Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Panasonic / Leica (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/panasonic-leica-29/)
-   -   FZ150 worth upgrading to? (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/panasonic-leica-29/fz150-worth-upgrading-191983/)

csa Sep 14, 2011 3:56 PM

FZ150 worth upgrading to?
 
I love my FZ40 so much! But want an additional camera that would be a step up. So would the FZ150 be worth considering; or the GF3.

I love macro & landscape the best.

Square one Sep 14, 2011 4:10 PM

Personally, with the choice of those two, it would have to be GF3.

FZ150 offers flash hot shoe, full HD movie option, faster focus, tilting screen and a few other tweaks over the FZ40/45

Where as the GF3 offers a larger sensor, the option of changing lenses just like a DSLR without the added size and weight of the pentaprism and mirror..... the doorway to lenses and accessories to your hearts content

laurel99 Sep 14, 2011 4:21 PM

I can't speak to either one of those cameras specifically, but...

I bought an FZ35 in April 2010 and used it for a year. Really happy with it, but I wanted a more advanced camera with a larger sensor so I got an Olympus EPL1 with the 14-42 kit lens this spring. I've enjoyed the Pen, but was struggling a bit with it ergonomically sometimes, so last month, I bought a Pany G2 body on closeout and I am loving it. I bought the Pany 14-45 lens, quickly followed by the 100-300 (already had the 45-200).

For me, personally, it was the right upgrade progression and I'm really glad I went from a superzoom to an ILC.

Laurie

csa Sep 14, 2011 4:22 PM

Thanks Square One; that's sort of where I was leaning; it would be a great companion to my FZ40.

csa Sep 15, 2011 12:02 PM

Laurie; thanks also for your experience. I might look to see if any G2 bodies are still available.

csa Sep 16, 2011 1:38 PM

One other question; if I did go with the FZ150 (because of cost/G models); mine is 14mp, and the FZ150 is 12mp. What are the disadvantage/advantage of this? Is more mp better for image quality?

Square one Sep 16, 2011 2:52 PM

Up to a certain point more mp equals better image quality.

In practice, if you pack the pixels too close in a CCD sensor not enough photons hit each pixel and you get noise problems.

In a point and shoot camera such as the FZ series, the sensor is about 0.25 inch square, and it can be seen that around 8 million pixels is the 'sweet number', above that noise creeps in, below that 8 X 10 inch print outs is about the maximum without getting pixelation problems

Side note. This is why Sigma use the Foveon sensor system. In simple terms it is built like film. Instead of having the pixels on a single layer and using a mix of Red, Green and Blue detectors the Foveon sensor has a layer of Red sensors, then a layer of Green senors stuck on top them, and then a layer blue sensors stuck on top of the green senors. The advantage is that the sensor elements can be larger (three times larger) and collect more light as a result and noise goes down as a result.

csa Sep 16, 2011 3:45 PM

Thanks Square One!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:56 PM.