Reading mode: Light Dark

Please convince me on buying FZ20

Go to last post
M

Medic1210

Senior Member
Messages
2,055
Reaction score
0
Location
Rockingham, NC, US
Ok, this is my first post. A little history might be in order. I have been taking pictures with film for close to 10 years using Minolta Maxxum line of cameras, the 700Si being my flagship model. Anyway I sold that camera a while back and nearly gave up photography for lack of interest. Anyway a couple years ago I decided to join the digital bandwaggon by purchasing a Nikon Coolpix 2500. I liked that camera for what it was designed for, but now I'm ready to step up. I really want the Canon 20D and will purchase one (or the next latest and greatest model that replaces it) in the future. In the mean time I have begun to look and research for an EVF camera to satisfy my needs until buying a DSLR. Well, I have to admit that until a week or so ago, I had never even heard of an FZ20. Nor did I know that Panasonic made anything other than TVs and VCRs and such. Well, while in the Canon talk forum, I see somebody mention buying an FZ20 instead of a 300D, and I think to myself, "Self, what is an FZ20, and who makes it?" Well, after searching the site, I learn that it is infact a Panasonic. I nearly ditched the whole idea right off the get-go because I had never even heard of a Panasonic camera being mentioned in the Photography mags I read (at least since I started reading them again). I figure that if it wasn't made by Canon, Nikon, or Minolta, then it was a P.O.S. Well, needless to say, I didn't ditch the idea, and instead decided to research it more, and read the review here on this site, and also read posts here for the last week or so. Here's my dilemma. I think this camera is pretty good, but I have to admit if it wasn't for the optically stabilized Leica lens and "Highly Recommended" review, I wouldn't be here posting these questions trying to decide whether or not to buy one. Here's my questions that I would like answered prior to deciding on the purchase.

Are people here buying this camera because of the stabilized fast 2.8 super zoom lens only, or is it because of something else? The reason I ask is because I see people also complaining of some of it's shortcomings like the noise above ISO 80 which seems to be a big issue.

Another thing. If Panasonic is so ahead of the competition with the Venus Engine and optically stabilized fast lens, then why is it stuck in the old ages with a non-dedicated hot shoe? Seems that the camera would be much better with E-TTL or an equivalent TTL flash capability. It seems to be such a hassle for me to be sure the external flash is set properly according to the aperture I'm using in order to take a properly exposed picture. I don't always want full manual, hence the whole point and shoot idea.

I have never seen one of these in person, so I don't know how the ergonomics are, but it seems that the shutter release is a bit awkward with it's placement. The grip is designed like a normal SLR, but the shutter release is placed on the top instead of on the part that juts out like the Nikons and Canons etc. Also, the look of the camera from the back seems a bit chintzy or cheap (I know that it isn't, but it just looks that way compared to the look of it's competition, namely the pro-sumer models from Canon and Nikon). I know that looks aren't what I'm buying, but people want something that is also nice to look at, (although I have to admit that the retro look has begun to grow on me a bit).

With most pro-sumer digital p/s cameras nowadays having a tilt/swivel LCD panel, why would Panasonic leave this feature off?

I do like the fact that this camera has an awesome lens that takes superb pictures and that it is supposedly a very responsive camera with quick lag times (at least after the initial 5 second startup). I love the fact that it is optically stabilized and is useable handheld at shutter speeds nearing a second. One trouble I'm still having is breaking the mentality/stigma of "it's not a Canon, Nikon, or Minolta" although I'm pretty much through with Minolta for reasons I won't get in to. Or, the fact that it's made by a TV company, and not a company known for making awesome cameras. I'm a bit cautious regarding the noise. I would rather it be at least a 7mp instead of a 5mp camera, although I understand that increasing the megapixls on the micro sensor is just going to increase the noise, and increasing the size of the sensor is going to shorten the focal length of the lens. Still, it is hard for me to fall to one side of the fence that I'm straddling. On one side of the fence I see a Canon Powershot G6 with 7.1mp sensor that has a true dedicated hot shoe with E-TTL flash capability and is compatible with an external flash that will go with the future Canon DSLR I want to buy. However, it doesn't have an optically stabilized lens, and it's lens is only a 4x zoom. On the other side I see a camera with a super quality lens that takes awesome pictures and is fast throughout the zoom range, and seems to be quicker as far as response than the Canon.

