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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 4, 2005, 7:08 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Steve's FZ5 review has just been posted - not read it yet!

HArj

:|:blah::G
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 4, 2005, 7:15 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
jussiuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 719
Default

hooray!
Must read it straight away!
Thanks Harj!!!
jussiuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2005, 7:36 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
fmoore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,116
Default

Less than enthusiatic review. Sounds like just another one of those image stabilzed ultra zoom thingies.
Having had the fz5 for a month, these are Steve's (pro) conclusions. (The rest of the review is essentially a listing of it's features with comments on how to use them.)

"The overall image quality when using 5-megapixel Fine mode was good."

"The Lumix DMC-FZ5 will make an great choice for the family or tourist user, especially if you're shooting your children's sporting events."

Duh!
fmoore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2005, 7:46 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
jussiuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 719
Default

Yes it was a bit less than I expected...yet still in between other things he is giving it high praise.
But that thing about families and tourists can be interpreted as him not feeling it is good only for snapshots!
I beg to differ...
jussiuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2005, 8:50 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,249
Default

If this was a writing assignment, I would ask, Steve, what makes the camera "fun"? Explore that a bit.

Well, essentially, you have a great sharp lens that maintains its brightness throughout the zoom range. Nothing like this existed before digitals! Photographers had to spend big $$$$$$$$$ to get this kind of coverage, with this kind of image quality, with at least 3 lenses that had to be switched off and on. Not other camera other than the Oly C2100 provided this. If you add the Raynox DCR6000 for $100, the range of focal lengths is amazing: 23-420mm. What more can you reasonably expect from a camera for the price?

They're NOT perfect cameras. I wish Pana did a couple things... a swivel LCD - my kingdom for one! And that whole beat to death gain-up thing.

I just think the photographic press kinda "doesn't get it" with regard to how revolutionary these cameras were. Now they're getting "old hat" though.
NickTrop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2005, 10:02 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 16
Default

Is it just me, or do the sample photos look a bit over-exposed?
jneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 4, 2005, 10:55 PM   #7
Member
 
Dark Cobra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 60
Default

Some of them look a tad overexposed. However, the amount of noise in pretty much all of them is disappointing. Even Steve commented that at 80 ISO there was noticeable shadow noise. That makes this pretty much a deal breaker for me. The images are at best . . . "alrgiht" . . . and I think Steve got it right when he indicated this would be a good camera for snapshot taking tourists or for snapshots of the kids at soccer or something.

However, there really isn't much in the way of "WoW" imagery to jump up and down about. This is a shame since such a gorgeous lens should be able to deliver really tack sharp images free of noise. Unfortunately, the electronics of the camera are not up to par in justifying what that lens is probably capable of delivering.
Dark Cobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 5, 2005, 12:55 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2
Default

If you look at the spray-can text in sample picture
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_...s/P1000004.JPG

and compare it to some other camera sample for example the Sony W1 there is a hugh difference in quality

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_...s/dsc01305.jpg
pahlgren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 5, 2005, 1:30 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Henrik L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27
Default

The oversharpeing is not so nice on fz5 although i get the feeling theres artificial light on the sony and only natural light on the pana which makes it abit unfair maybe??
Henrik L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 5, 2005, 2:56 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
habanero5869's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 23
Default

Henrik L wrote:
Quote:
The oversharpeing is not so nice on fz5 although i get the feeling theres artificial light on the sony and only natural light on the pana which makes it abit unfair maybe??
Henrik - you are absolutely right... notice the shadow eminating from the magazines on the FZ-5 shot, whereas there is only bright light with the Sony shot. Another clue is in the center of the red M&M wherethere is avery obvious window reflection in the FZ-5 shot. In the Sony shot, the window is noticeable, but clearly overpowered with what appears to me as a flash reflection. I don't know about any other comparison, but to me, that makes the photos totally uncomparable! I wonder if at some point Steve changed his methodology on this shot?
habanero5869 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 7:59 PM.