FZ cameras not "indoor cameras?" - NOT!!

[Barry Kernerman]

You may be in total darkness, but your camera was using the night lighting to focus on. That's what you were able to see in your LCD.
Barry

http://bobbyz.smugmug.com/gallery/52579/1/1805500

The FZ-10 does NOT do well indoors.

That's a pretty emphatic statement.
I'm just curious, what makes you such an expert on the FZ-10.
Perhaps you meant to say "I do not do well indoors with the FZ-10".

Speaking for myself, I am well aware of some of this cameras
shortcomings,
and I try to work around them, and sometimes very successfully.
I have taken, what I feel, are some very good indoor shots.
I've also taken some horrible shots. Now I know there are some
on this forum that consider anything less than 100 percent as
unacceptable,
but after owning 100's of cameras in my lifetime, I KNOW that no
camera is perfect. That's why at any given time, I will own several
cameras. There is no one camera perfect for all situations.

Jim

--
Bobby

http://bobbyz.smugmug.com

 

[Barry Kernerman]

This is an absolutely gorgeous discussion going on here, with
couple of posters, including you, putting up really good arguments.
All that, and we have not yet been derailed. I like that.

Coming to the FZ10's low light ability, I prefer to look at it as
an inconvinience, rather than as a bug or a flaw. A better ability
is certainly desirable, but there is no point in scaring away
potential owners by decrying it aloud.
There is an almost $300~$400 price diff between the A1 and the FZ10
(based on todays price on Ritzcamera.com).
even after all that, you get a lower zoom than the FZ10.
Is that a flaw?

I am not comparing the 2 cameras in any way, except perhaps by mentioning the A1's low light capabilities. There is a difference between features, and features that don't work properly. In the case of the A1, it's 28mm. - 200mm. zoom is quite adequate for most people, and cannot be construed as being a flaw. In fact it's lens is really of no less quality than the lens on the Panasonic, but surely there is more to an FZ10 than its lens just as there is more to an A1 than its lens.

it is not a trade-off. The FZ10's EVF/LDC is flawed, and often unusable in low light. That is the difference. You may look upon it as an inconvenience. I see it as a design flaw which needs to be corrected by Panasonic. I suppose that's where we differ. You are simply sweeping it under the rug instead of facing that it is a real existing design problem.

People will not be frightened away by this discussion. Give them more credit than that!

If nobody talks about it on this forum they will find out about it themselves after buying one anyway. Then they must choose whether it is a hinderance or not. When I owned a 707, I never used the night shooting even once. But what does that prove anything.

What amazes me is that none of you appear to even care if Panasonic ever fixes this problem or not. As a result, the FZ11 and FZ12 will probably be no better in that respect, since you all seem to be insisting that it is all only a figment of my imagination. I assure you, it's hardly that.
Barry

no. it is a tradeoff.
would we like more zoom on the A1? Sure.
would we like better low light ability on the FZ10? maybe. I don't
particularly see the need for it. I have the Sony DCR-TRV17 with
low light and no light ability for over 1.5 yrs. how many times
have I used it? Once - to find out how it works.

I therefore cannot justify spending $400 for a camera that does not
meet my needs. You do. So good for you.

Barry Kernerman wrote:
.....

Not like shooting in the dark. But shooting in low indoor light.
If I wanted to shoot in the dark I would buy a Sony 7x7 or 828.
Not everyone likes to use flash, and I am one of them. If the A1
were to have such a flaw, nobody would buy it - even with all of
its multitude of features.
Don't take criticism of the FZ10 so personally.

 

[John_Reed]

No, I didn't use continuous focus. I just watched the subject through the viewfinder, (EVF) and half-depressed the shutter button when she came into view; then I just moved the camera along with her, keeping my eye on her in the viewfinder, until she came to about the right place, then pushed the shutter button all the way. It's important to keep your camera moving through the whole process.

When you take the panning shot like in your gallery, do you use
continuous focus? I am trying to figure out how to pre-focus using
the focus button. I am not good at judging distances. Any
suggestions, I am an upgraded fz1 owner.

