Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 12, 2005, 12:34 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16
Default

Im trying out a FZ20 until the end of the week. Im impressed with its nice zoom lens and all in one package. The negatives? - low ISO's.

My questions to Maxxum 5D users is: Am I going to notice a significant increase in picture quality overall using the Maxxum 5D? I know it will definetely be better for low light situations, etc.
aztec506 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 12, 2005, 12:48 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
bernabeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 990
Default

would you prefer a chevy corvette or a chevy impala ?
bernabeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2005, 1:20 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16
Default

LOL. I actually prefer a LEXUS ES300, but I cant afford it.

Hey give me a break, Im a novice just trying to learn.
aztec506 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2005, 2:11 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 92
Default

I guess that it just depends on what you want it for. Ultimately the 5D is capable of a much higher level of performance than the FZ20, but both cameras have advantages.

Both have AS, so let's get that out of the way.

The FZ20 is as you say an all in one, with an integrated 36-432mm equiv superzoom lens. If you go for the 5D, you will have to match this range with either a couple of lenses (the 17-70mm kit lens and a 70-300mm or similar) or go for one of the 11x 18-200mm superzooms. Don't forget that there is a 1.5x multiplier on 5D lenses to give the 35mm equivalent, thus the first lens combo gives 28-450mm and the superzoom 28-300mm. Where the 5D really wins is that you can fit lenses outside this range such as superwideangles and telescopes, you can get very high end or bright (f1.4 to f2.8 ) lenses and also specialist lenses such as macro lenses. So the 5d comes away as slightly more cumbersome in that you may have to use a number of lenses, but it's much more flexible in this area. Don't forget that the 5D kit lens and the 18-200mm start at 28mm equiv, so have a much wider wideangle end than the FZ20 at 36mm, important if you like landscape photo's.

The difference in MP between the FZ20 and the 5D is not great (5.3 v 6.1). In respect to noise, the FZ20 is noisy at fairly low iso values and the 5D low in noise up to 1600 iso and 3200iso is useable in emergencies. So the 5D is much better in low light. I can't comment on the FZ20 AF, but the 5D AF works well in low light.

From what I have seen in a brief encounter with the FZ20, the 5D beats it comprensively in most areas of speed such as start up time and where it really wins is the optical viewfinder versus the EVF. I like to do Macro and personally find the sort of fine manual focus needed with a very shallow dof almost impossible on an EVF.

So both cameras have plus points, but for me the 5D is a much better choice in almost every way.
Ikki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2005, 2:54 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
bernabeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 990
Default

the reason a P & S camera can have a lens with such a large zoom range is because it has a miniscule CCD onto which it packs a whole bunch of VERY SMALL pixels

an APS-C size dslr sensor with 6meg of large, quality pixels is far far far superior

a dedicated 'prime' lens is almost invariably superior at any given focal length

put these facts together and i conclude:

for snapshots get a P & S

for photography get a dslr
bernabeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2005, 3:43 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 159
Default

While I echo the support for DSLR(being a 5D shooter myself), ultimately you have to buy what you can afford, and to match the versitility of a prosumer like FZ-20, with focal range of 36-432 at f2.8 fixed aparture in that range, you probably will end up with a set of VERY EXPENSIVE lens. While the idea of not having to lug 3-4 lenses around is also the advantage of something like FZ-20. If you are prepare to invest in a SLR, then go for it by all means.
RacingManiac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2005, 4:21 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16
Default

Hey

Thanks for the help, comments, mini reviews, etc.

Im leaning towards the 5D and if I go that route Id probably just purchase the 18-200 lens and use that as an everyday lens instead of buying the kit and then adding a 28-300 or a 70-300 lens. That way I wouldnt be lugging around a bunch of lenses.

I like the FZ20, but as you all mentioned, it does have its limitations. Pretty neat camera though. Another negative factor is that it doesnt record RAW, which I use a lot with my old Olympus C5050Z.
aztec506 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2005, 7:26 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
bernabeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 990
Default

try to find a used 35-70 f3.5 macro (equiv 52-105 w/ 1:2 macro)

RAZOR SHARP

the perfect walk around
bernabeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2005, 8:29 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 41
Default

aztec506 wrote:
Quote:
Hey

Thanks for the help, comments, mini reviews, etc.

Im leaning towards the 5D and if I go that route Id probably just purchase the 18-200 lens and use that as an everyday lens instead of buying the kit and then adding a 28-300 or a 70-300 lens. That way I wouldnt be lugging around a bunch of lenses.

I like the FZ20, but as you all mentioned, it does have its limitations. Pretty neat camera though. Another negative factor is that it doesnt record RAW, which I use a lot with my old Olympus C5050Z.
You will not regret with your decision. When I was introduced to photography 2 years ago, I got the FZ1 becauseof the 12 x zoom. However, I soon find there are so many limitation when you want more control of your picture. I got the FZ208monthslater. As you progress,you will know what you want. You want tobe able to shoot in low light with less noice, faster startup time, sharper image (Depend on the lens), speed of focus, Raw formatetc.After afewreading here and there, Idecided on 5D a year later because I simply can't live without the Image stabilizer or Anti shake.Other brands build their antishake on the lens which are just to expensive for me.

So it depends on which stage of the photography experience that you are now. For me, I am just enjoyingthedifferent possibility now. Sometimes by just looking atit. :lol:
doublechin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2005, 9:55 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16
Default

Thanks for the comments folks.

Bernabeu - the "35-70 f3.5 macro (equiv 52-105 w/ 1:2 macro)" lense that you mentioned - is that a Minolta brand lens? or just a generic lens with those specs? Again, forgive my lack of knowledge on this sort of thing.
aztec506 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 4:28 AM.