I truly feel the only reason that I'm giving the FZ20 this much consideration is because of the lens. I have to admit that without it, I wouldn't be thinking twice of it. I saw in another post today requesting features on a "future" FZ30 with many replies that start to show people's true feelings regarding the FZ20's shortcomings. This makes me wonder why I should buy one for myself. Please help me decide. Obviously I am seriously interested in this camera because my first post at this site is trying to decide on buying something that I didn't even know existed 2 weeks ago. Now have been stunned by the image quality, but still need that final push to get me off the fence.

Thanks in advance, and sorry for the such long-winded post.

Mike

--
I'm not resourceful enough to insert a witty quip here.
 
Medic1210 said:
In the mean time I have begun to look and
research for an EVF camera to satisfy my needs until buying a DSLR.
Well, I have to admit that until a week or so ago, I had never even
heard of an FZ20. Nor did I know that Panasonic made anything
other than TVs and VCRs and such. Well, while in the Canon talk
forum, I see somebody mention buying an FZ20 instead of a 300D, and
I think to myself, "Self, what is an FZ20, and who makes it?"
Well, after searching the site, I learn that it is infact a
Panasonic. I nearly ditched the whole idea right off the get-go
because I had never even heard of a Panasonic camera being
mentioned in the Photography mags I read (at least since I started
reading them again). I figure that if it wasn't made by Canon,
Nikon, or Minolta, then it was a P.O.S.
Click to expand...
I know where you are coming from. I had the same attitude until I got my FZ20. It's a fantastic camera. If it makes you feel better, it's a Leica lens ;-)
Medic1210 said:
Well, needless to say, I
didn't ditch the idea, and instead decided to research it more, and
read the review here on this site, and also read posts here for the
last week or so. Here's my dilemma. I think this camera is pretty
good, but I have to admit if it wasn't for the optically stabilized
Leica lens and "Highly Recommended" review, I wouldn't be here
posting these questions trying to decide whether or not to buy one.
Here's my questions that I would like answered prior to deciding on
the purchase.

Are people here buying this camera because of the stabilized fast
2.8 super zoom lens only, or is it because of something else? The
reason I ask is because I see people also complaining of some of
it's shortcomings like the noise above ISO 80 which seems to be a
big issue.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say that the 12x 2.8 zoom is the ONLY reason but it was a big one for me. I have a Canon 10D as my primary camera and the FZ is more my casual camera that I take along when I don't want to lug the SLR. The 400/2.8 IS lens for the 10D is $6,500. The FZ is less than $500. That math ain't hard for me. Of course the 400/2.8 on a Canon DSLR is going to give better quality pictures but the lens alone is 13 TIMES as much as the FZ20. That's hard to argue with.

Yes there is noise above 80 but it isn't as bad as many would have you think. Neat Image is a great program and gets rid of the noise nicely if necessary.
Medic1210 said:
Another thing. If Panasonic is so ahead of the competition with
the Venus Engine and optically stabilized fast lens, then why is it
stuck in the old ages with a non-dedicated hot shoe? Seems that
the camera would be much better with E-TTL or an equivalent TTL
flash capability. It seems to be such a hassle for me to be sure
the external flash is set properly according to the aperture I'm
using in order to take a properly exposed picture. I don't always
want full manual, hence the whole point and shoot idea.
Click to expand...
It would definitely be nice if it had a dedicated shoe but what type of TTL system would it use? Panasonic doesn't make TTL flashes. I have a Sunpak 383 and Vivitar 285 HV that I use with mine (the 285 gives better results IMHO,) and they work fine. It is a bit of a pain to have to adjust the flash when you adjust the aperture on the camera but it's not a deal breaker IMHO.
Medic1210 said:
I have never seen one of these in person, so I don't know how the
ergonomics are, but it seems that the shutter release is a bit
awkward with it's placement. The grip is designed like a normal
SLR, but the shutter release is placed on the top instead of on the
part that juts out like the Nikons and Canons etc.
Click to expand...
It's not perfect but it's not bad either.
Medic1210 said:
Also, the look
of the camera from the back seems a bit chintzy or cheap (I know
that it isn't, but it just looks that way compared to the look of
it's competition, namely the pro-sumer models from Canon and
Nikon). I know that looks aren't what I'm buying, but people want
something that is also nice to look at, (although I have to admit
that the retro look has begun to grow on me a bit).
Click to expand...
The camera doesn't feel cheap at all. It's very solidly built and I like the styling. Here's a pic I took with my 10D:

http://www.pbase.com/twalker294/image/36694610/original
Medic1210 said:
With most pro-sumer digital p/s cameras nowadays having a
tilt/swivel LCD panel, why would Panasonic leave this feature off?
Click to expand...
That would definitely be nice.
Medic1210 said:
I do like the fact that this camera has an awesome lens that takes
superb pictures and that it is supposedly a very responsive camera
with quick lag times (at least after the initial 5 second startup).
Click to expand...
Mine doesn't take 5 seconds to start up -- maybe 3...
Medic1210 said:
Or, the fact that it's made by a TV
company, and not a company known for making awesome cameras.
Click to expand...
The results speak for themselves.
Medic1210 said:
On the other side I see a
camera with a super quality lens that takes awesome pictures and is
fast throughout the zoom range, and seems to be quicker as far as
response than the Canon.
Click to expand...
The G6 was the other camera that I was considering when buying the FZ20. I decided on the FZ mainly because of the lens. The long zoom and IS makes the camera more versatile.

Good luck! Let us know what you decide...

--
Todd Walker
http://www.toddwalker.net
http://www.twphotography.net
http://www.pbase.com/twalker294
 
Thanks Todd for the reply. Like mentioned, I have all but decided on the FZ20, but those few nagging thoughts have kept me from placing the order. Again, I'm really impressed with the image quality of the FZ, but wouldn't mind a couple extra megapixels to play with. I also know that with my luck I'll buy this camera, and then the next month they will come out with a 7mp with a 14x optical Leica stabilized and with a swivel LCD that isn't useless in the dark. Imagine me trying to convince my wife that the camera I just bought was allready in need of replacement....

Mike
 
Medic1210 said:
I figure that if it wasn't made by Canon,
Nikon, or Minolta, then it was a P.O.S. Well, needless to say, I
didn't ditch the idea, and instead decided to research it more, and
read the review here on this site, and also read posts here for the
last week or so. Here's my dilemma. I think this camera is pretty
good, but I have to admit if it wasn't for the optically stabilized
Leica lens and "Highly Recommended" review, I wouldn't be here
posting these questions trying to decide whether or not to buy one.

Are people here buying this camera because of the stabilized fast
2.8 super zoom lens only, or is it because of something else? The
reason I ask is because I see people also complaining of some of
it's shortcomings like the noise above ISO 80 which seems to be a
big issue.
Click to expand...
Hi Mike,

The long and fast zoom was one of the decisive factors for me when I bought my FZ10. However, the possibility to use fully manual exposure controls was at least as important for me. The manual focus has also been handy in a few instances.

BTW, I think you're pretty tolerant when you say "if it wasn't made by Canon, Nikon, or Minolta, then it was a P.O.S. " Usually Minolta is not included there ;-), afaik.
Medic1210 said:
Another thing. If Panasonic is so ahead of the competition with
the Venus Engine and optically stabilized fast lens, then why is it
stuck in the old ages with a non-dedicated hot shoe? Seems that
the camera would be much better with E-TTL or an equivalent TTL
flash capability. It seems to be such a hassle for me to be sure
the external flash is set properly according to the aperture I'm
using in order to take a properly exposed picture. I don't always
want full manual, hence the whole point and shoot idea.
Click to expand...
If you want point'n'shoot flash, you can use the onboard flash. The won't be the juice for bounce, though, but bouncing a flash is hardly point and shoot, anyway.
Medic1210 said:
I do like the fact that this camera has an awesome lens that takes
superb pictures and that it is supposedly a very responsive camera
with quick lag times (at least after the initial 5 second startup).
Click to expand...
I do not find the startup time too long, if I switch the camera on when I take it off the bag, it's basically ready when I lift to my eye. I have, however, disabled the sleep function in my camera so that it stays on until the battery runs out.

As far as shutter response is concerned, it's a pretty fast camera (and I'm talking about the preceding model).
Medic1210 said:
I'm a
bit cautious regarding the noise.
Click to expand...
The noise really is a non-issue. It is there at 200 ISO and rather bad at 400, but it really cleans up with PP so that 4x6 prints are no worse than 400 ISO film.
Medic1210 said:
I would rather it be at least a
7mp instead of a 5mp camera, although I understand that increasing
the megapixls on the micro sensor is just going to increase the
noise, and increasing the size of the sensor is going to shorten
the focal length of the lens. Still, it is hard for me to fall to
one side of the fence that I'm straddling.
Click to expand...
In my experience the 4 mpix of the FZ10 are quite enough for 30 x 45 cm prints, thank you.
Medic1210 said:
I truly feel the only reason that I'm giving the FZ20 this much
consideration is because of the lens. I have to admit that without
it, I wouldn't be thinking twice of it. I saw in another post
today requesting features on a "future" FZ30 with many replies that
start to show people's true feelings regarding the FZ20's
shortcomings. This makes me wonder why I should buy one for
myself. Please help me decide. Obviously I am seriously
interested in this camera because my first post at this site is
trying to decide on buying something that I didn't even know
existed 2 weeks ago. Now have been stunned by the image quality,
but still need that final push to get me off the fence.
Click to expand...
Well, what do you need the camera for? Producing pictures or for something else? Who'd care if it read Lomo on the front of the camera if it were capable of producing such good pictures and had such a feature set for the price?

