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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 24, 2004, 11:26 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 253
Default

I imagine the sensor in your 4mp Canon is significantly (and proportionately) bigger than the one in the 2mp FZ2 as well.

Are you shooting with Auto ISO? I pretty much always leave my FZ1 set to 50 ISO, even for indoor flash shots, and I don't have any problems with noise. The few times I've had to go up in ISO, I usually just flip over to the "Simple" mode, which usually ends up with the ISO set at 200, and I still just don't see noise.

Must just be a perspective thing. Maybe I just don't know what I'm missing!
EffZeeOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 25, 2004, 9:44 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 36
Default

I always have ISO locked at 50 with the FZ2. You're right about the canon - it's sensor is proportionately bigger which is great.

If you're not seeing noise at ISO 50 in low light on any FZ camera then you're definately missing it either becuase of your eyesight or just because you've never seen a truely noise free image before? I'm not trying to be mean or anything. I can show you noise in just about any ISO 50 daylight shot from my FZ2 if you like. But hey, it's all good, i love the cam, i just like to share my experiences as it amazes me that anyone with an FZ can say they don't think it's a high noise cam. Maybe my standards are just too high but i love crisp, clean detailed images.
richardmanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2004, 12:29 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 253
Default

What's an "IXY400"? I can't find that Canon model anywhere. I'm interested in seeing sample pics, because I'm wondering why its pictures would be so much sharper/noise-free when the Canon S1-IS (which I'm very interested in) has extremely noisey and soft pictures. I have the funny feeling I'll be comparing apples to oranges when I find out what an IXY is, because I have the funny feeling that it's not a superzoom camera, but...I thought I'd ask anyway.

As for not seeing noise in my FZ1 ISO 50 shots...maybe I'm just doing something right, because there's just no noise there -- especially not in daylight shots. But I'm always willing to be educated -- please post shots from both cameras (preferably of the same or similar subjects, conditions, etc.). I'd love to see the difference, even at the risk of it "ruining" the FZ1 for me!
EffZeeOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2004, 2:17 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 36
Default

I agree Canon S1-IS is pretty useless (high noise, very soft pics).

Google IXY400 and u'll see it. It's the name they give the IXUS400 in asian countries. It's probably the most popular compact digi cam in the world, and definately one of, if not the best in terms of image quality. Uses the same sensor as the A80.

For the FZ2, of course, there isn't a great deal of noise in daylight shots but i usually see noise in a blue sky in broad daylight and in the shadow areas in a broad daylight shot. Check out http://members.optusnet.com.au/richa...y/P1000231.jpg for an example - i've circled the noisey areas. Be sure to view it at 100%.

It's no use comparing the IXY400 to FZ2 in terms of noise as the IXY400 has a proportionately larger sensor and will win every time, especially in low light.

As i said in my original post, the FZ2 picks up a little bit of noise in broad daylight at ISO50 (not much but i'd certainly get rid of it with neat image if i wanted to print) whereas other cams (not ultra zooms mind you!) wouldn't pick up any noise at ISO50 in broad daylight.

In darkness i find people's skin comes out all mottled with red green and blue specks and very noisey and blurred, compared to my IXY400 which takes noiseless photos in pitch blackness, probably due to the flash being much stronger than the pitiful FZ2 flash, the larger sensor, and the AF assist light.

After saying all this, i still believe the FZ line are the best ultra zoom cams currently on the prosumer market with stabilization. The others seem to have even worse image quality.
richardmanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2004, 12:38 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 253
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richardmanley
I agree Canon S1-IS is pretty useless (high noise, very soft pics).
Darn! I was hoping as an obvious Canon fan, you could refute the rumors on the S1. Oh, well. Looks like my upgrade path is still the FZ10.

Quote:
Google IXY400 and u'll see it. It's the name they give the IXUS400 in asian countries. It's probably the most popular compact digi cam in the world, and definately one of, if not the best in terms of image quality. Uses the same sensor as the A80.
I did Google the "IXY400", but only came up with one English site and that was for accessories. The rest are all in various foreign languages. I was thinking it was maybe a rebadged Powershot S400, but it doesn't appear so. None of the usual review sites have a review on it (at least not yet).

