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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 12, 2004, 10:34 AM   #11
ASB
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6
Default

post the photos...please....



thanks
ASB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2004, 2:23 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
fireworkz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 164
Default

Antti wrote:
Quote:
I went with fz3 because of price and size. If you don't print larger than 8x10, you would not see any differences in picture quality. You have to be a pro to get the advantage of the fz20 features. Don't waste your money on something that you don't really need yet. Cameras develop so fast that you'd be upgrading in couple of years anyway.
Very well spoken or rather written.... I was very double minded to buy my Cam...FZ20 was very close to get a FZ3 .. as I was interested in <8x10 pics..
I think this is really valuable advice to all intending on buying the FZ3..
Panasonic should have kept the Price a bit lower..to attract more ppl..




fireworkz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2004, 11:32 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

...a final thought on this. While I'm in the minority opinion, my take on the "digital" thing as a whole is that they're super, fantastic, wonderful snap-shot cameras. In that regard, they can't be beat, nothing wrong with that, absolutely has its place. To me, they mainly replace polaroids. If your main concern is optimal image quality - at least as things stand now - film is still king.

You wouldn't - nor would you expect, to push the Polaroid technology to get 35mm or medium format quality out of them. No - if you wanted better images, you bought an SLR. Polaroids - like digicams, existed for immediacey and convenience (sp) at the expense of image quality. They were fun, served their purpose, had their place.

If you want a digital camera that ->approaches<- film's quality and capabilities, you need to spend big dollars on a high-end DSLR. Supposedly, 35mm film's resloution if measured in megapixels would be something like 20 megapixels. Also, there's greater latitude. My mediocre, $200 SLR's 50mm prime lens goes from f-1.7 to f-22, has a "bulb" mode and shutter speed up to 1/2000. Most consumer-end digitals lenses go from 2.8 to 8, no bulb mode and are 2,3,4,5,6 megapixels in res as opposed to around 20 for film. To get a DSLR with the capabilities of a $200 film SLR, you're spending 3, 4, 5... thousand on up.

Doesn't make sense to me. That's why I like the Lumix, especially the "lower-end" models like the Z-1 and the Z-3. I think they are more in-line with what -> I <- think digitals were intended for, they're more compact, and less expensive. Buy an Fz-1 or an FZ-3 as your snap happy, and with the money you save, get yourself a Nikon, Canon, or Vivitar (yes, Vivitar) manual SLR. For the 1 out of 5,000 pics you want to blow up, poster size, take it to a good lab. You'll get better results. The style you get from a digital is very limiting in my opinion, because they have such a large DOF. I can't get that great blurry backround with the subject isolated in tack-sharp focus no matter how I try.

Now that I've snapped off a few thousand digital photos, I'm not looking at "the next level" of digicam. I'm looking over the next year to pick up a nice film camera to "fool around with".
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2004, 11:53 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Raghu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ambattur, near Chennai, India
Posts: 3,656
Default

Yes, I totally agree with you. However, I feel the digital camera gives you faster learning experience because of its immediate results, and you can apply this knowledge on analog cameras without fooling around with various settings and anxiously waiting to see your mistakes! So, use the digital for fun and learning and the analog for serious photography.

One suggestion. Can the thread berearranged to makethe latestentry appear on top?

Raghu, India
Raghu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2004, 1:41 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

Raghu wrote:
Quote:
One suggestion.¬* Can the thread be¬*rearranged to make¬*the latest¬*entry appear on top?

Raghu, India
Ya know, I was thinking the same thing. That would seem to make more sense, like e-mail, but I don't think you can.
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2004, 1:34 AM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8
Default

Hi,

Ihad to decidebetween the fz3 and 20, as well. I got th fz3 from an online shop in Austria for 360 (cheaper in Germany) Euros4 weeks ago. I love her. Just yesterday I went to a theater, sat about 10m from the stage and got amazing shots with 12xzoom, 400ASA program/burst mode. The pictures are noisy, of course. (which I will reduce with neatimage) But the actors are frozen in their movements and gestures sharply. Without much light and nowhere to put my kamera on steadily that wouldn`t have worked without a panasonic, I guess.



The fz20 is too big for me - I don`t want to look like the official photographer.

Kaser


kaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2004, 1:44 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
fireworkz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 164
Default

kaser wrote:
Quote:
Hi,...I love her. Just yesterday I went to a theater, sat about 10m from the stage and got amazing shots with 12xzoom, 400ASA program/burst mode. The pictures are noisy, of course. (which I will reduce with neatimage) But the actors are frozen in their movements and gestures sharply. Without much light and nowhere to put my kamera on steadily that wouldn`t have worked without a panasonic, I guess.
Please post some pics you took..
fireworkz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2004, 2:34 PM   #18
hbh
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 50
Default

Actually the lowest prize in Germany for a FZ20 is 494 using www.geizhals.at. If you have a better prize, please add the link.
hbh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2004, 3:37 PM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 84
Default

472 Euro at Nomatica ... I bought mine and I live in Norway ... beat theprice here in Norway by 150 Euro ... I don't think you will find better
jesuswon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2004, 5:40 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
gail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7
Default

ASB wrote:
Quote:
post the photos...please....

Here are some photos I took with the FZ3. The majority of them are just test photos, taken very quickly. I've only had the camera for about six weeks and I'm still trying to get a feel for it.

http://www.pbase.com/gailb/fz3

I can't speak highly enough about the FZ3!
gail 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 2:18 AM.