By the way John, I love your work in that galllery.

--
just imagine

--
John Reed

Nikon CoolPix 4500 Panasonic DMC-FZ1 (w/FZ2 upgrade)

--
Bobby

http://bobbyz.smugmug.com

--
John Reed

Nikon CoolPix 4500 Panasonic DMC-FZ1 (w/FZ2 upgrade)

 

[Ramblin]

If I can shoot in a reasonable sized room without flash using the light of a 60 watt shaded lamp and have the picture turn out. I'm happy.

.01 percent of camera users would shoot in extremely low light and then up the levels in photoshop to see what details can be seen. .01 percent would get mad when the camera wouldn't make this shot.

If the A1 and Pentax can do this GOOD! People who take mostly indoors shots have no need to buy a 12x zoom camera. The 12x zoom is wasted for indoor shooters unless they're shooting the apartment across the way through their window. People who want to carry a camera in their purse or pocket don't buy a canon digital rebel. People who are having trouble seeing don't buy telescopes to watch TV.

That being said. The EVF boost is possible with a firmware update. Will it be done? I doubt it. Can it be redesigned to do better in low light? Yes it can. Will I pay more to buy a re-designed camera? No.

obsession with achieving something which is not considered
practical in regualr life?

--
Olympus C5050, Panasonic FZ1, FZ10K, Oly Tcon 1.7
http://www.pbase.com/ramblin_mo/galleries

 

[jimagine]

What amazes me is that none of you appear to even care if Panasonic
ever fixes this problem or not. As a result, the FZ11 and FZ12
will probably be no better in that respect, since you all seem to
be insisting that it is all only a figment of my imagination. I
assure you, it's hardly that.
Barry

Ah, Barry...you seem to be missing the point here: we don't agree with you, therefore we're not marching on Panasonic Headquarters this week. See, your opinion is just that, you are not the final arbiter of fact here. In my opinion the A1 is less of a camera than the FZ10 in more ways than just the lens, and at a considerably higher price. But I don't think the A1 is flawed...It was my final choice over the 5700 and F828. At the last moment I heard about the new FZ10. I plugged it into all of my extensive research and testing of the other three and guess what: I bought the FZ.

So, after careful comparison and consideration I chose the one you didn't. That's why there's more than one camera company. If it was a clam, I'd be shooting with the A1 now and enjoying it.

--
just imagine

 

[jimagine]

Just a new user here. I did take this picture on total dark night
(I could barely see my camera buttons) I was able to compose it on
my LCD. I have upgraded fz1. I don't use EVF.

http://bobbyz.smugmug.com/gallery/52579/1/1805500

Bobby...great work. I love the way you handle with the difficult exposures involving silhouettes and sunlight on water. The shot across the sound with the bridge barely visible in the fog is a great testament to the potential of this camera

--
just imagine

 

[Mareda]

Ah, Barry...you seem to be missing the point here: we don't agree
with you, therefore we're not marching on Panasonic Headquarters
this week. See, your opinion is just that, you are not the final
arbiter of fact here. In my opinion the A1 is less of a camera than
the FZ10 in more ways than just the lens, and at a considerably
higher price. But I don't think the A1 is flawed...It was my final
choice over the 5700 and F828. At the last moment I heard about the
new FZ10. I plugged it into all of my extensive research and
testing of the other three and guess what: I bought the FZ.

So, after careful comparison and consideration I chose the one you
didn't. That's why there's more than one camera company. If it was
a clam, I'd be shooting with the A1 now and enjoying it.

--
just imagine

Yes, that IS the point. If we're not unhappy, it doesn't mean we're in denial. We're not going to get up in arms over what two or three of you are posting here.

Jimagine, are you saying Barry doesn't even OWN a Panasonic - that he returned his FZ10? I must have missed that, but if that's the case, this is just trolling. Between novices posting "tips", pictures being posted that were taken by non-Panasonic camera's simply for the sake of posting them, and all of this whining, I feel as though two terrorists have hijacked the Panasonic forum. And I'm not kidding!

