Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Nikon

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 12, 2005, 5:53 PM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8

I know, I know. This has been hammered near to death. I'm still on the fence though. Can anyone point me to some pic comparisons in at/near full tele between the 8800 and fz20 (especially in lower light conditions; e.g. distant trees at dusk). On the Pana sites, they say the fz20 takes much better photos at tele due to the speed (i.e., F/2.8) but on the Nikon forums I get another story. I've read the reviews and threads but still feel like I'm missing something to push me one way or the other. Thanks!!!!!!
seb is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 12, 2005, 9:53 PM   #2
Senior Member
Walter C's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA USA
Posts: 7,589


It is unlikely that one of us would own both those cameras. If not, I would make a suggestion that could better answer your question.

Take a memory card to your camera store and ask to take some pictures there using both cameras. Take the same shots with each camera, take the memory card home and compare the shots on your computer to your heart's content.

BTW, is low-light photo situations your primary usage?

Let us know what you found out? About the best we can do is share our photos on this forum and let you see what the 8800 is capable of.

Walter C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2005, 7:03 AM   #3
Junior Member
pdlstl's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 20

I had an FZ10. Was unhappy with low-light shots. My buddy bought an FZ20 (which he loves). When I was considering a new camera, he suggested the that I go ahead and spring for the 8800.

Bottom line, an FZ20 owner pointed me toward the 8800 although he's happy with his FZ20. And BTW, he's loving my tele shots with the 8800!

Also, it's my opinion that the Nikon has better glass in it.

Just my 2ยข...

pdlstl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2005, 4:22 PM   #4
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 62

This site lets you compare two pics side by sidefrom two different cameras. You'll notice more noise in the Panasonic pics and I thought the pics weren't as sharp as the 8800. http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

I got a chance to play with the Panasonic camera. It felt like a toy, IMHO compared to the 8800.It has a plastic body while the 8800 has a magnesium alloy body. The manual focus on the Panny was not very usable but much better the 8800 which is not usable at all. But heck I would rather let the camera do the focusing so I can concentrate on framing the shot. You'llalso lose some megapixels with the Panny, a swivel out LCD and the ability for the camera to gain up in low light situations.This means that the LCD will get dark in low light situations and you'll not be able to frame your shot. That said the Pannyis an excellent cameraand has garnered many a great review. Itisfaster then the 8800 - shot to shot,and has a larger zoom.I wanted an Ultra zoom with great glassand I belive the 8800 has that and feels great in my hands. To each his own. I can't wait to see the new Luminix line when it's released.
traderfjp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2005, 8:46 PM   #5
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6

I had a different experience. I ended up selling my 8800 and getting FZ20. Two main reasons (not related to tele pic quality). autofocus on 8800 was just a disaster. Takes too long and hunts around all the time in low light. Action shots, forget about that in 8800. I tried manual focusing it and manual focus on 8800 was just a joke. The other was takes close to 12 seconds to write a RAW file! It didnt matter whether I had a faster card since the camera was taking up all that time not letting you do anything else while writing. For me 8800 was a bad experience. BTW, I am a 15 year fan of Nikon. This one was a disapointment for me.

If you do not care autofocus time, write speed, lousy manual focusing capability go with 8800. Otherwise give FZ20 some thoughts it's a great camera for the money. Negatives?? Nikon had zoom capability while taking video clip which I really liked. FZ20 does not have that. FZ20 is a little lighter and feels a bit on the ligher side (proSUMER vs PROsumer) than Nikon. Manual exposure setting is through button not dial.

After all, it is your call whatever fits your needs. I strongly suggest that you TRY OUT both before you buy. 8800 at Ritz and FZ20 at Circuit City
leeyx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 20, 2005, 10:06 PM   #6
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 8

Nobody mentioned the price difference. At my suggestion, my niece bought an 8800 for $730 at BestBuy (had to show Abe's of Maines price to have them match it). I bought an FZ10 a year ago for $460. I like the 8800 better than the FZ10 (or FZ20) but it costs more. It all depends on your needs and how much you want to spend.
mike65401 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2005, 9:15 PM   #7
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 24

Repeat topic (one of them anyway), but here is my post:

vitiris is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:46 PM.