1)more soft image has less resolution
so if you dont like soft and sharp check the resolution charts at 28 and 300 to see for yourself that 300mm is softer AND has less resolution (less detail is being captured).
anyway thats not really my point. Let's see a full resolution sample and decide. Some will like it some will not. Really dont care a lot about the extenders
2)in any case i think that 300mm and 9mp is a nice tele and a big resolution to offer crop when a more tele lens is needed
3)and i also belive that if 300mm is not enough you should buy a panasonic fz30 with a much more sharp 420 mm lens and with image stabalisation
4)and if you want video with a 660mm lens then the result will be silly without image stabalisation or a tripod
5)in any case i am very angry with fuji that although its sensor is clearly less noisy so it gains 1-2 stops by raising the iso it finnaly looses this advantage since
a)its lens is darker (f:2,8 and 5,6 at tele instead of a constant 2,8 or a 2,8-3,5)
b)it offers no image stabalisation
So if we compare the panasonic fz30 and the fuji we should not compare same iso at both, since panasonic has a more bright lens and has image stabalisation so if at tele fuji would need 1600 iso panasonic would need 200-400 iso due to the more bright lens and image stabalisation.
so go on and compare 1600 fuji and 200-400 panasonic because in real life where fuji would have to use 1600 asa so as not to blur by camera movement due to low light panasonic would have to use 200-400
I am no panasonic fan. No way, I just wait for fuji to put a brighter lens and image stabalisation so as to KEEP THE ADVANTAGE IT HAS AT HIGHER ISO.Because now its wasted by the lack of image stabalisation and a bright lens