Maureen

 

[jimagine]

Jimagine, are you saying Barry doesn't even OWN a Panasonic - that
he returned his FZ10? I must have missed that, but if that's the
case, this is just trolling. Between novices posting "tips",
pictures being posted that were taken by non-Panasonic camera's
simply for the sake of posting them, and all of this whining, I
feel as though two terrorists have hijacked the Panasonic forum.
And I'm not kidding!

I don't know really...it's to hard to keep up with the players with out a score card. Either way, I don't begrudge him his opinion. I'm jsut trying to point out that it's just that, because he seems hell bent on criticizing all the happy FZers that don't share his indignation.

Good example...I came downstairs on the weekend and Kristen was sitting at the window on a gray winter morning trying to take some 420mm shots of finches at the feeder. She was frustrated and said "now I understand why people are complaiing about this in low light" She couldn't get the camera to shoot above f/2.8 at 1/60. he was having trouble pulling focus and because those little dudes move s fast, of course 1/60 made for even more blurry shots. When she put them on the computer there was some serious CA in the branches....big bummer all around.

I made a few adjustments, and snapped a series of shots. We loaded them in and it was night and day difference across the board. She had made some bad choices with settings because she hadn't learned the camera yet, and she had made some bad decisions from a photographers standpoint that were also easily corrected.

She was immediately relieved and then blown away by it's low light performance.

just imagine

 

[camerex]

the FZ10 works equally well. People who point out these problems
should not be crucified, but are doing everyone of us a favor by
continually drawing these problems to the attention of Panasonic.

Our Hero!

You can be sure they are reading every message on this forum, and
that is the only way they might listen.

In the whole scheme of things, this forum is such a tiny fraction of all the Panasonic camera owners. If you really think you're going to make a difference, well you're very naive.

If what you're hoping for is a firmware upgrade, then perhaps a petition
is the right first step. But if you want people to support your cause,
you might refrain from insulting and alienating them.

If you're just looking for a fight, well have you checked out the
ongoing Canon-Sony debate, or the always heated Mac-Windows debate,
or for some real excitement, check out the religious forums.

Jim

 

[Mareda]

Jimagine, are you saying Barry doesn't even OWN a Panasonic - that
he returned his FZ10? I must have missed that, but if that's the
case, this is just trolling. Between novices posting "tips",
pictures being posted that were taken by non-Panasonic camera's
simply for the sake of posting them, and all of this whining, I
feel as though two terrorists have hijacked the Panasonic forum.
And I'm not kidding!

Jimagine, according to this post, Barry no longer owns the FZ10 -he returned it:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&message=7173823

Interesting that he continues to troll the Panasonic board.

Maureen

 

[chiks]

There is a difference between features, and features that don't work properly. .

The FZ series AFAIK never claimed low light performance as a feature on its line of cameras.

The FZ10's EVF/LDC is flawed, and often
unusable in low light. That is the difference. You may look upon
it as an inconvenience. I see it as a design flaw which needs to
be corrected by Panasonic.

I consider it a deliberate choice by Panasonic. I am sure they must have had a good argument on what should be released to the customer, and apparently the pro-reality guys won the argument.

I suppose that's where we differ. You

are simply sweeping it under the rug instead of facing that it is a
real existing design problem.

I am not sweeping it under a rug. I know it and somehow I always expected it. I think it might have been due to the fact that I was brought up by the old school of photogrpahers who insist on proper lighting before taking a picture.

People will not be frightened away by this discussion. Give them
more credit than that!
If nobody talks about it on this forum they will find out about it
themselves after buying one anyway.

OK. I will give them that credit. but i think it is prudent to realize that some people are more heavily influenced by this sort of discussions and when they get the camera, rather than appreciating the positive aspects, they will keep on brooding over the negative aspects, ruining their ownership experience.

Then they must choose whether
it is a hinderance or not.

One must realize the power of propoganda to understand what I am trying to convey.

