MtOlympus: I took my NEX 6 on a trip with my SLR. The SLR never got out of my camera bag. When I got home I sold the big camera that I had been so happy with, and bought a second NEX 6. Now I keep one loaded with a 12mm prime and the other with the 55-210. Life is now good!
So you always have a unique perspective...
keeponkeepingon: Y'all need to read your own buying guide, this is not a superzoom and you folks are just about the only ones calling it a superzoom:
From the most recent buying guide: "Super zoom / Bridge'Very powerful zoom lenses - typically 20X+ zooms"
10X is not a super zoom. All we have here is a big inconvenient camera with (relatively) little zoom with a lens that is (relatively) slow on the not so wide end (where most folks use it the most) and (relatively) fast on the long end.
300m is what I use for kids soccer and it's barely enough, forget about birds etc.
It's hard to rationalize the cost and size when you can get a pocketable 7X LF1 for under $400.
Considering LF1 and stylus1 - I'd see the LF1 more as high-class take-always pocketable while you still have a decent Dslr in your shelf. If one wants only one camera the Stylus1 looks like a fair concept.
For owners of "real" i.e. pure-foto digicams the question is if the hires sensor delivers more detail than a current digicam of similar price.Too bad that this question is (again) not answered.
Sonys Alpha 58 has several advantages, the most important being a huge offering of third-party lenses, some of them excellent.The E-lens series made sense for small system cams, but I don't get the point for this model.
Samples show grease and smear even at brightest light and ISO100 - similar to the FZ60. Several other digicams with the same small sensor perform better, and the nice lens and other feature can not compensate for the inferior IQ.
A jacket-able system camera with an EVF .. nice. But the small size raises the question about the (smaller) lens quality again - Sonys 16-50 seems to outperform the Pana Vario PZ 14-42 in terms of IQ - and it even has more wideangle...
"70% improvement in signal-to-noise ratio" - fine to hear that about the microphone - how about the same improvement for the image sensor?
The FZ60 was so noisy with ISO100 in bright sunlight it really surprised and annoyed me.
pulsar123: Even though obviously a gimmick (I can't image what one would want to shoot at 1200mm equivalent FL; this is the domain for telescopes, with their massive stable tripods and star tracking motors), the lens's FL range is quite impressive from a lens designer's point of view. In addition, the maximum aperture is 36mm (at the long end), which is also impressive for a P&S camera.
Good point - what I wanted to reply to people complaining about sensor / diffraction: You can use that thing as a telescope - and it's even stabilized.
Maverick_: That's a lot of effort for $399. Lots of features for so little. What would they have to do next to top this. Where do you go from here camera makers? 16mm to 2500mm for $299? And what comes after that fish-eye, to 3000mm for $199?
This to me sounds like the beginning of the end. You can't support this growth in order to give people reasons to upgrade their bridge cameras. If someone buys this camera today and shoots with it a few times a year, he/she would have no reason to ever upgrade unless the camera breaks. This camera already belongs to a small market segment.
With compacts going away, as phone cameras taking over that responsibility, a tiny segment who aren't shooting with DSLRs and phones would still want a bridge cam true, but this segment will keep shrinking fast.
My guess is that we are looking at the last of this particular segment. A couple of more years and that's it.
The future is phone cameras and FF DSLRS.
"If the image quality is reasonable up to ISO400 and good enough for prints up to A4"... - I saw noise even at 100 ISO in bright sunlight on the FZ60 so I sold it after one journey. This one won't be much better.Anyhow, the 20 mm wideangle is a good reason for checking it out.
G0RD0: In comparison to the Canon sx50hs. The Canon can do 1200mm (35mm equiv) optically 24mm x 50x =1200mm. The FZ70 is 20mm x 60x =1200mm (35mm equiv). So the Panasonic is actually just adding 4mm of Wide angle, but no increase in actual reach when compared to the Canon. Panasonic is just using 60x as a marketing strategy. They have not achieved any greater zoom then what was already available
The 20 mm _is_ the really impressive achievement that I've been waiting for. After dpreview has often praised wideangle reach I don't see why they focus on the tele in the short report.
