Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 4, 2006, 6:35 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Narmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,813
Default

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Pa...50/page6.shtml

Good review, but please read the conclusion interesting point (from half of the page , downwards in the link above).

There are als omany encouraging tests in the 7 parts of the "RESULTS" section

Narmer

http://digilander.libero.it/peribsen/indice.htm


Narmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 5, 2006, 2:05 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

i agree with everything they said, except the 'recommended' bit
i can understand someone buying it knowing the issues
and the unmentioned TTL flash is a step up for a camera with noise issues
but for me its like 1 step forward, 2 steps back

Riley
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2006, 6:55 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
rhermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
Default

It confirms everything said in this forum and the 'recommended' bit is just the same as how I feel about the camera.

One of the things I like about the camera labs reviews is the way they talk about the reason or need to upgrade to another camera and how it is placed in the competition.

When you look at the reviews for canon d400, sony alfa, you always find at the back of the review how they compare to the previous models or the competition. I miss this here, or does this mean there is no real competition.

Ronny
rhermans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2006, 8:31 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
genece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,111
Default

I really feel no one wants to admit to the fact that the FZ cameras are the best ultrazooms made......they are not the best camera made, but they are without a doubt the best ultrazoom(IMHO).
genece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2006, 8:07 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 28
Default

genece wrote:
Quote:
I really feel no one wants to admit to the fact that the FZ cameras are the best ultrazooms made......they are not the best camera made, but they are without a doubt the best ultrazoom (IMHO).
Amen. The Fluzis are the creme' de la creme' of "Bridge" cameras. Want a cheaper camera? Smaller? Want "more" camera and wide angle?: go DSLR.

Otherwise, be extremely confident that when you "Strap on a Fluzi", it doesn't get any better .
AlAsaad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2006, 11:10 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

Interesting review. But no real surprises. I contemplated for quite some time on which camera to go for, and ended up buying the FZ30 to add to my FZ1 and FZ4. I really couldn't see the advantages of the 50 over the 30 myself. IQ was similar, resolution gain in the 50 over 30 is negligible, and ergonomics good on both. Only thing I'd like to see on the 30 was a quicker change for the iso, but that's not a big deal. One thing the reviews don't delve into too much it seems is the camera's capabilities when shooting in RAW. That's the format I intend to use. Mind you, I guess 90%+ of people use jpg, so maybe it just isn't a large issue with the reviewers....cheers......Don
thekman620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2006, 11:41 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

so is using raw a fix for the way too much NR ?

Riley
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2006, 9:13 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Narmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,813
Default

Yes rRiley, it is.

But the problem is that you'll need a lot of space and time (although I am one who does a lot of PP on my FZ20 pics).

Furthermore you'll need to correct other features which VIII takes care of, like contrast, Wb, CA... some of them are even harder to correct than NR...
Again, the solution would be to have more than 3 levels of in-camera settings for jpgs... And also note that IMO (Although I have NO EXPERIENCE with Raws) this file format is much more effective on larger CCDs cameras, for on small ccds ones, noise comes up at every large change in colors, contrasts, brightness....
Narmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2006, 12:38 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

I have done quite a bit of RAW processing with my dslr, and am looking forward to seeing how the FZ30 does. Yes, you will see all the noise in its splendid glory, but at least you can control the amount of NR that is applied in pp. That in itself, at least to me, is a good reason to shoot RAW. The less in camera processing, the better as far as I'm concerned. Also, the ability to control the white balance, and increased control of dynamic range is also a big plus. Maybe I'll find that shooting jpeg's is better in an all in one digital, but I really doubt that. On dpreview's resolution testing, the RAW file showed better detail and resolution than the jpegs. I'll be very interested to see the results and comparisons in real world shooting between the 30's jpeg's and RAW files. Now if they'd just deliver the da__ed thing!!..cheers.....Don.
thekman620 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


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 1:03 PM.