Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 6, 2007, 8:14 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

The FZ50 is more expensive than the FZ18 because it is has a 10MP sensor, and Panasonic knows that the consumer will pay more money for a camera with more MP. If you absolutely must have one for $600, you can still buy one directly from Panasonic at that price. And, if you want to have the same or greater zoom range as the FZ18, you have to add some accessories. And, if you want to use that dedicated hot shoe, you have to add a flash. Did I say add? Sorry, I meant buy. Let's add everything up...(all prices from a very reputable dealer - B&H, who has all the items in stock).

FZ50 = $465.95
DMW-LW55 (wide angle converter) = $209.95
DMW-LT55 (1.7x teleconverter) + $269.95
DMW-FL360 (flash) + $199.95

Total = $1145.80

Not bad for an antiquated point and shoot, eh?

And what about that weight? Lighter than a DSLR...body only? Let's compare...

FZ50 with accessories ($1145.80) = 734 g (25.9 oz) 1.47 lbs!

Canon XTI with 18-55mm zoom ($614.95) = 746 g (body only = 556g)
Nikon D40x with 18-55mm zoom ($614.95) = 726 g (body only = 522g)
Oly E510 with both 14-42mm and 40-150mm zoom (654.95) = 710 g with the larger lens (body only = 490g)

You can actually buy a number of DSLR's that are lighter than the antiquated FZ50, which will offer much better picture quality, and be able to take great pictures at more than ISO 200 without capturing nothing but grain and losing detail due to overly aggressive in-camera noise reduction. And apparently for less money.

But you won't listen to me, so here's what the pros say:

Steve (ever the nice guy)..."As you can see in our sample photos image quality was very good using the 10-megapixel, Fine mode, with the ISO set to 100. You can also choose to shoot in uncompressed RAW format."

dcresource: "Am I disappointed that Panasonic stuffed a tiny 10 Megapixel sensor into it and then turned the noise reduction to eleven? Very much so." "It's also the largest and most expensive of the bunch -- in fact, it's even bigger and more expensive than some digital SLRs! If you're a person who doesn't plan on taking a lot of high ISO shots then I can certainly recommend this camera. If you want to shoot at higher sensitivities, be prepared to spend time in Photoshop to get the best results, or perhaps consider a digital SLR"

photographyblog: "Unfortunately the DMC-FZ50 carries on an unwanted Panasonic tradition, namely noise. Previous Lumix models have suffered from noisy images at relatively slow ISO speeds, and I'm afraid the DMC-FZ50 with its 10 megapixel sensor is no exception."

Cameralabs: "And with good reason too: as seen on our outdoor noise results page, the FZ50 sadly runs into trouble at 200 ISO and above, where ultimate detail is smeared-out by aggressive noise reduction systems; you can turn the noise reduction down, but the results still leave much to be desired. At 400 ISO and above the images begin to resemble impressionistic paintings when viewed at 100%.

Of course you could argue the FZ50's undesirable artefacts essentially disappear at lower screen magnifications or typical print sizes, but as far as we're concerned, that's missing the point. We believe every camera should stand-up to scrutiny at 100% and every single Megapixel should be usable – otherwise, what's the point in going for such a high resolution sensor? Forcing yourself to shoot exclusively at 100 ISO or treating the camera as if it had half its actual resolution is no way to work. "

dpreview: "If you look at the list of pros and cons above you'll notice that the pros are mostly concerned with the camera and the cons are mostly concerned with the image, or more specifically the effect of noise and Venus III noise reduction. This sums up the FZ50 perfectly; a fantastic camera with a less than stellar sensor / processor, and way too many pixels."

More expensive is more expensive...not necessarily better.

The Hun






rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 2007, 11:45 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

rinniethehun wrote:
Quote:
The FZ50 is more expensive than the FZ18 because it is has a 10MP sensor, and Panasonic knows that the consumer will pay more money for a camera with more MP. If you absolutely must have one for $600, you can still buy one directly from Panasonic at that price. And, if you want to have the same or greater zoom range as the FZ18, you have to add some accessories. And, if you want to use that dedicated hot shoe, you have to add a flash. Did I say add? Sorry, I meant buy. Let's add everything up...(all prices from a very reputable dealer - B&H, who has all the items in stock).

FZ50 = $465.95
DMW-LW55 (wide angle converter) = $209.95
DMW-LT55 (1.7x teleconverter) + $269.95
DMW-FL360 (flash) + $199.95

Total = $1145.80

Not bad for an antiquated point and shoot, eh?

And what about that weight? Lighter than a DSLR...body only? Let's compare...

FZ50 with accessories ($1145.80) = 734 g (25.9 oz) 1.47 lbs!

Canon XTI with 18-55mm zoom ($614.95) = 746 g (body only = 556g)
Nikon D40x with 18-55mm zoom ($614.95) = 726 g (body only = 522g)
Oly E510 with both 14-42mm and 40-150mm zoom (654.95) = 710 g with the larger lens (body only = 490g)



More expensive is more expensive...not necessarily better.

