MrLynn: Color me somewhat disappointed. I use my Rebel T2i/Tamron 18-270mm combination a lot in the canoe and walking about, often for birds, and last fall was all set to spring for a Canon SX60 (better EVF than the SX50, but worse IQ reviews). Then I saw an FX1000 at Best Buy and loved its bright EVF and the idea of the larger sensor. But it wasn't a 'superzoom'.
When I heard that the FZ300 was imminent, I hoped that it would expand the well-reviewed FZ200's zoom, keep Leica optics, and maybe even increase sensor size. But that didn't happen.
I might still get an FZ200 when the price comes down. My 270mm with the SLR's sensor is close to 400mm 35mm-equivalent, so 600mm equivalent should gain me a little, maybe enough, as it's hard to steady the camera when the canoe's bobbing.
Still, I wish the new FZ300 were 900mm or so, even at the cost of losing the f2.8 aperture at the long end. But I suppose Panasonic didn't want to tread on the heels of the indifferently-reviewed FZ70.
The f2.8 aperture is wildly great-the lens quality gives spectacular IQ. I don't belive the FZ300 in enough of a jump to make trading up worthwhile. Prices will drop now for the 200.
Since we are in a result based society, how do Cosina (Voigtlander) lenses stack up against Cosina (Zeiss) lenses. Does the quality drop noticably with the price? Have their been tests? Inquiring minds want to know!! VRR
AshMills: Presumably DNG converter will still let CS6 work just fine? (assuming your current lenses are already supported)
I also just started using the JPEG/Raw combo. I agree completely. Any old PS product can be used once converted.
VREN: Life isn't free. You must pay for upgrades. That said, it is obvious that Adobe is attempting to drag persons kicking and screaming into their subscription-based software, with no appreciation for the customer loyalty that helped them to reach where they are now.
Ain't gonna happen...
After reading "replies" to my statement of praise, I realize that I always should preface my comments by indicating that I shoot no video whatsoever and do street photography these days in monochrome raw (converting to color where necessary). For that use the f2.8 constant aperture is nothing short of spectacular. I post process in PS and lightroom. My final word on this topic ...for me the Fz200 results have been outstanding. VRR
rwdigital: The FZ300 is the replacement for the FZ200 but I see nothing innovating in the image quality. The FZ200 was a total garbage. Even with so acclaimed F/2.8 constant the camera has a lot of noise even at ISO 200 in normal condition, when you switch to record in the AVCHD video mode, the footage goes almost 3 stop darker, the MP4 mode now and then record pix-elated footage which ruined a lot of family event, the image quality is way too soft and the image its not that good with that tiny sensor...So whats new on the FZ300?...The 4K it’s just a gimmick marketing strategy which I really dont get sold by, IS in not even available in 4K just like the FZ1000, so they are playing games here with this camera, then on the following model, they will put IS in 4K mode, I bet this camera (FZ300) doesn't have Headphone Jack,maybe the mic jack but the same useless 2.5mm... I already sold by Sony RX10 II...
Just read a comment from someone who cooled called the Fz200 "garbage". That's what makes horse races, I guess. I bought the digicam the moment it came out. I take candids of people in street photography sometimes in very low light conditions. The camera is superbly sharp in all conditions. The images blw up to 20x30 with absolutely no loss of sharpness or resolution. The lens has spectacular resolving power. I can't help but be amazed at conclusory statements which are used to justify bad results. Photography is much more than the equipment. Knowing how to use it to achieve results you want is vitally important. Of course I was probably doing photography before the critic was born. I would never give up the Fz200 especially not for a model that changes so little. Panasonic, as I have said in other posts gives the Photographer so much more of what is needed than either Canon or Nikon. To me, personally, the Fz200 is spectacular. VRR
Panasonic should provide a service to engrave the numbers properly. I presume that they will have to do so in the future. VRR
I own 2 DSLRs with the latest being a 40D I bought 7 years ago. Since then I have standardized on m4/3. I really wanted to go back to use DSLRs but they are just too difficult to have with me when I travel- I will be commuting coast to coast. There is no question that try as they might- Canon/Nikon etc. will be unable to extend their lines of DSLRs for long. Mirrorless will absolutely take the place of the DSLR. Poetic justice? Canon has for so long refused to compete with itself to the detriment of photographers, by not giving what we need. Full frame mirrorless with the new resolutions will take over professionally. Canon/Nikon MUST have contingency plans. VRR
Hinder: Crap, still no viewfinder?!!!! No thank you. How do you hold it still at 600mm? An add on VF? Might as well carry my SL1 . I really wanted to like it but it's just another Canon fail. :(
Absolutely right-to say nothing of the problems with composition. Viewfinders are a must for serious photography.