The FZ series cameras are really good, but they have their shortcomings. Just like anything else out there. The list of shortcomings varies a bit from person to person, naturally. I do not miss the articulated LCD, for example, but would like a better EVF.

As far as future is concerned, I don't think anybody outside Panasonic or Leica knows for sure what the next FZ model will be like. It might be worth waiting for. Anyway, as long as you wait and think, you won't be getting any pictures.

I really have no experience with any Canon digitals but having spent some time with my FZ10 I do not feel the urge to get a Canon (or Nikon) P&S just for the bragging rights it might earn me.

My advice: go ahead and buy the FZ20. You'll probably like it. If you don't you'll be able to either return it or sell it.

The Panasonic FZ-series really is like a bit of a secret, a good one to boot.

Cheers,

-Topi Kuusinen, Finland
 
Thanks for the reply Topi. The desire to own a Canon isn't really for bragging rights so much as it is the fact that it is a company with a long history of making outstanding quality cameras. That being said, I'm really leaning more torward the FZ20 now after researching it. I just still need to overcome my minor qualms such as non-dedicated hot-shoe, non-swiveling LCD (a feature I have grown quite accustomed to on my little Nikon), 5mp limit. The things that are really keeping me interested in this camera are the quality of images I have seen posted here taken with the FZ20, the responsiveness as compared to the Canon and Nikon, the awesome lens, and the ability to take full control of the picture taking process when I really want that flexibility.

Another question. As for the manual focus, is the EVF or LCD really sharp enough for assuring fine focus? I know that the center of the LCD will zoom in, but is it adequate for tac-sharp manual focus?

Thanks again for the reply.

Mike
 
Medic1210 said:
Thanks for the reply Topi. The desire to own a Canon isn't really
for bragging rights so much as it is the fact that it is a company
with a long history of making outstanding quality cameras.
Click to expand...
Hi Mike,

I can understrand that point; it's just so that sometimes if you want to have a real long-zoom digital P&S it just has to be a Nikon 8700 or 8800 or you're not a real photographer. I would not be a better photographer even if I had a Nikon 8800.
Medic1210 said:
Another question. As for the manual focus, is the EVF or LCD
really sharp enough for assuring fine focus? I know that the
center of the LCD will zoom in, but is it adequate for tac-sharp
manual focus?
Click to expand...
You will get differing opinions on this one, but it has worked for me, sometimes even in cases where it's been so dim and/or little contrast that the AF has not been able to lock focus. It will need some getting used to, though.

The magnification works better than I understood from the written descriptions; I felt it's just a gimmick until I used it. IMHO and YMMV, of course.

Another point that you should be aware of with your film background is the huge DOF even at full zoom. I'm also not quite happy with the rendering in the transition regions from sharp to OOF, but I think it might be due to the in-camera processing (how could the camera know that this spot is supposed to be sharp whereas the next spot is supposed to be just a little OOF?). However, as far as the DOF is concerned, it is there in all small-sensor P&S cameras.

You will be able to isolate the subject from the background, but it just won't be as easy as with 35 mm film and a telephoto lens. Compromises, compromises.

Cheers,

-Topi Kuusinen, Finland
 
That is my tack on the subject which has been covered well.

I was saved from blindly going for a DSLR by a feeling that I didn't want to burden myself with HP at the time ..so I bought a Nikon 5700 for cash.

With the pro-sumer you have a camera type which we didn't have available when we used film ..the ones with decent length zooms anyway.

Over two years I have rarely felt the need for a DSLR and for the average photog the pro-sumer will do all they want once they get the hang of how the little beauties work .. the 5700 is a little beauti unlike the FZ20.

I went to the FZ20, and bought an FZ3 for my wife who is reluctantly stepping up from a rather basic Canon s20, becuase of the speed of operation, the long lens, the IMO 'proper' zoom which maintains it's aperture throughout unlike most except DSLR lens on digitals.

