the TM900 or TM700 (same size threads).

If you also shoot with dSLRs you've probably already got various polarisers but probably not of the very narrow 46mm width that the TM's take. The answer is to use step-up rings to adapt to your larger filters.

I have 72mm and 77mm polarisers to match my Canon L glass but I was not able to find a 46-72 or a 46-77 step up ring. However if you go 46-67 then 67-72 (or 67-77) they work fine and without any vignetting at widest angle.

In the UK you can get these rings from Speed Graphic Home - for the widest range of photo accessories

Oh and one other little tidbit that I don't recall reading in the thread: the backlight compensation function works really well. Therefore you may not need to bother delving into the manual exposure functions. Its not a sticky function though - switching the cam off resets it to OFF.

Pete

[Mark Rosenzweig]

Thanks for the tip on the step-up rings.

But I am puzzled by this: "the backlight compensation function works really well. Therefore you may not need to bother delving into the manual exposure functions."

Backlight compensation as I understand it increases exposure. The problem with the TM900 is that it overexposes in sunlight. So I do not see how the overexposure button helps you avoid manual mode where it is most needed. Of course, it help when there is backlight! Maybe you jus meant in that scenario, not generally?

[Tom Hardwick]

I'm with you Mark. The backlight button adds an arbitrary 1.5 stops or so to the exposure so is like a stopped clock - right only twice in 24 hours. For me the spotlight button (does the 900 have this facility?) is a far more useful tool as it ensures that highlights don't over-expose.

tom.

[Peter Riding]

Mark, yep sorry - it was a general tidbit to add to the sum of knowledge in the thread rather than a specific recommendation on how to deal with perceived over exposure in sunny conditions.

Tom, I wouldn't say the backlight compensation function is arbitary at all. I've used it dozens of times in scenarios where the compensation required has varied from under a stop to a heck of a lot more (as measured with my two 5DII's with which I shoot stills at the same time) and its performance has been impressive. Same goes for the TM700. Neither appear to be adding a fixed value for compensation.

Its big advantage is that you can be ready to shoot very quickly indeed rather than delving into the manual function menus. And it will of course adjust itself if the amount of backlighting changes such as if clouds temporarily obscure the sun; therefore it works well for a locked down unattended cam.

Pete

[Tom Hardwick]

Interesting! I didn't realise the 900 used iBLC (intelligent backlight compensation) but of course - with a camera as clever and competent as this, why on earth not? Thanks for the info Peter. But I can only access this iBLC using the camera's remote?