As an old time Leica photographer it is my sole opinion (I say sole because so many will disagree) if you don't have a viewfinder- you are a snapshooter no matter how much time you spend in post processing. VRR
Once again Canon... no built in EVF...idiots..."nuff said"
looks lovely- but as I have said so often in this column, I have trouble using a 35mm lens as a "normal" lens...let alone a 28mm.
vroger1: Hi all. I am a total Lumix guy-but sorry, although it means nothing- my very first reaction is "G-d that's an ugly little sucker" I am sure it will prove to be a superb camera- but boy is it ugly. But that's just my opinion.Now I'll start reading the specs. VRR
You actually get it!!
Hi all. I am a total Lumix guy-but sorry, although it means nothing- my very first reaction is "G-d that's an ugly little sucker" I am sure it will prove to be a superb camera- but boy is it ugly. But that's just my opinion.Now I'll start reading the specs. VRR
vroger1: One caveat. When I bought the Leica 25mm Summilux some years ago, I already had the 20mm Lumix 1.7. The latter lens is good- the much more expensive Leica branded lens is great. The difference was noticeable even in the sample comparisons by DP Review. Lumix lenses are very good- but Leica branded are probably worth the price difference. VRR
I am sure you'll get it- I found the Lumix branded lenses tobe extraordinary (witness the 45-200 http://v-images.smugmug.com/Other/IN-PARIS-2011/18852693_D5zdL8#!i=1461093880&k=tqV5xgx&lb=1&s=A )- but with respect to the 1.4 Leica branded- the kick up in sharpness- is more than warranted (http://v-images.smugmug.com/GENERALSTREETIMAGES/2011-IMAGES/18183376_36DHSf#!i=1589033514&k=VN77t8t&lb=1&s=A). VRR
Zvonimir Tosic: Does not matter what this camera is not. But for that what it is, a beautiful and functional little device. Kudos to Panasonic.
Just a comment- from an old time photographer that Panasonic listens to us more than any other innovative manufacturer. Though I have standardized on the Leica Typ 109 (Panasonic Lumix LX100) a digicam that does "everything" and does it well, over and over again Panasoinic says: "This is what they want". Fast lens- Fast lens superzoom (FZ200). The only problem is each time they come out with a viewfinder equipped professional grade (by feature) digicam, I buy it. pure joy from Panasonc. VRR
One caveat. When I bought the Leica 25mm Summilux some years ago, I already had the 20mm Lumix 1.7. The latter lens is good- the much more expensive Leica branded lens is great. The difference was noticeable even in the sample comparisons by DP Review. Lumix lenses are very good- but Leica branded are probably worth the price difference. VRR
I never thought I'd be a critic of Canon. I have said in the past and continue to say, that Canon's problem is that it does not listen to consumers. Now that they have upgraded the M- they will not (at this writing) export it to the United States. Why?...I believe that Canon has been surpassed by other manufacturers who do in fact listen to consumers; that they realize that sales in the US would be limited to photographers who would otherwise buy their DSLRs and do not want to lose that market. I use the Canon M ($250) for black and white almost exclusively. The results are superb. I use the Leica TYP 109 (LX100) for most of my other images and the reults are equal to or better than other digicams including APS C Canons - the key to that Panasonic digicam are the features. They border on the unbelievable. Panasonic LISTENS TO US AND GIVES US WHAT WE WANT AND NEED, I guess that the new M will eventually be sold in the US but it is too little, too late and Canon knows it. vroger
The other day a young lady who is an actress in France, came in out of the rain into my law office. I took the opportunity to run off a few frames with the TYP 109 - (which is the Leica iteration of the LX100). I was in a rush and it wasn't until I checked the specs that I saw the "Intelligent Auto ISO" had set the unit at 1600. There is little to no noticeable noise. I have not used the camera much as of yet- but as I travel in the next two months I have every reason to believe that it will perform up to expectations. I enclose the image.
lacix: ...Guys will whistle after you!
I agree- strictly for women. There is always room for a tiny camera. One doesn't have to use a phone.