On the tele you can always crop and get the same prespective as with a longer zoom - but you can never get the wider angle.
Another camera that needs a strip of self-adhesive rubber as a handgrip to be usable...
dickg1: If Panasonic thinks this camera is going to seriously compete with the Canon S110 in attracting the "enthusiast" crowd, they screwed up big time!
In my mind, the feature that sets the Canon S110 apart from the majority of its peers is a 24mm wide end.
I recently sold my S95 and bought the S110 for just that reason. I'd much rather give up a 200mm long end to get a 24mm wide angle. The difference between 24mm & 28mm is much greater than the diffeence between 120mm and 200mm.
marike "4mm is greater than 80mm? No it's not. Need a slightly wider FOV, you can always stitch two images together"Not seriously, but you can always crop a 120 mm picture and get the 200 mm perspective, accepting the loss of resolution - you can't do that with a 28 vs 24 mm.But otherwise I agree that - from my usage - 200 vs 120 is more often preferable than 24 vs 28.
iudex: Another barrier broken: an EVF in an enthusiast compact. This alone is great. Of course the 200k EVF is far from good one, however it is still 100% VF and this alone makes it far more useful than 75-80% OVF on G15 & co. So kudos to Panasonic for doing what many have asked for.
Exactly, and one wonders why no camera maker had this idea before, instead always competing in segments with almost the same feature set. Looks like this could finally be a replacement for my Canon A720.Maybe some day we'll even see a lens starting at 24 mm in a pocketable camera with a viewfinder.
I dont buy the "unexpectedly", either it was completely staged, or the photographer influenced the situation, in whatever direction, by pointing a camera at the man. Domestic violence is a serious problem, if this report brought it to more attention, kudos for that. But with regard to human beings in media, we always should keep in mind that there is no such thing as an objective view.
Hmm, I don't understand the sense of this digicam category (like S110), given the latest fast-lens offerings. If one wants better low light perfromance/IQ - why not make a real step to faster lenses, like XZ-1/2 or G15? These also fit well into a jacket pocket.
If smaller, lighter and cheaper variants of 1/1,7" sensors make sense, then it would be with more zoom range, i.e. 28-200 but smaller aperture as the P-7700.
BTW I am currently discovering Marseille with a Canon A720 that I got at ebay after having sold an A710 there years ago :) The IQ is really good (8 Mpx), it offers 35-210 zoom range AND an optical viewfinder AND fits into a pocket.Pfff...
Almeida: A bit expensive...
So this is just the model to attract you, look at the dozen or so of cheaper bridge offers from the same brand and you might get happy...
jaykumarr: I am not very confident that Fuji's efforts in research and development and inventions are very fruitful in their end product due to poor quality control. White Orb Issues, Too much CAs, jpeg artifacts, soft except for "cluster line patterns" in photos are sporadically present in Fuji cameras. But, though inferior in spec. sheet Panasonic, Canon cameras deliver better output.
I hope/drool fuji delivers good output overall and nail the coffin of other bridge cameras. But I insist fuji to concentrate more in output quality than the fantasies of out of world inventions.
For more hands-on information you might want to learn japan. Or, if the features you ask are so obvioius, motivate competitors to jump in the gap.
mpgxsvcd: Can someone remind me why an average consumer needs a 1000mm lens? This just seems like an exercise in seeing how big a lens you can fit on a small sensor camera.
I would much rather see a smaller zoom range and an F2.8 lens throughout. The Panasonic FZ200 is a much much better choice.
An _average_ consumer would rarely need more than 300 mm - so why invest in the size of a bridge cam in the first place?
Amadou Diallo: Some interesting comments around the choice between intervention and documentation. Arguments for both sides, obviously. But the comments about the scene being staged have somehow evolved from "Was it staged?" to "It was staged", with no basis in fact. This is a documentary project from a freelance photojournalist.
Good point, WilliamJ. In that very picture showing him angry one wonders why his anger should ignore the photographer.
bb42: Some caution about the originality of the story is advisable. If it is for real - was Shane asked for consent to publish the pictures?
Stan, are you saying that Mr. Angry signed this agreement?