Panasonic FZ30 , FZ20

[Magikhat]

Im going on my honeymoon in 2 weeks and I wanted to buy a camera

I currently have a 3mp cannon elph
My hands are not steady and my pictures come out blurry a lot
The 12x digital zoom on that elph really is horrible


I was looking at the FZ20 and FZ30

I want to take regular pictures/indoor outdoor
and a few landscape shots of the island we are going to

It just seems like a great camera, despite some of the reviews
it seems like it has everything I need

The FZ30 is 485$

the FZ20 is 350$

Its a big difference, and the reviews say the FZ20 has brighter lens?
And they say FZ3 shows somewhat more noise than the FZ1/2 because of its higher pixel density. (Dont know if this is true)

Should i save my money, or am i really missing something if i dont go with the FZ30

I still have to buy a memory stick and some other things..

I have not yet personally held the FZ20 or FZ30, The picture makes it look big
but I think if its bigger than most digital cameras out there, I will shake less

Im will just be doing point and shoot mostly, I do not know much about cameras
but to get a nice camera to learn with would be nice. The macro feature looks
very fun to play with as well

Any suggestions would be great, thanks- Daniel

[kassandro]

I would clearly go with the FZ30. It is worth the additional dollars, especially for your honeymoon. It has much better ergonomics. Unlike the FZ20 it has an excellent movie mode. It has a nice tilt'n swivel display.
With both cameras you will have no more pictures blurred by shake. Image stabilisation really works.

[audioedge]

personally Id take the better lens in the FZ20 but thats just me... the other things are nice but do you want gadgets or a lens?

[E.T]

Magikhat wrote:

The 12x digital zoom on that elph really is horrible

That's natural because digital zoom is plain fraud.

I want to take regular pictures/indoor outdoor
and a few landscape shots of the island we are going to

In that case you would be better with for example KM A200... these hyped ultrazooms don't have best wide angle.
Unless you're more specially taking wild animal/birds shots I would rank good wide angle much better to have than that longest possible tele.


BTW, is your current camera Canon PowerShot S230?


Also don't buy Memory Sticks, that Sony's proprietary scheisse won't help any with other cameras.

[audioedge]

E.T wrote:

Also don't buy Memory Sticks, that Sony's proprietary scheisse won't help any with other cameras.

Unless they have a PSP then it might be handy, lol...

I agree with all your other comments tho except that ultrazooms are only better for birding, like was mentioned in some otherthread that extra bit of zoom might enable you to frame a shot exactly as you like.

[Magikhat]

Sorry How is the lens better in the FZ20 than the FZ30

I do want a nice lens but I want gadgets too

The Konica Minolta DiMAGE A200 is the same price
as the FZ30 but the fz30 has a 12x zoom

compared to a 7x zoom of the A200

but you say the A200 has a awesome wide view
and the 7x zoom compared to the 12x zoom is not much to give up

and the A200 wide lens is really a lot better then?

How does the FZ30 and A200 lens compare quality wise? not just tele/wide?

And does the A200 take better macro shots?

thanks- Daniel

[audioedge]

the fz20 is f2.8 throughout its entire range.... i think the fz30 goes to f3.7 very soon into its focal lengths... which basically means the fz20 performs better in lower light

and as for your questions on other issues you should think of focal lengths rather than zoom factors (x12 etc).... the A200 has 28-200mm and the Fz's 35-420mm... so its a personal preference as to liking wide angle or lots of zoom... I had an FZ5 and I loved the zoom factor, it really is great fun - and if I ever needed to get a wide angle I would take two pictures and stictch them together (FZ comes with stitching software bundled)

from pictures i have seen i would say the a200 edge's it, but dont get me wrong lots of top quality Fz pictures are out there... and for macro they are pretty similar i think...

[E.T]

A200's macro is quite superior to almost all other digicams I've seen reviewed, because it works in tele end so lens doesn't shadow target (wide angle macro requires almost cramming lens to target) and there isn't heavy distortions, chromatic aberrations and such...



FZ30:

can get down to around 5cm at the wide end of the lens (capturing an area around 5.5cm across). At the long end of the zoom the macro is, inevitably, less impressive, focusing down to around 200mm and capturing an area just under 15cm across. At the wide end there is inevitably some distortion, and you can see some chromatic aberration (CA), but it's good for this class of camera. The FZ30's macro mode is slightly less capable than the FZ20.
Wide macro - 54 x 40 mm coverage
Distortion: Average
Corner softness: Low to average

Tele macro - 148 x 111 mm coverage...

So tele macro isn't much any macro at all and here's what that "average" means:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Pana...cro/Wide1x.JPG




FZ20:

As is common in zoom cameras the FZ20's macro capabilities are much better at the wide end of the zoom (5cm subject distance capturing an area around 43mm across), and there is inevitably some barrel distortion (and some color fringing). At the full 12x zoom position the close focus ability is less impressive - a subject distance of 200cm capturing an area around 12cm across, but there is no distortion at all.
Wide macro - 43 x 32 mm coverage
Distortion: Average
Corner softness: Average

Tele macro - 116 x 87 mm coverage...

Here's that average again:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Pana...cro/wide1x.JPG



A200:

The telephoto macro option provides respectable close up shots with high magnification and no distortion (other than a little corner softness at a wide open aperture). The frame coverage results are virtually identical to the A2.

Tele macro - 54 x 60 mm coverage
Distortion: low
Corner softness: low
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Koni...tele7x-001.jpg

Dpreview propably messed little here, lens is exactly same as in Minolta 7-serie, and A1 and A2 models and those capture shot whose longer side is ~50mm. (I've had 7i and now have A2)
Also Imaging Resource states it that way: The A200 performed very well in the macro category, capturing a minimum area of only 1.99 x 1.49 inches (50 x 38 millimeters). Resolution is very high, and a lot of fine detail...

[tclune]

While my personal decision is in line with AudioEdge's, the differences that seem to matter between these two cameras boil down to this:

The FZ20 has a brighter lens and, by all disinterested accounts, less noise in the lower ISO settings in lower light images.

The FZ30 has better ergonomics, a better movie mode, more pixels (if you're thinking of making largeposters), and can save images in RAW format. The last of these is the one that is most attractive to me.

ETA: By the way, the FZ30 doesn't have noticeably higher pixel density than the FZ20, it has a larger sensor (that's why they couldn't use that wonderful FZ20 lens any more). The density is almost identical between the two cameras, so I really don't know why the noise is more pronounced at ISO 80 & 100 in all but bright sunlight. It may be that they needed to tone down the image processing to keep from processing the higher resolution away with the noise. But that is pure, unadulterated speculation.

[Magikhat]

Based on the pictures
it seems you can get a lot closer with the FZ20

The A200 seems nice but I think I have my heart set on

the FZ20 or FZ30


(on those macro pictures)
THE FZ30 didnt zoom in as much, but it was a clean, more clear picture

and with 8MP , after you take the picture you can zoom into that and get closer?

THe FZ20 lens is brighter, but is it that much of a difference?