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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 20, 2004, 2:56 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 44
Default My take on the FZ10

While waiting for my perfect DSLR to come out I decided to pick up a FZ10. I tried to find any excuse to return it but I just can't give it up, so I'm keeping it.
To make a long story short, It can do things no other prosumer camera can. The fast lens with stabilizer and 420mm reach is just unbeatable, and on top of that, the image quality is very good overall. Yes, it's noisier than my friends Digital rebel, but the noise can easily be cleaned up. It makes gorgeous 8.5 x 11 prints. I even stuck a 28 year old Minolta flash on it and my indoor and night shots are excellent. For the price, this not so little camera is more fun than a barrel of rabbits.
nimos is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 20, 2004, 4:32 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 272
Default

You may want to be careful with using that flash without first checking the trigger voltage. If it's too high, it could damage your camera. You may want to check this site http://www.botzilla.com/photo/G1strobe.html
Guerito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2004, 11:22 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 44
Default

Too late for that advice, I suppose. I already took over 150 shots with that old external flash unit, but I see no sign of any damage.
nimos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2004, 9:55 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Panasonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 321
Default

I've tested several units with voltages substantially higher than what is recommended. While the flash units would not work, there was no damage to the camera.
Panasonic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2004, 11:12 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 50
Default

Nimos: Jeu-got-it Hombre! My sentiments exactly. It's a helluva step-up from my Sony DSC-75....which, at the time, did not cost much less than the FZ10 does today. Thankyousan Panasonic.

...along with Photoshop CS/8 and a Mac - Happy family.

Jim
Wetstuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2004, 2:15 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2
Default Question about FZ10 Flash Performance

Be gentle - I'm a somewhat new digital camera owner.

My wife truly outdid herself for my birthday and presented me with my first "real" digital camera. She gave me a model I'd mentioned earlier (the DX6490), which seems like a great camera. But, I've become very interested in the Lumix in the meantime because of its 12x optical zoom, fantastic macro capability, and image stabilization. She knows this and has told me to get the camera I want. Here's my problem: she's going to want to take picture after picture of the kids indoors in semi-low light settings. I've seen that the Lumix's flash only reaches ~6ft, whereas the Kodak's gets out to over 16ft. Even though the Lumix has a hotshoe, I know she'll never use it.

Maybe I'm suffering from analysis-paralysis, but I can't seem to pull the trigger on choosing between these two cameras. They're both (barely) in our price range and will likely be the last camera I'll buy for several years.

So, all things considered, which would you recommend? Has anybody experienced the Lumix (the camera I'd really like were it not for the low-light concern) in such conditions? How'd it perform?

SOMEBODY MAKE A DECISION FOR ME!
auburnboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2004, 4:47 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 20
Default

There is a flash exposure adjustment accessible by pushing the up arrow. I have used the FZ10 with the onboard flash at distances anywhere from 5 to 18 or 20 feet by adjusting this easily accessed feature. The pictures look fine to me. I understand that my standards may not be as high as others, but it sure beats the heck out of the other DC's I have used and owned. That IS sure comes in handy too.
Bierbaum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2004, 11:21 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2
Default

everything I have found said use the panasonic flash... the in camera metering and self adjustment to the camera means no fus no muss... other than that you are totally on manual.
I use it to take basketball/sports shots for a paper... great camera, excellent with a flash... we are 100 miles from a decent photo place for 35mm... fz10 rocks!
rapid fire outside caught a dry ice bomb in 5 rames soooo clear you could read the mt dew on the label leaving at mach 3! beuaty eh?
ubrew4u is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2004, 11:34 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2
Default Re: My take on the FZ10

Quote:
Originally Posted by nimos
While waiting for my perfect DSLR to come out I decided to pick up a FZ10. I tried to find any excuse to return it but I just can't give it up, so I'm keeping it.
To make a long story short, It can do things no other prosumer camera can. The fast lens with stabilizer and 420mm reach is just unbeatable, and on top of that, the image quality is very good overall. Yes, it's noisier than my friends Digital rebel, but the noise can easily be cleaned up. It makes gorgeous 8.5 x 11 prints. I even stuck a 28 year old Minolta flash on it and my indoor and night shots are excellent. For the price, this not so little camera is more fun than a barrel of rabbits.
amen brutha... got one myself, added the flash and have been in digitlal heaven for 600 bucks!
ubrew4u is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2004, 2:01 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 96
Default Re: FZ10 vs Kodak DX6490

I've owned both of these cameras, and returned the DX6490. My reasons have been posted several times both here and at Phil's DP Reviews Forum: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1033
so rather than repeating myself, may I suggest you do a SEARCH in both forums for DX6490 and my name "Charlie Howard" or "Charlie+Howard".