When I owned a 707, I never used the
night shooting even once. But what does that prove anything.
What amazes me is that none of you appear to even care if Panasonic
ever fixes this problem or not.

there is difference between mentioning this aspect of the camera and moaning over it every day.

As a result, the FZ11 and FZ12
will probably be no better in that respect, since you all seem to
be insisting that it is all only a figment of my imagination. I
assure you, it's hardly that.
Barry

Possible - if the designer in charge believes in displaying what is apparently the true brightness of the image as one would see in that much amount of light, then this will continue.

 

[camerex]

Jimagine, are you saying Barry doesn't even OWN a Panasonic - that
he returned his FZ10? I must have missed that, but if that's the
case, this is just trolling. Between novices posting "tips",
pictures being posted that were taken by non-Panasonic camera's
simply for the sake of posting them, and all of this whining, I
feel as though two terrorists have hijacked the Panasonic forum.
And I'm not kidding!

Jimagine, according to this post, Barry no longer owns the FZ10 -he
returned it:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1024&message=7173823

Interesting that he continues to troll the Panasonic board.

Maureen

Maureen,
I think the reason Barry continues to troll this board is because it's so new.

If you look at his posting history, it goes back over two years, with over 44 pages, and from the looks of it, he's done the same thing in every other forum at DPreview. At every other forum it's been the same thing. He's critisizing this camera or that one, and always comparing it to his camera of the moment. It's actually a pretty interesting read.

Five months ago he stated:

"I personally have had no need to shoot in total darkness, and that green IR mode of the Sony cameras is nothing more than a useless gimmick anyway. It would have been more useful to include an alarm clock instead."

Hmmm.

Jim

 

[chiks]

apparently my opinion about being obsessed appears to hold some water here.

....

Five months ago he stated:
"I personally have had no need to shoot in total darkness, and that
green IR mode of the Sony cameras is nothing more than a useless
gimmick anyway. It would have been more useful to include an alarm
clock instead."

Hmmm.

Jim

 

[Mareda]

I think the reason Barry continues to troll this board is because
it's so new.
If you look at his posting history, it goes back over two years,
with over 44 pages, and from the looks of it, he's done the same
thing in every other forum at DPreview. At every other forum it's
been the same thing. He's critisizing this camera or that one, and
always comparing it to his camera of the moment. It's actually a
pretty interesting read.

Thanks for the scoop, Jim. That pretty much describes what a troll does, no matter how pure they try to paint their motives.

Maureen
http://maureen.smugmug.com

 

[Effzeeone]

Jim. It should not be necessary to "work around" a camera's faults
to obtain decent results from any camera.

I wouldn't want a camera that an entry level first time digicam owner could easily use -- it would be too simplistic and wouldn't suit my needs. Just like I wouldn't want a professional level camera -- it would be too far over my head and skill level and wouldn't suit my needs. I think the problem here is that the FZ10 is somewhere between a prosumer camera and a point-n-shoot, and that's a place where there's a lot of confusion from both sides of the digicam fence (amateur and professional).

There is no contesting the fact that the FZ1/2 and 10 EVF/LCD goes
totally black in low indoor light levels, and that the AF cannot
obtain focus at those levels. That is a flaw that they should
correct and not ignore. People who shoot in low light, but are
actually aiming their camera at a light source of some sort, are
not really shooting in the low-light levels I am talking about.
Why for instance can my A1 focus in almost total darkness - with
almost no available light source? One doesn't have to be an expert
to see this fault.

I won't contest that the LCD darkens when taking pictures in low light, but I will contest the usefulness for the general public of a camera that will focus in complete darkness or offers some expensive nightmode. I use my FZ1 for a lot of different types of shots -- outdoor, indoor, low light, some digiscoping, infrared shots, etc. -- I have yet to feel the need to take a picture in complete darkness. My FZ1 can and does focus perfectly fine in just one birthday candle worth of light, and that is at 50 ISO without a flash -- the pictures turned out great. I cannot imagine a time that I would need to take a picture in less light than that. HOWEVER, obviously you and a few other folks who have mentioned that "flaw" do feel the need to take pictures in complete darkness. I'm not knocking your desires in a digital camera -- I just think you need to realize that the vast majority of folks are not taking pictures in complete darkness so they really don't miss this feature or consider the lack of it to be a flaw on the Panasonic FZ series.

