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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 27, 2004, 12:58 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Charlie46227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 295
Default

I LOVE this camera now that I learned the rudimentaries of WB (and how to set it correctly), about knowing your lighting situation. I say it is not 'point and shoot' in that the average joe who has a cheapo basic 35 mm point and shoot camera with little or no zoom will have to learn a little about lighting etcetera or they will think the camera can't do as well indoors (as I mistakenly thought), when in fact it does reallly well IF you use the proper settings. To me 'point and shoot' means that's all you do. Out of the box experience, my old Epson 870 was better indoors but after making just one or two easy adjustments, the Z10 as you say 'ROCKS !' and does a much better job. As I said in my original post, after an adjustment or two it IS point and shoot and easy to get great shots.

Charlie
Charlie46227 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2004, 1:17 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,748
Default

georgez opinion

I appreciate the photos that you offered. Your white balance is excellent. In fact, it is "so" excellent that people may ignore the other areas that I myself have discovered with the FZ10, it's inability to control blur as well as focus when it comes to moving subjects.

This camera's greatest power and potential and strength is it's zoom. It doesn't even compare to the Canon's ability to focus in low light primarily because the Canon has a focus assist light. However, if I wanted my Rebel to get as close as the FZ10 to a subject I'd need 600 plus mm of glass, which would set me back further than I care to go at this time. That's why I like owning it. It costed me less than 1/4 of what a good lens for the Rebel would have cost me for doing the same sort of thing. It's clear in your photos that you have not zoomed in as close as you could have "optically" and I understand why, because I own this camera. Had you zoomed in more, which you probably did, the blur would have been even worse than those that you posted.

There is no reason to attempt to justify a purchase of the FZ10 for things like basketball. It just doesn't do a good job, as your posts demonstrate (if a rational person disregards your excellent white balance they will be forced to focus on the blur and out-of-focus remainder).

I love my FZ10, and will use it for what it's good for: outdoors shots from a distance.

I think you did a wonderful job of demonstrating the potential of the FZ10 to record basketball in an average way, which gives it even more credibility as a purchase, because it isn't useless in that sort of situation. However, nobody should ever purchase this camera if their ultimate goal is to get shots in a basketball court. The FZ10's forte is "not" in that area. I've gathered a few relatively decent basketball shots with the FZ10, but to get close to the expression, the face, and the action, it's not easy. I appreciate that you didn't use a flash and that you were honest about the lighting in the gym you shot at - it was perhaps better than average.

I have G5, FZ10, and Rebel, and test all 3, learning to love all three for "different" yet equally valuable reasons:

http://www.brrd.ab.ca/nnorway/carrweb/index.htm

Cheers
Normcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2004, 2:54 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 10
Default

Hello Norm-
Thanks for your input.
Please keep in mind that this site is
Quote:
billed as the consumers best source of digital camera information and news
Although I'm a bit of an enthusiast, my perspective is that of a consumer, part of the target audience. You, on the other hand, being digital technical instructer are clearly a professional photographer, or the equivalent. You have purchased - of otherwise obtained- in recent months an FZ10, G5, 300D and, I'd suspect several other cameras. My resources, on the other hand, just won't go to purchase all these cameras that you have access to. I just don't need them and they wouldn't be a wise investment for me. My perspective is totally different from yours; I'm clearly an amateur, a consumer and part of the primary target audience.
Now, lets talk basketball shots, your obvious proclivity. I, too, have a grade schooler who plays basketball, soccer, swims etc. I'd like to get a few good shots of her in the gym, palying soccer, etc. As we both know, the outdoor shots aren't the issue. As for the gym situation, my other point and shooter, my Kodak 6340 (a camera which I like very much, by the way) just can't cope with the challenge of action shots, with or without flash, from the stands, indoors. The FZ10 in a similar situation, from my perspective as a amateur, can take a good shot. I would have to disagree with your assessment that you can't get good results under those conditions. That's not to say that it will likely take excellent shots either. But my assessment is, yes, better than average. You're simply too limited by the slow shutter speeds necessary to achieve usable light on your focal plane. What I would suggest to you, however, is that if you take your $999.00 stock 300D with its 3X lens, no tripod, no flash (as you know, flash isn't allowed in a game) and handheld in the stands- it's not a sure thing that your 300D will take a better shot than my $500.00 FX10- in a mean number of situations. Yes, you can surely get a faster shutter speed using ASA 800, but 1) can you hold it still enough and 2) after cropping to compensate for short focal length, will your picture have enough resolution to be comparable.
The indoor basketball shots you've posted so far are beautiful, but all have been made with the benefit of a strong flash. News flash-Norm! In an NCAA game, they'll warn you once and take your camera or eject you if you keep flashing during a game. Your choices for shots from the stands are: 1- a 300D, or equivalent with a long stabilized zoom at a cost of $2,000 plus and a gold medal in weightlifting to haul it all around or 2) an FZ10. Prove me wrong, Norm. I haven't seen it so far in your multifarious posts.