The Hun








So you are comparing a camera, cost-wise, fitted onlywith a cheap18-55 lens and no accessory flashwith a camera that, after you outfit it with two accessory lenses,covers a rangefrom 24mm to 714mm and an accessory flash?

My comparison in terms of weight was compared to two mid-rangeDSLR's I have used...the Canon 10D andOlympus E1. I would expect you would use the lightest, cheapest bodies to make your point on that, and there I do agree. I played with an E510 this past weekend. It's quite nice, but in bringing DSLR's into this conversation, we both went well beyond the original posters question, which had nothing to do with DSLR's.

Take that Canon XTI, add lenses that give you a comperable zoom range andspeedof the lens on the FZ50, AND add a flash unit like you did with the FZ50, and while you're at it, add the weight up on the new DSLR outfit.

The E510, in order to equal the speed of the FZ50 would require replacing those two kit lenses with the 14-54 and 50-200 f2.8-3.5 Digital Zuikos, andneither setup equals the reach on the wide or telephoto endof the FZ50 setup you named and priced with a flash (which you also left off in the DSLR pricing).

You sure you don't work in that shop the OP visited?

I've used both types of cameras, have many images from both on my website and have hadmany of both types printed.As to your comment about viewing files at 100%, I've never made a print 32x42 inches, which is the size you would have to print an FZ8 file to equal the view of a file at 100% on a monitor. An FZ50 file would have to be printed even bigger. Do you typically print your images at over 4 feet in size?100% viewing online is irrelevent for anyone other than someone more interested in the pixels than the pictures. At "fit to screen" size on my wide panel monitor with Photoshop open, a file is already over letter-size, which is the size I print the biggest majority of my pictures.

You keep on quoting reviewers, some of which are neither "pro" reviewers or photographers, but are notoriously some of the worst pixel peeping geeksaround.I'm sure if they had existed in the days prior to the invention of digital photography, many of those guys wouldhaveshot slides and view them with microscopes instead of loupes. Prints from an FZ50 stand up very well....at least for those of us who've actually usedone for that purpose.





Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 3:38 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

"...but don't kid yourself here...pick up a DSLR with a standard zoom lens. The FZ50 weighs less than that DSLR body with NO lens mounted."

That's what I was referring to. I didn't bring up DSLR's.

"As to your comment about viewing files at 100%, I've never made a print 32x42 inches, which is the size you would have to print an FZ8 file to equal the view of a file at 100% on a monitor."

Wasn't my comment ...note the 'end quote' (") after the word 'work.' I didn't mention the FZ8.

I don't work in a camera shop. If you did, the shop would be full of nothing but dusty, old FZ50's, and you'd be broke.

"You keep on quoting reviewers, some of which are neither "pro" reviewers or photographers, but are notoriously some of the worst pixel peeping geeksaround."

I quoted Steve...

You're a great photographer, and your camera is the best ever made. Now do you feel better?

the Hun

rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 10:24 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 44
Default

Hun,



Your argument does not hold water at all. Did you add alll the lenses and an optional flash to the DSLR? What would be the weight and cost of it then?

DSLR's might look attractive but if you want a fast QUALITY zoom lens and an optional flash then you are looking at some big bucks,more weight and a huge commitment.

We all get caught up in pixel peeping. but at what point are you satisfied? If you want the best, be prepared to pay 1,000 dollars or more for just one lens!
richwolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 11:30 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

rich,

I have no argument. No, I didn't add all the lenses to the DSLR, because you can only use one at a time. By the same token, I didn't add the weight of the wide angle and teleconverter to the FZ50 in my comparison. No, I didn't add the weight of the external flash to the DSLR, because I didn't add the weight of the external flash to the FZ50 in my comparison. The weight of the DSLR would increase the same amount as would the FZ50, assuming the same or similar flash unit was added. The cost of the DSLR would increase only if a flash was purchased. Since the DSLR would be capable of much better low light performance than the FZ50, you might not have to add an external flash.

The original comparison made here was between the FZ18 and the FZ50. If you have an FZ50 and want a wider angle lens than the FZ18, you need to buy a wide angle lens for it. If you want a longer reach than the FZ18, you need to buy a teleconverter for it.

"DSLR's might look attractive but if you want a fast QUALITY zoom lens and an optional flash then you are looking at some big bucks,more weight and a huge commitment."


You're not telling me something here I don't already know. I never said I wanted a DSLR. I replied to a post that stated that the FZ50 waslighter than a DSLR body only, and that it was the next best thing, quality wise...I disagreed...I still do.

"We all get caught up in pixel peeping. but at what point are you satisfied? If you want the best, be prepared to pay 1,000 dollars or more for just one lens!"

I'm not pixel peeping. I'm very satisfied. I don't want or need the best. I'm not getting prepared for anything, because I'm not going to buy a $1000 lens.

This was my reply to the OP:

The FZ50 is a year older model, it's considerably larger, heavier, has a smaller zoom range, smaller LCD (not looking too good so far)...it does have a hot shoe..

I guess it all depends on what you're looking for in the way of features.

Did I lie? If so, which of the above statements was a lie?


For this I got attacked. I'm still getting attacked. And you know what? I kind of like it - bring it on!

the Hun





rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 11:53 AM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 44
Default

Never accused you of lying.