Quote:
For the FZ2, of course, there isn't a great deal of noise in daylight shots but i usually see noise in a blue sky in broad daylight and in the shadow areas in a broad daylight shot. Check out http://members.optusnet.com.au/richa...y/P1000231.jpg for an example - i've circled the noisey areas. Be sure to view it at 100%.
Well, I have to say that if you have to establish a noise opinion on the FZ2, that's not a very good picture with which to do it. The shot itself would be taxing the limits for just about any camera, even a dSLR. It appears that you're under a covered porch or awning, so you're shooting from in the shade, but your subject(s) are in bright sunlight. Judging by the shadows, it also appears that the sun is facing you. Because of all this, the picture is bit overexposed in some parts (the sky and other brightly lit areas) and underexposed in the shadows (where the noise is). I think the extreme contrasts are what's generating just about everything that could be considered wrong with picture (noise, overexposure, etc.). I don't know of any camera on the market today (especially not consumer level) that could handle this type of shot. It would be interesting to compare the two cameras with this same type of difficult shot (same time of day, conditions, etc.). I would guess that the IXY wouldn't fair much (if any) better.

My FZ1 (upgraded) pictures don't look like this...ever. The whole picture looks soft as well as mostly overexposed. Looking at the EXIF, I can't really tell what Picture Adjustment you had this set to, but if it was set to soft that could explain it. The exposure adjustments seems to be set at zero. This looks more like the type of picture that I use to get with my Sony FD91, which looked more like a sub-megapixel camcorder capture rather than a digital camera picture.

I also noticed that the EXIF reports the creation software as Adobe Photoshop 7, which made me wonder if any adjustments had been made or preferential filters applied that could result in this type of results? Some of the areas where you're citing noise looks more like JPEG artifacts, which could be caused by PS.

Quote:
In darkness i find people's skin comes out all mottled with red green and blue specks and very noisey and blurred, compared to my IXY400 which takes noiseless photos in pitch blackness, probably due to the flash being much stronger than the pitiful FZ2 flash, the larger sensor, and the AF assist light.
I'm probably just coming across argumentative here, but I've been having this discussing with various fellow digicam owners ever since I owned my first digicam: Why do you want to be able to shot in total darkness? (rhetorical question) I guess I just have personally never found the need for that, and my results with my FZ1 with flash pictures has been MUCH better than with any other camera I've owned (Sony, Olympus, Kodak, and Minolta). I'm very happy with my FZ1's low light flash pictures, especially ones of my youngest's recent first birthday, where I've taken flash pictures that were focussed using only one birthday candle worth of light. Even the ones with no flash and only a birthday candle worth of ambient light turned out very nice -- noisey, yes, but still very nice considering it's only 1 candle. It's also not really fair to compare a superzoom camera to a low zoom point-n-shoot for indoor shots. My Kodak DX3600 (a $200 2mp digicam) took great indoor shots, but it only had a 3x Ektanar lens in it, too. Whereas my Sony FD91 (stabilized 14x optical zoom lens) took mediocre indoor shots at best.

We're probably just severely comparing apples to oranges here -- the IXY400 seems like a completely different type of camera from the FZ1/2 or even the FZ10.
EffZeeOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2004, 5:34 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 36
Default

Yes, as i said IXY400 is a rebadged IXUS400 which is rebadged S400 in the US market. Of course no one needs to shoot in total darkness, in fact i don't even care about the poor low light performance of the FZ2 as that's just what you should expect from an ultra zoom in my opinion. The FZ line is obviously not a 'take to party' type of point and shoot camera. That's the reason i own the canon, for taking everywhere. The FZ comes out when i need to take nature photography etc. With both of these cams i have most situations covered nicely.

The photo in question was taken in P mode with no in camera sharpening and everything set as it should be. I didn't do any photoshop editing either though i did save it in photo shop on high quality after drawing the circles around the noise so there may be some jpeg artifacts.

Also, i'm not a fan of any one particular camera manufacturer, though i am a fan of the FZ line and Canon's take anywhere compact point and shoot IXUS line. I take things on a cam by cam basis, i dont think you can say one particular manufacturers gets it perfect every time. Just look at the Canon S1IS for example, the sample photo's i've seen from it wouldn't even compare to an FZ1/2.
richardmanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2004, 10:02 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
alexo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 232
Default

Panasonic wrote:
Quote:
As I've explained in the past, I'm not permitted to comment on any product that's not officially announced. In this case I can tell you this.

At this time I haven't seen a sample nor have I seen mention of it. The comment that a Panasonic rep told this person about it is highly unlikely as it's the company policy, especially at trade shows, that such speculative info is not discussed.

Logically, the model number is possible. As soon I I receive any info that I can share I'll be sure to share it with all of you.
Time to share Bob... :-)


alexo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2004, 4:59 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1
Default

Hello! anybody knows the price range of the FZ3 by any chance ? I'm in a big hurry to buy it ! Dpreview posted its features but not its price... Thanx
marine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2004, 9:58 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
fmoore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,116
Default

MSRP $400 US
fmoore 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 10:28 AM.