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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 4, 2005, 11:17 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
msantos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 561
Default

I currently own a FZ-15, its a great camera, but I want to make an upgrade. The optins are:

Panasonic FZ-30, with Leica 35-420"mm" / F2.8-3.5

TOTAL: $999.00



Canon EOS Rebel XT, with Sigma 18-200 (near 28-300mm) F3.5-6.3

Total: ($800+399) = $1,199.00



With which of them would I get better results, I mean Rebel XT has less noise, but FZ-30 has better lens, so the point is:

At full zoom, is it better f3.5 and OIS, ISO 80 (Fz-30) or f6.3, no-OIS and ISO-400 (Rebel Xt)???

In low ligth shoots, the noise of FZ-30 with ISO-80 &f2.8 lens is almost the same than Rebel XT with a higer ISO and f3.5 lens?

What do you think?
msantos is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 4, 2005, 12:02 PM   #2
Member
 
terryf1960's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 30
Default

Thats a hard questio n to answer. Overall your going to be better off with the XT. But for what your asking the FZ30 could fit your needs equally as well. I have both the FZ30 and the 20D. The 20D is very similar in picture quality. Yesterday at a scenic gorge and falss and last night at a local fair I was finally able to really give the FZ30 its first workout. I found that it performed extremely well. I had a bit of overexposure troubel with the FZ30 in reall sunny conditions trying to get landscape shots of big waterfalls. I could only stop down to f11 with ISO 80. If I'd only had a polarizer things would have been perfect. At the fair while shooting a smashup derby I got some great shots from far away in the stands. As the light faded thea camera performed extremely well thanks to OIS. When it got too dark and the pictures started to become blurry I switched over to movie mode to video some of the event. Well video mode has no problem with low light as it picked it up nicely and I was able to record this way. Zooming in with movie mode was great. You won't be able to that with an XT. The only problem with movie mode was sometimes it would falre against certain lighting that would put a blue line through the frame. I've never seen that in my past video modes I've had such as the Canon S50. Of cours in that camera I could not pick up video in low light. I am very pleased with the FZ30 but its a hard thing to ask if you should get it over a DSLR. If you see your self wanting to expand your lens capabilities then the answer is easy. The FZ30 for what it is, is a great camera. But it still can't begin to compete in alot of ways with the DSLR.
The noise on the FZ30 has so far not been a major problem for me. I use noiseware professioanl and it cleans up my shots very nicely. I've noticed though that on some of my landscape shots that noiseware professional can really trash some of my detail and you have to get a balance of how much noise to remove at the cost of remving the noise. I am probably better off shooting important landscape shots with my 20D and 17-40 F4L which is my widest lens.
I've done some portraits with the FZ30 and it does a fine job delivering nice sharp shots but no way does it replace a good 50mm or 85 mm fast prime. I find I have to manufacture the background blur to try and achieve the effect I like. That can be almost as good if your handy in PS.

Landscape resized for web. I could have really blurred the water making it nice an silky looking had I been able to stop the lens down a couple more stops giving me a slower shutter speed.



Portrait manufactured bokeh. Sharp but not what you can get with a good prime.




Lowlight fair shot full size and no touching or noise removal. Remember this shot will be the FZ30 at its worst because it is a night shot taken in the stands a few hundred ft away at full zoom. ISO 400


terryf1960 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2005, 12:08 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

I think you're looking at trade offs when comparing the 2 cameras. The dslr will sometimes enable you got take photos in poor light without resorting to a tripod. Just crank up the iso, and you'll be quite surprised at the results. Low light focusing is generally better. The viewfinder is a big difference too. One of the complaints is the lack of light in the FZ viewfinder in poor light. Much better on a dslr. Convenience in shooting with the FZ's is the big plus. Just pick it up and go-no extras to lug around. It weighs a lot less than a dslr, and if you're on an outdoor walkabout, it is excellent. I think it's the best walkaround you can find. My only gripe with the FZ's is low light shooting. Indoors, the dslr will be better, especially if you have a 50mm f/1.4 prime which are quite reasonable in price. Chances are you might not even need a flash. It's probably good to have both cameras. Different tools for different jobs...........Cheers..........thekman.
thekman620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2005, 1:23 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,974
Default

You can't go wrong with either camera but each has its strengths and weaknesses which are not the same.