Talk about too many pixels on too small a sensor have nothing to do
with anything. That's nonsense.

This is not nonsense, and it's exactly the same problem that the Sony F828 has. You are misinformed on this issue, and although you state that Panasonic owners shouldn't defend what you consider flaws in the FZ line of cameras, you don't seem to mind calling something "nonsense" that is actually scientific/engineering fact.

--
Chris

 

[Effzeeone]

Barry has some legitimate points when it comes to some features that Panasonic could have added to this camera. Laser focus assist wouldn't have been too difficult to add, and is something that some FZ owners are adding aftermarket with a laser pointer, LED mini-light, etc. I have also noticed that cameras that have hologram/laser assist/etc. type of focus systems typically have a MSRP of $999 (anyone hear the word "Sony" in that statement?).

I'm finding myself getting a bit annoyed with Barry for his global criticisms of the entire FZ line, but I cannot completely condemn him because I found myself in the exact same situation recently both here and on Steve's Forums for DARING to directly compare the FZ1 with the Minolta Z1 (in a Minolta forum). My side-by-side, admittedly unscientific testing of these two cameras proved to me that in FULL AUTO MODE, the FZ1 blows the doors off the Minolta Z1. There was just no comparison at all -- I felt like I was comparing the FZ1 to one of those Mustek interpolated 3mp cameras that sell for $150. I stated this in a very nice way in response to people asking for direct comparisons between the Minolta Z1 and the FZ line of cameras. MAN! Was I ever blistered -- BOTH here and on Steve's Forums. It got completely personal, but relevant criticisms of my findings were like, "If you had made some manual adjustments, the Minolta Z1 would've outperformed the FZ1", and "The Minolta Z1 has its flaws, but it's a great camera and I'm having a lot of fun with it", and "Why would you buy a digital camera with manual controls if you didn't want to use them most of the time?", and "No digital camera is perfect -- you should've taken more time to learn the idiosyncracies of the camera before returning it." I think most of these paraphrased quotes could be applied here and to just about any camera vs. camera debate.

Barry was obviously looking for a camera that offered lower light focussing, and he was willing to sacrifice a bigger zoom to get it. I personally do not understand the need to photograph in such low light, but hey...I'm not taking his pictures, so what the heck do I know about it? I don't feel there is enough wrong with the FZ1 to complain about anything to Panasonic. I think for $360 they came out with a great camera. The same is probably true for the FZ10. I did find over a dozen flaws (not preferences -- flat-out flaws/false advertising/etc.) with the Minolta Z1. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of criticizing it to a bunch of people who really liked it, regardless of the flaws. I think Barry has made the same mistake here.

Trust me, it's probably best to just let it drop. You're never going to convince someone who doesn't like something to like it, and you're never going to convince someone who likes something to not like it. I don't mind folks wasting their time trying, but some of the messages are getting pretty nasty and there's really no need for that. Trust me, I'm speaking from experience on this debate (Minolta vs. Panasonic), getting nasty from both directions (from me and to me). It's not worth it. I've stopped myself from chiming in on this thread about 1/2 dozen times now, because it just looked way too familiar! So I'm not preaching -- I'm admitting to being sucked into this type of thing all the time. But you usually end up just feeling foolish in the end.

Everyone enjoy their respective cameras!

--
Chris

 

[Barry Kernerman]

Hi Ramblin. Perfect camera? Who asked for a perfect camera? I only expect a camera where things work properly within the shooting conditions one would normally have the right to expect.

If I wanted a perfect camera I wouldn't have bought an FZ10 - maybe not even an A1 either. In any case, I don't see what price has to do with it.

I really don't give a hoot who wants or doesn't want an A1. That's not the issue here and I'm not a Minolta salesman. The issue is what must be done to the FZ10 to correct the EVF problem. Viewfinders should not black out under such conditions, and the AF should not stop working.

