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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 17, 2004, 1:34 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Jawis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 21
Default

spectator wrote:
Quote:
read imaging-resource's review and you might change your mind keeping your fz20.


http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/CP8800/CP88A.HTM
Have to admit that the Nikon is full on features, but where is the manual focus ring? It can be a pain to have to manual focus with button/s and/or small dial esp. while looking through the EVF.

No, I think I will have the manual focus ring and F2.8 zoom lens and stick with the FZ20 for now.


Jawis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2004, 8:10 PM   #12
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,139
Default

Quote:
the only advantage of FZ20 is 12x zoom compared to 10x of Nikon 8800 and the F2.8 Leica lens throughout the zoom range. other than that, everything in FZ20 is inferior to 8800
How could you possibly "know" this until the camera is in someone's hands and a reasonable report including images is made.

We have no idea about issues like noise, usablility, stability (This will be the first fixed len for Nikon with stabilization), chromatic aberration, etc.

It could be the next great digicam - it could also not be so great. I have four Nikon digicams and they vary a bit in usability and quality, etc.We can "probably" expect pretty good performance, but it would be much more prudent to wait and see.

Let's see - I could have "two" FZ20's for the price of "one" CP8080... hmmmm...

Lin
Lin Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2004, 10:26 PM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10
Default

hehehemann wrote:
Quote:
spectator wrote:
Quote:
... New Nikon Coolpix 8800 is released in the market (http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/ni...cp8800_pr.html)

the only advantage of FZ20 is 12x zoom compared to 10x of Nikon 8800 and the F2.8 Leica lens throughout the zoom range. other than that, everything in FZ20 is inferior to 8800. :|

stop that mediocrity Panasonic! if you want to make your FZxx survive the competition, listen to your customers' complains. don't give your loyal fans a mediocre improvement(s?) if you want them to stay with you.

Well i really do hope this Nikon is a superior camera, its costs nearly twice as much as the FZ20!!
Exactly, price isn't exactly the same. Hasn't made me change my mind about getting the FZ20. If I was going to spend close to that much I would go with an A2 with some flash cards, which the 8800 doesn't come with.
Semper_Fi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2004, 12:08 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 14
Default

Hey I don't know what kind of car you're driving but I suggest you stay out of the luxury car showrooms or you'll be kussing out ol' besty all the way home.
banderson317 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2004, 8:27 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 25
Default

Nikon makes great cameras, no doubt. But, before I would spend $999.99 for a non-DSLR, I would go a few hundred more and get the D70 or the next version of it. I bought the Panasonic because it did listen to its customers and offered a great camera with an excellent lens at about half that price. I bought mine from CC when it had the FZ-20 for $539.

No, it doesn't have 8 megapixels, a swiveling LCD, or other features on the Nikon 8800, but the fact is, when you have to decide what to leave off to lower the price to where the product gets into more hands, a few non-essentials have to go.

So, my response to your lambasting of Panasonic is to give it a rest and go ahead and spend the $1000 for the Nikon. I spent a little over $500!
Vandyu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2004, 9:26 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 26
Default

With a price tag of $999, that Nikon is way out of the reach of most people. At $599, the Panasonic is an absolute steal considering all the features.

The fact that people are even comparing the two cameras and consider them in the same league, with that kind of difference in price, is a true testimonial of the strengths of the FZ20.

I've printed beautiful 13x19" prints from the 4-megapixel FZ10. I have no idea why I would need 8 megapixels.
Jim Zim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2004, 11:03 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

Spectacor, where did you go? Did you sober up and realise your post was absurd? Do you actually know how to use the (overrated) RAW format that so many consumers seem to want but I would bet the house actually know how to use? (Wanna know what my "RAW" format is? ->file->save as->XYZ.PSD)

Does it make you feel good when folks at parties say, "Wow, 8 megapixels!" even though five of them are completely extraneous, since most things you will ever print require only 2 or 3 megapixels for photoquality resolution? And, if anything - the extra megapixels will, ironically, add noise, not improved resolution since most manufacturers don't increase the CCD size in porportion to the increase number of pixels.

The camera that costs $500 less - 1/2 the price, still has ->BETTER OPTICS<- Nikon, and the other fixed lense digicams have yet to catch up to Panasonic/Leica. And when they do, expect to pay twice the price for the conspicuous consumption factor of having "a name" prominately displayed on your digicam. Oh, I forgot, you're paying twice the price already.
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2004, 11:12 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
José A.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 367
Default

Jim Zim wrote:
Quote:
I've printed beautiful 13x19" prints from the 4-megapixel FZ10. I have no idea why I would need 8 megapixels.
Well, for cropping... or for bigger prints (as we are assuming there is no additional noise that could show on the picture). But still, 13x19" is a lot. And the price difference is also, that cannot be ignored if the two cameras are going to be compared.
José A. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2004, 8:03 PM   #19
Member
 
Jon_Doe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42
Default

The Leica lens give the Panasonic a big advantage. I've seen blowups that compare favorable with 8 megapixel DSLR pics. For the money the FZ10 and 20 cannot be beat, imo.
Jon_Doe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2004, 7:51 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

I'll throw my 2 cents in. Who would pay $1000 for a digicam when you can buy a DSLR, as earlier mentioned, for thesame price (Canon), or a couple of hundred more for the D70. Seems ludicrous to me. I plan on getting the FZ20 if it ever makes it to Canada. Sure seems like the best deal going from what I've seen (as in sample photos). 8mp almost seems silly if you don't increase the sensor size. That's the only feature of the FZ20 I'm worried about (the small sensor) -but the picture samples I've seen are very good, so my worries seem unwarranted. Can't wait for it to arrive across the border.
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 10:12 AM.