Steves FZ30 review is up :)

[boyzo]

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/fz30.html

Not read it yet.

[Leberwurstsaft]

As I expected, the Review is again taken from the previous Lumix FZ camera, the FZ20, and then altered. The Problem with that is, that there are some specifications mixed up with those from the FZ 20, like " 8-megapixel effective CCD for images up to 2560 x 1920 pixels" and " Shutter speeds from 1/2000 to 8 seconds "...
Also pictures from the display are taken from the FZ20 Review (like on the second page, the manual focus display screenshot: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_...c_manfocus.jpg). I really hope to see this fixed soon, because there is a big change in resolution of these displays.
And all that, after such a long time since the camera has been introduced.

But, ignoring these things, the review is quite useful. Thanks.

[Nizidramanii]

I agree with Leberwurstsaft. I read that review and then read the FZ-20 review (because I'm interested in both cameras) and I felt like I was reading a Xerox copy. It doesn't seem like there was a whole lot of effort put into it.

I do like that he included a video sample with the sample images. That helps a lot in determining the quality of a camera's video features, which is often ignored by camera reviewers.

[steve]

Thanks for pointing out the obvious errors, I hope we got them all fixed now. I would love to be able to spend a month per camera when reviewing these things, unfortunately we don't have that kind of time. Yes, we absolutely do "clone" one review to another when the cameras are as close as a FZ20 and FZ30- at least as far as the first four pages go, this is typical boilerplate stuff and we only change the pics and specs, etc. The conclusion text and sample images are what 90% of the readers want to see and this is the real "meat" of our reviews.

To give you an idea of what it is like to be me we currently have 26 cameras in the process of being reviewed. We will barely finish this before we start the process all over again for 2006 with the CES show in January and the PMA convention at the end of February. The average "sales lifespan" of a digital camera is maybe six months before it is outmoded by a newer model. How much time can be given to each review is variable depending on the camera's feature set, sales price and market segment. We do the best with what we have guys - there's only three of us reviewers here and I do a lot more than just reviews. (I just spent ten minutes of my day explaining all this to you...)

[Leberwurstsaft]

Alright Steve, I fully understand you. I just wanted to point out the most obvious "bugs" in that report. I know that big portions of older reviews are being reused everywhere. Personally I wouldn't like to do your work, it would overwhelm me in a second. So thanks for what you are doing!

[msantos]

steve escribió:

To give you an idea of what it is like to be me we currently have 26 cameras in the process of being reviewed.

Thanks for all your work, your help, and for spending your time here with us!!!

If you want, send me half of those 26 cameras, and I'll be happy to help you !!

[rduve]

Thanks for your review, Steve, and your recommendation of this great camera. There was no mention of your review about the unacceptable noise levels at high ISO's that were pointed out in dpreview and dcresource. I was especially looking forward to your review to see your take on this before committing to this camera. How would you rate the noise issue? A non-issue as many of the FZ30 owners here insist?

[Nizidramanii]

Maybe Panasonic fixed the initial noise issue on the FZ30? I think it would be possible for Panasonic to realize that there was a noise problem in the camera and then slip a simple fix into the later production models. I don't recall seeing too many members here complaining a whole lot about the FZ30's noise. All digital cameras get noisy at high ISOs.

[boyzo]

Thanks Steve very good review and as a user of the FZ30 I have too agree with you, this is a super camera.

Its the Penultimate FLUZI.

Pixel peepers will need to decide for themselves

John

[rduve]

Nizidramanii wrote:

Maybe Panasonic fixed the initial noise issue on the FZ30? I think it would be possible for Panasonic to realize that there was a noise problem in the camera and then slip a simple fix into the later production models. I don't recall seeing too many members here complaining a whole lot about the FZ30's noise. All digital cameras get noisy at high ISOs.

Naturally all digital cameras, especially with tiny sensors, get noisier as ISO increases. However, if you look at the samples from the FZ30 on dpreview or dcresource, as well as some postings here in the Panasonic forums (e.g. Lovelife's postings of his jazz photos), the FZ30's noise issueappears to beparticularly ugly. Maybe, it is a processingand not a sensor issue (in which case theRAW images would come out less noisy, right?), but the samplephotos at ISO 400 look like they were painted with watercolor on cottage cheese. (See: http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/?gal...cfz30_samples/). It appears to me that this is worse, not better, in the FZ30 than in the FZ20. I own the FZ20, and I love it. Those sample images at ISO 400 were the only reason why I have not upgraded. If Panasonicimproved onthat issue since the initial release, that of course would be fantastic. Maybe some of you recent owners can post some new high ISO pics.

PS: Check out my new galleries at http://euromaninla.zoto.com/galleries.

Rainer