You called the FZ50 outdated. Compared to the FZ18 it has a larger sensor (I believe) and a manual focus and zoom ring which are important to some people. Just those 3 items along with the hotshoe might be enough to convince people to buy this "outdated" camera.

Even the weight of the camera is a positive to people who want something that feels more substantial.

Only the consumer can decide which is more important to them.

No way a DSLR is in the same price league if you have to buy the lenses to give the same range as the FZ50

Is the Fuji 6000fd outdated because it has no IS? For some people larger sensors rule for good reasons.
richwolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 4:57 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

" You called the FZ50 outdated."

When did I do that? I think you were the one that came up with that term.

" Only the consumer can decide which is more important to them."

So what did i say? I said: " I guess it all depends on what you're looking for in the way of features. " Didn't I?

" No way a DSLR is in the same price league if you have to buy the lenses to give the same range as the FZ50"

Never said it was.

" Is the Fuji 6000fd outdated because it has no IS?"

Lack of IS has no bearing on whether a camera is current or not. There are new models coming out all the time that do not have IS.

the Hun


rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 6:22 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 44
Default

rinniethehun wrote:
Quote:
" You called the FZ50 outdated."

When did I do that? I think you were the one that came up with that term.

" Only the consumer can decide which is more important to them."

So what did i say? I said: " I guess it all depends on what you're looking for in the way of features. " Didn't I?

" No way a DSLR is in the same price league if you have to buy the lenses to give the same range as the FZ50"

Never said it was.

" Is the Fuji 6000fd outdated because it has no IS?"

Lack of IS has no bearing on whether a camera is current or not. There are new models coming out all the time that do not have IS.

the Hun

Direct quotes from you:Hun

"FZ250? Must be really new - hasn't even made the Panasonic web site yet. What do you know about it?

the Hun



The FZ50 is a year older model, it's considerably larger, heavier, has a smaller zoom range, smaller LCD (not looking too good so far)...it does have a hot shoe..



Not bad for an antiquated point and shoot, eh?



You can actually buy a number of DSLR's that are lighter than the antiquated FZ50, which will offer much better picture quality, and be able to take great pictures at more than ISO 200 without capturing nothing but grain and losing detail due to overly aggressive in-camera noise reduction. And apparently for less money.



I don't work in a camera shop. If you did, the shop would be full of nothing but dusty, old FZ50's, and you'd be broke.



You're a great photographer, and your camera is the best ever made. Now do you feel better?"





Forgive me but I confused outdated with antiquated. Explain the difference?



You are good at adding up weights and cost of equipment when it bolsters your argument but to say a DSLR with a kit lens at the same price of the FZ50 is all around more capable than the FZ50 then I cannot agree with that. The FZ50 and other bridge cameras all offer a feature set for the money. You overlooked many obvious features of the FZ50 whichhappens to be oneof the highest rated non DSLR cameras out there.




richwolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2007, 8:30 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

richw,

You are pretty good at putting words in other peoples mouths. First, you accused me of calling the FZ50 ‘outdated', which was an out and out lie - you were the one that referred to it as ‘outdated'. Now, you're accusing me of calling it ‘antiquated'. Dude, the OP used that term in his post about the camera shop people...I didn't bring it up, I only referenced it one of my replies, as I considered it humorous. If you recall, I referred to the FZ50 an older model than the FZ18.

"You are good at adding up weights and cost of equipment when it bolsters your argument..."

As I told you previously, I have no argument. I added up the weights as a response to the "...pick up a DSLR with a standard zoom lens. The FZ50 weighs less than that DSLR body with NO lens mounted." I picked up three DSLR bodies with NO lens mounted, and they all weighed less than the FZ50. In fact, two of the three, when fitted with a kit lens, still weighed less than the FZ50. The other weighed 12 grams (.42 oz) more.

"...but to say a DSLR with a kit lens at the same price of the FZ50 is all around more capable than the FZ50 then I cannot agree with that. "

Here you go again...I never said that a DSLR with a kit lens is all around more capable than the FZ50...I did say that I considered a DSLR to be capable of producing higher quality pictures than the FZ50 when shooting at more than ISO 200. Any arguments?

"You overlooked many obvious features of the FZ50 which happens to be one of the highest rated non DSLR cameras out there."

I admit I didn't specify all of the features of the FZ50 in my reply to the OP...I wasn't attempting to provide a complete, professional camera review. I merely pointed out some of the more obvious differences between the FZ50 and FZ18. Many camera shoppers consider model age, size, weight, and LCD size very important features. By the way, who said the FZ50 was one of the highest rated non DSLR cameras out there - wasn't one of those pixel peeping geeks, was it?

And why did you post in red? Are you angry? Are you trying to intimidate me? I think you've strayed considerably from the OP's request for information. Now if you have anything relevant to add....

The Hun

rinniethehun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2007, 12:31 PM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 44
Default

Your first response on this thread was uncalled for. You probably knew full well that the OP was asking about the FZ50.

You are just another internet bully.

I have better things to do with my time than to argue with the likes of you.

Merry Christmas.


richwolf 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 11:03 PM.