I'm not asking for more features. This is neither a beginner's nor advanced digital, but somewhere in between, and as such it has a good feature set for the needs of most people that would choose it.

But if my attitude toward this camera were as some would like to think, I would never have bought one in the first place. It's precisely that I do like the camera that I want Panasonic to fix what I consider to be its major flaw. And why shouldn't they? Since the FZ10 was released, Minolta has come out with 2 firmware upgrades for the A1. Where's Panasonic? There's no reason why they cannot do the same for their camera owners.

As you well know, this subject has repeatedly popped up over many weeks - not just from me, but from others as well. I'm sure you will recall the extent to which I was sometimes angrily attacked on this forum when I first brought it up. It wasn't until Walter confirmed that the problem did in fact exist that it abruptly died down and there was complete silence about it for awhile. Aside from what went on about it on this forum until that time, I was also subjected to a few very nasty e-mails from certain individuals who appeared to take my observations as a personal assault. Others thought I was a troll, but some apologized when I went out and bought the camera.

Anyway Ramblin, I promise I won't blow a gasket! I will continue to harp on this issue though. no matter what anyone thinks. I believe I was the one who first brought it into the open. First after testing out a borrowed FZ1 for a few days, and later I was the one who called it a great outdoor camera - that said after buying my own FZ10.

Frankly, I will never cease to be amazed at how personally some people take any criticism of their cameras. They are after all - just cameras - not people! One would think they themselves were being personally attacked. I find that extremely strange and somewhat bizarre. Why on earth do they stick their heads in the sand and pretend that the problem just doesn't exist - or isn't really of importance? I'm not the only person who has complained about it - and like the others, as an owner, I have every right to.

And contrary to your worries, people are not so easily swayed by this discussion about that it will drive them away to buy some other camera. That's not going to happen.

In the meantime, this thread has already been over-worked and is already reached the point of being unconstructive. So I think it is time to drop the subject for now.
Regards,
Barry

(Before Barry or Max blow a gasket. I'd love to have a A1)

With that statement out of the way....

What were they thinking? It only 7.1X optical zoom? We should
demand that they fix it. Why, I have to be almost twice as close to
get the picture I want. ISO 100 What were they thinking? My Oly
5050 can shoot at 64 ISO. Man did minolta engineers mess this up.
The above statement is silly, but not as silly as some reaming
Panasonic for not making the "perfect" camera designed to their
personal specifications.

A1 - $650 best price I found from a reputable dealer.
FZ10 - I paid $495 with shipping included. Is the A1 31% better?
Maybe. Did I want to pay that much? Nope

File size - I think this has more to do with the image processing
of the Venus engine. I doubt that 3 out of 100 users would take
advantage of the TIFF or RAW if it was available. Cameras just
aren't designed for the 3% crowd.

Larger JPG files are possible out of the FZ10. Look at the 30%
increase in the upgraded FZ1 to FZ2 files. Try as I might I have
not been able to see any improvement with the 30% larger JPG. I
don't see the 1.5MB FZ10 file size being a problem.

--
Olympus C5050, Panasonic FZ1, FZ10K, Oly Tcon 1.7
http://www.pbase.com/ramblin_mo/galleries

 

[Barry Kernerman]

Chris. Please see my reply just made to Ramblin. I also think it is time to end this thread as it is serving no constructive purpose. Obviously we don't agree as to what I perceive as being a glaring weakness in the camera and you don't.

I will just say that I did buy my FZ10 for outdoor use as additional reach from my A1's 200mm., but not everyone else did. I bought it knowing full well that indoor shooting could be a problem for it. So from that aspect I am not complaining that I did not get what I expected, or paid for.
Barry

Barry has some legitimate points when it comes to some features
that Panasonic could have added to this camera. Laser focus assist
wouldn't have been too difficult to add, and is something that some
FZ owners are adding aftermarket with a laser pointer, LED
mini-light, etc. I have also noticed that cameras that have
hologram/laser assist/etc. type of focus systems typically have a
MSRP of $999 (anyone hear the word "Sony" in that statement?).