With regard just to the indoor capabilities of the two cameras: both of them have problems indoors unless given some help. In fact, one of the main reasons I returned the DX6490 was that it's indoor pictures were very inferior to identical pictures taken at the same time with my older Kodak DC290.

* DX6490 *
The DX6490's viewfinders do a much better job in low-light than the FZ10's, but that only helps when composing the picture, not in recording it. Normally, you wouldn't be trying to take pictures in a room so dimly lit as to make the FZ10's viewfinders unusable, so this is more of a "bragging rights" issue than a real world one.

Without a flash, the DX6490's images were so underexposed as to be useless; with a flash, they were still a little underexposed, but the colors were off because the room lighting threw off the White Balance. There's really no way to get around this problem on the DX6490: you can't do a manual white balance to correct for the yellow-orange room lighting that creeps into a flash picture, and the DX6490 does not have a hot shoe (I don't recall whether it has provision for a Sync control). Eventually, you will realize that you will either have to use an external flash or just not take any indoor pictures; but by that time, it may be too late to return it, and you may be stuck with an unusable camera. Although there is no hot shoe to hold a flash, you could use a Slave flash, but would have to get a handle/bracket to hold both the camera and the flash.

* FZ10 *
Without a flash, when using Auto ISO, the FZ10 can take an adequately exposed picture indoors with reasonable room lighting, but the camera usually will select ISO 400 in that situation, resulting in a VERY noisy image. The image quality will be poor, even if you go to the time & trouble of running it through a noise reducer like Noise Ninja or Neat Image; and facial details will be lost. My 200 Thanksgiving pictures fall into this category.

Without a flash, using ISO 100 (the highest level that yields a fairly clean image), the images on the FZ10 will be badly underexposed. This can be corrected with a photo editor, but you'll also have to correct White Balance unless you used the camera's WONDERFUL manual WB capabilities (something that is far weaker on the DX6490). Some of my Christmas pictures fall into this category; the rest, into the first category.

At ISO 50 or 100, the camera's built-in flash is very weak, as you already know. Using an external flash can solve this problem, but will take some experimentation to find the right combination of settings on the flash and on the camera. My January-February pictures fall into this category, and although I'm closing in on a good solution, I'm still not there: I want to be able to use ISO 50, but even with the blindingly powerful external flash I'm using now (the fourth one I've tried in three months... each more expensive than its predecssor), ISO 100 is the slowest that yields pictures that do not require post-processing.

BTW: my "test" pictures that use indoor lighting, but don't have people in them, come out a lot better than "similar" pictures of people, expecially of groups (the distance has to be greater to fit them in).

* OTHER CAMERAS *
This indoor illumination problem seems to be more common with many digicams than I realized when just using the DC290. The DC290 is only a 2 mpx camera, and the pixels on its CCD probably are larger than on current 4-5 mpx consumer digicams, so it can shoot at higher ISO's without introducing excessive noise.

Over Christmas, I borrowed a friend's Canon Digital Rebel, equipped with a 28-135mm Image Stabilized lens. This is truly beautiful equipment (and heavy), but much to my surprise, its pictures were not as good as the FZ10's. Indoors, it's built-in flash underexposed the images just about as badly as the FZ10's. The Canon's images had less noise (it has a much larger CCD), but the pictures were dark, flat, and improperly white balanced; the FZ10's were only dark. Both required serious post-processing to make them usable.

The fundamental problem, in my very amateur opinion, is that none of these consumer-oriented cameras is physically large enough to hold the large capacitors needed with a powerful built-in flash. They could be built that big, but presumably the manufacturers have found that people don't want to buy such bulky cameras.

If you are determined to not use an external flash, you may want to look for a digicam that can minimize noise at ISO 400, or else find a way to make your room lighting bright enough for the camera you choose.
Charlie Howard 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 2:21 PM.