Now as to where you're getting all these cameras and what they'll give you next....
georgez opinion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2004, 7:41 PM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 55
Default

:thumbsup:

excellent views and opinions from both sides.

As far as I am concerned, a normal regular amateur P&S photographer, the camera works great!!! even in the low lights of my living room(60w in a lamp shade in 25x15 room), where most of my pictures are taken.

one thing I have learned is this:

when taking pictures in low light with the built in flash, put the camera in full auto mode and switch on Spot mode.

The flash output is very nicely controlled with the subject bieng prefectly exposed and the results are great for 4x6 prints, from a noise perspective.
chiks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2004, 11:06 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,748
Default

Quote:
My perspective is totally different from yours; I'm clearly an amateur, a consumer and part of the primary target audience.
George:
Perhaps our perspectives are not so different as my main area of instruction has been videography and video editing as well as digital design. Still photography is quite new to me and at the moment remains a hobby that I just happen to be able to utilize at work occasionally.

The 3 cameras that I own belong to me and the burden of cost goes 100% to me; they are not work oriented tax deductible purchases. The school cameras are all low end consumer grade point-and-shoot, since that's all it takes to do yearbook photographs and general stuff.

My first purchase was a G5 a few months ago, which I bought because I wanted to begin to focus on shooting school sports and perhaps get some photos that could be used for our website or yearbook. My school is very sports oriented so I have a great opportunity to shoot (and flashes are allowed here so that isn't an issue). The G5 couldn't give me the quality that I wanted but it did one thing, it hooked me on digital photography. I thought the FZ10 would do the job for me and I wanted that optical 12x zoom regardless, so I bought that camera and I'm happy with it (for reasons other than indoor sports). When I get serious about something I get "very" serious about it and following much research it seemed clear to me that I needed an SLR format where I could pick and choose my lenses.

No matter how many rulers I see with points of reference, and no matter how many lens tests I read, I will ultimately make a decision on quality and value by how the tool performs it's ascribed duty (in this case taking action photographs that are in focus). The Rebel has performed well in this area. It has so far provided me with shots that I deem respectable and this desire for quality could well come from my past in videography and photo editing over the years. It will do what the FZ10 and G5 were unable to do.

In other words, my perspective is not unlike yours, since my goal at the moment is purely the joy of shooting a good photograph and learning more about this area of creativity. And I'm willing to spend some money and time to strive to get closer to that point, yes. But I don't think that differs with any serious hobbyist.

I'm certainly far far from a professional still photographer, and I am learning things, as a consumer, from this forum just as you are.

PS - as for what I'm going to get next...I'll focus on lenses and add-ons since I can now do that. And I can slow down on the spending because I have somewhat reached the goal I was looking to reach.

No sense in half-baking anything in my book. If you don't plan to cook it right, then don't put it on the grill.
Normcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2004, 3:43 AM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3
Default YenRug!!

Hi YenRug!

I see you're already planning ahead for the Farscape Convention in Burbank. I hope to see you there again; I believe we met briefly at the first or second convention.

I'll be going to the Grand Slam in Pasadena at the end of this month with my new FZ10 with the FL28 flash. I'll let you know how it goes and post some pictures if they come out. I'm in the 'preferred' seating at this convention so I'm not going to hope for great pictures.

I'm also attending a couple of the William Paley TV Festival panels in the next couple of weeks (William Shatner on Wednesday and Smallville the following Monday). I'll post those too if they come out decently.

Surfy
surfwidow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2004, 6:38 AM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7
Default Re: YenRug!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfwidow
Hi YenRug!

I see you're already planning ahead for the Farscape Convention in Burbank. I hope to see you there again; I believe we met briefly at the first or second convention.

I'll be going to the Grand Slam in Pasadena at the end of this month with my new FZ10 with the FL28 flash. I'll let you know how it goes and post some pictures if they come out. I'm in the 'preferred' seating at this convention so I'm not going to hope for great pictures.

I'm also attending a couple of the William Paley TV Festival panels in the next couple of weeks (William Shatner on Wednesday and Smallville the following Monday). I'll post those too if they come out decently.

Surfy

Ello Surfy!!

I've been lurking on this site for well over a year now and like Adam am keeping tabs on what would be great for using at the next Burbank con. Very pleasantly surprised to see you here!

Will be anxious to see your results aswell!

Angie
BritAngie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2004, 7:15 AM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 49
Default

Thanks for the heads-up, Surfy. Yes, I was at Burbank in 2000 and 2001, apologies if I can't remember who you are, I'm terrible with names and there were a lot of new faces! Hoping to hear some good news from your Con trips.

I've already got my seat for this years Con, 5th row back. Just wondering if I can get away without using a flash all the time, or if it's something I'm definitely going to need.

Look forward to seeing how your pics come out.
YenRug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2004, 10:27 PM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23
Default

Um... about focusing in low-light... why not manually set it?
Reactor 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 8:14 PM.