I'm finding myself getting a bit annoyed with Barry for his global
criticisms of the entire FZ line, but I cannot completely condemn
him because I found myself in the exact same situation recently
both here and on Steve's Forums for DARING to directly compare the
FZ1 with the Minolta Z1 (in a Minolta forum). My side-by-side,
admittedly unscientific testing of these two cameras proved to me
that in FULL AUTO MODE, the FZ1 blows the doors off the Minolta Z1.
There was just no comparison at all -- I felt like I was comparing
the FZ1 to one of those Mustek interpolated 3mp cameras that sell
for $150. I stated this in a very nice way in response to people
asking for direct comparisons between the Minolta Z1 and the FZ
line of cameras. MAN! Was I ever blistered -- BOTH here and on
Steve's Forums. It got completely personal, but relevant
criticisms of my findings were like, "If you had made some manual
adjustments, the Minolta Z1 would've outperformed the FZ1", and
"The Minolta Z1 has its flaws, but it's a great camera and I'm
having a lot of fun with it", and "Why would you buy a digital
camera with manual controls if you didn't want to use them most of
the time?", and "No digital camera is perfect -- you should've
taken more time to learn the idiosyncracies of the camera before
returning it." I think most of these paraphrased quotes could be
applied here and to just about any camera vs. camera debate.

Barry was obviously looking for a camera that offered lower light
focussing, and he was willing to sacrifice a bigger zoom to get it.
I personally do not understand the need to photograph in such low
light, but hey...I'm not taking his pictures, so what the heck do I
know about it? I don't feel there is enough wrong with the FZ1 to
complain about anything to Panasonic. I think for $360 they came
out with a great camera. The same is probably true for the FZ10.
I did find over a dozen flaws (not preferences -- flat-out
flaws/false advertising/etc.) with the Minolta Z1. Unfortunately,
I made the mistake of criticizing it to a bunch of people who
really liked it, regardless of the flaws. I think Barry has made
the same mistake here.

Trust me, it's probably best to just let it drop. You're never
going to convince someone who doesn't like something to like it,
and you're never going to convince someone who likes something to
not like it. I don't mind folks wasting their time trying, but
some of the messages are getting pretty nasty and there's really no
need for that. Trust me, I'm speaking from experience on this
debate (Minolta vs. Panasonic), getting nasty from both directions
(from me and to me). It's not worth it. I've stopped myself from
chiming in on this thread about 1/2 dozen times now, because it
just looked way too familiar! So I'm not preaching -- I'm
admitting to being sucked into this type of thing all the time.
But you usually end up just feeling foolish in the end.

Everyone enjoy their respective cameras!

--
Chris

 

[Barry Kernerman]

Jim. I had just suggested to Ramblin that this discussion end as it is pointless to continue it.
But I cannot let your message pass unanswered.

the FZ10 works equally well. People who point out these problems
should not be crucified, but are doing everyone of us a favor by
continually drawing these problems to the attention of Panasonic.

Our Hero!

You can be sure they are reading every message on this forum, and
that is the only way they might listen.

In the whole scheme of things, this forum is such a tiny fraction
of all the Panasonic camera owners. If you really think you're
going to make a difference, well you're very naive.

Yes, I do believe that Panasonic is watching this forum. Panasonic Bob is a good example that they are following discussion on the forums. And yes, I believe that pressure from this forum just might get them to upgrade the firmware. I believe that you are the naive one. How do you think Minolta was pushed into releasing several firmware upgrades beginning with their D7? It was not out of the goodness of their heart. It was mainly because of pressure and complaints from owners of their cameras. The A1 has already had its 2nd upgrade released. They are now very much aware of user demands.

If what you're hoping for is a firmware upgrade, then perhaps a
petition
is the right first step. But if you want people to support your cause,
you might refrain from insulting and alienating them.