That is where the dilemma comes in.

What will happen eventually is that you will want to have the easy features of an FZ camera and the better quality and low light capabilities of a DSLR.

With the DSLR continuing to come out with newer, lighter and perhaps better camerasone could wait on it and the price point of the bodies will become less and less. Also, you can look and see what is out there and the examples of what the current crop of DSLR's are doing and the kind of lenses that are considered the best of the lot.

I have the Pana LC40s, two FZ1v2, FZ10, FZ20, Sigma SA9 35mm, and Konica Minolta Z10 and a Pentax *ist DS.

Love the FZ1v2, the Pentax *ist DS, and the Sigma SA9 35mm in that order.

I am selling the rest of the lot and taking the FZ30 into serious consideration.

The jury is still out and I am not in need of a camera anytime soon.
vIZnquest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2005, 10:55 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
msantos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 561
Default

Thanks for your comments; it is really hard to decide, It seems I want the best with little budget.

One thing is clear now, it doesn't matter which one I decide, I'll get a good equipment, with pros and conts.


msantos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2005, 4:11 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
beernutz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 293
Default

I get $561 for the FZ-30 ( http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Panas...ype=bottomline )

vs.

$750 for the Rebel XT body (http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Canon...ype=bottomline )

and

$350 for the Sigma 18-200 (http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Sigma...ype=bottomline )

or $1100 for both. That difference is quite a bit different from what you quoted.


beernutz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2005, 7:37 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
msantos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 561
Default

:O

That prices make me unconfident!! Are that suppliers serious??

Butterfly Photo & Digitale Trailer.

to good to be truth!!
msantos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2005, 7:54 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
beernutz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 293
Default

msantos wrote:
Quote:
:O

That prices make me unconfident!! Are that suppliers serious??

Butterfly Photo & Digitale Trailer.

to good to be truth!!
Even if you leave those two out, almost all the others have the FZ-30 for under $700.
beernutz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2005, 8:15 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Narmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,813
Default

Marco

the XT with its stock lens produces very soft images: so you will have to buy a good WA too.
But then the results will be much better than with FZs.
Also good sigma 400mm can give great satisfaction, owing to the CCD multiplying factor whic hbrins 300 mm lenses to around 400mm and 400 mm ones to circa 500.

I am sure you will have great satisfaction with XT (and with 20D it would be obviously even better).

But noone can tell that in a year or two you 'll be buying a FZ40 too, more confortable to take with you than Canon and its lenses.

I have a FZ20 for 9 months now and I will wait for FZ40 before upgrading.



Francesco
Narmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2005, 8:22 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Narmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,813
Default

Terryf1960

Noiseware (and the IMO slightly better Noise Ninja and Neat Image) must be used with care.

The best way is to have them as Photoshop (or other editors') plugin, not as standalone programs.

The path to go is:

select the sky area (or other uniform color zone), feather selection and apply NR only to that.

I have hardly seen pics who needed NR all over the picture (except for FZ shots taken with all or most of In camera settings to High).

It is easy to do that with macros, where apart from the main subject all can be bokehed or OutOFocus.

When you apply NR to the whole pic, grass and distant mountain textures will be smoothed, especially if you do that on already resized images.

So the trick is apply NR to selections only, or to the whole image , but then use Photoshop UNDO BRUSH to decrease or UNDo the effect of NR plugin on areas which have lost texture/resolution.

That's it.
by this way you ll clean the Out of focus areas or the plain color (sky) ones, but the rest will remain intact

Narmer
Narmer 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 10:17 PM.