If you're just looking for a fight, well have you checked out the
ongoing Canon-Sony debate, or the always heated Mac-Windows debate,
or for some real excitement, check out the religious forums.

I find your remarks above rather confrontive and insulting. Because we don't agree with each other does not mean I am "looking for a fight" as you crudely put it. If you do not agree with me that is your right and privilege. I am being neither confrontive, nor in my opinion have I knowingly insulted anyone. If you feel that I have, then I apologize for doing so, as that was certainly not my intention in any way.

I'm expressing my opinion and have every right to do so - and you have the choice not to read it.

The fact is, most owners already know there is a problem, and I'm not the only one who has pointed this out since the release of the camera.

If you are satisfied with your camera as is, then that's fine with me. I'm happy for you. I paid $1,000. CDN for my FZ10 and that's a lot of money for a camera with a big flaw in its design. That does not mean I don't like the camera. I do, or I wouldn't be planing to replace it with another one. I bought it for outdoor use exclusively, knowing full well that there were problems with indoor shooting. But that doesn't mean that I should stop trying to get Panasonic to do something about it. Maybe that idea hurts your sensitivities, but I happen to feel very strongly about it. If you want the FZ11 to have the same problems as well, just keep your silence, and you can be sure they will do nothing about it then either.
That said, this discussion is closed so far as I'm concerned.
Barry

Jim

 

[camerex]

Barry,

You're a troll. I looked at some of your countless postings in all the other groups. You were trolling then, as you're trolling now.
There is no reasoning with a troll, and I really don't want to be sucked into
your endless rants and whines.

My discussions with you are closed.
Please be so kind as to respect that.

Jim

the FZ10 works equally well. People who point out these problems
should not be crucified, but are doing everyone of us a favor by
continually drawing these problems to the attention of Panasonic.

Our Hero!

You can be sure they are reading every message on this forum, and
that is the only way they might listen.

In the whole scheme of things, this forum is such a tiny fraction
of all the Panasonic camera owners. If you really think you're
going to make a difference, well you're very naive.

Yes, I do believe that Panasonic is watching this forum. Panasonic
Bob is a good example that they are following discussion on the
forums. And yes, I believe that pressure from this forum just
might get them to upgrade the firmware. I believe that you are the
naive one. How do you think Minolta was pushed into releasing
several firmware upgrades beginning with their D7? It was not out
of the goodness of their heart. It was mainly because of pressure
and complaints from owners of their cameras. The A1 has already
had its 2nd upgrade released. They are now very much aware of user
demands.

If what you're hoping for is a firmware upgrade, then perhaps a
petition
is the right first step. But if you want people to support your cause,
you might refrain from insulting and alienating them.

If you're just looking for a fight, well have you checked out the
ongoing Canon-Sony debate, or the always heated Mac-Windows debate,
or for some real excitement, check out the religious forums.

I find your remarks above rather confrontive and insulting.
Because we don't agree with each other does not mean I am "looking
for a fight" as you crudely put it. If you do not agree with me
that is your right and privilege. I am being neither confrontive,
nor in my opinion have I knowingly insulted anyone. If you feel
that I have, then I apologize for doing so, as that was certainly
not my intention in any way.
I'm expressing my opinion and have every right to do so - and you
have the choice not to read it.
The fact is, most owners already know there is a problem, and I'm
not the only one who has pointed this out since the release of the
camera.
If you are satisfied with your camera as is, then that's fine with
me. I'm happy for you. I paid $1,000. CDN for my FZ10 and that's
a lot of money for a camera with a big flaw in its design. That
does not mean I don't like the camera. I do, or I wouldn't be
planing to replace it with another one. I bought it for outdoor
use exclusively, knowing full well that there were problems with
indoor shooting. But that doesn't mean that I should stop trying
to get Panasonic to do something about it. Maybe that idea hurts
your sensitivities, but I happen to feel very strongly about it.
If you want the FZ11 to have the same problems as well, just keep
your silence, and you can be sure they will do nothing about it
then either.
That said, this discussion is closed so far as I'm concerned.
Barry

Jim