Where it falls down, and I still have the 5700 as a companion camera, is the inability to focus reliably with the zoom closer than 6'6". To somebody coming from the 5700 which though to use macro you have to be in mid-zoom it is possible to stand a foot or two from the subject and use the zoom to get a tighter composition.

The other boon is OIS since I also have x2.2 teleconverter giving me 950mm equivalent on the FZ20.

The 5700 gave me what I had in a heavy bag of SLR and lenses in a small compact camera .. better as a casual camera perhaps than the FZ20 .... and the FZ20 has considerably widened the field with regard to nature work. But is not very good in coming in close without CU lens.

From memory the subject size is 10cm across at the closest it will focus on it's own in wide-angle [5cm]. The 5700 give you a 3cm across subject.

But of course the 5700 is at least a four or five year old design and that is OLD with digitals.

So to sum up ... unless you are brainwashed with regard to DSLRs .. you could find a pro-sumer will do everything you want and way way far ahead of the film camera you used to use. Good Luck.
 
Good point about DSLR. I sold my Digital Rebel + lenses and bought an FZ20 to replace the Canon kit. I wanted smaller and lighter. The DReb was a fine camera as were the Canon lenses, but the kit was bulky and heavy.

Any regrets? Very few. The FZ20 isn't perfect but it has a nice balance of features in a smallish package at an affordable price. The image stabilization works a treat and the lens -- lovely! Great image quality at iso 80-100, and that's all I use.

Gene

--
http://www.pbase.com/gwilburn
 
most of the people that criticize the camera don't even own one. As far as your if it isn't a Nikon or a Canon comment, I am sure that they offer very nice alternatives. Of course, none of them can go f2.8 at 12x zoom with IS.

If our pics don't convince you, nothing will.
--
Theresa
Constructive criticism always welcome! :)
http://www.pbase.com/theresa_k
Panasonic FZ-20, Oly C-5O6O & FL-4O

 
Having owned many other brands of digital cameras, the FZ20
was the one I chose when it was time for an upgrade and it was
because of the optics. I have shot very expensive medium format
film cameras for years, but to me film is dead, I am not trying to make
a comparison to a film camera, but with any camera optics in my
book comes first, then features.

Most of the "people" who complain about noise "need" something
to complain about. When you have the chance to compare the actual
prints of the FZ20 against other cameras, that is when you begin to
understand why the owners here love this camera.
Medic1210 said:
Are people here buying this camera because of the stabilized fast
2.8 super zoom lens only, or is it because of something else? The
reason I ask is because I see people also complaining of some of
it's shortcomings like the noise above ISO 80 which seems to be a
big issue.
Click to expand...
Most point and shoot cameras do not even have a hot shoe.
Panansonic from what I can see does not have a real TTL flash ready
for their line of cameras yet and when they do, it will not be cheap.
Point and shoot people rarely purchase additional flashes. There
is a lot of talk here about using additional flashs because the users
here are more than just "point and shoot" kind of people.
Medic1210 said:
Another thing. If Panasonic is so ahead of the competition with
the Venus Engine and optically stabilized fast lens, then why is it
stuck in the old ages with a non-dedicated hot shoe? Seems that
the camera would be much better with E-TTL or an equivalent TTL
flash capability. It seems to be such a hassle for me to be sure
the external flash is set properly according to the aperture I'm
using in order to take a properly exposed picture. I don't always
want full manual, hence the whole point and shoot idea.
Click to expand...
I have to ask how it is that you even take the time to write the following
since you have not taken the time to actually go look at this fine camera.
Medic1210 said:
I have never seen one of these in person, so I don't know how the
ergonomics are, but it seems that the shutter release is a bit
awkward with it's placement. The grip is designed like a normal
SLR, but the shutter release is placed on the top instead of on the
part that juts out like the Nikons and Canons etc. Also, the look
of the camera from the back seems a bit chintzy or cheap (I know
that it isn't, but it just looks that way compared to the look of
it's competition, namely the pro-sumer models from Canon and
Nikon). I know that looks aren't what I'm buying, but people want
something that is also nice to look at, (although I have to admit
that the retro look has begun to grow on me a bit).
Click to expand...
Use some logic here, additional features = additional costs,
who knows why any manufacturer decides to market what features
on their cameras. I too wish it had a tilt swivel panel, but I have
shot other digital cameras for many years and I can not remember
how many times I used that feature in the past, because it was
that few times.
Medic1210 said:
With most pro-sumer digital p/s cameras nowadays having a
tilt/swivel LCD panel, why would Panasonic leave this feature off?
Click to expand...
Mike, take the time to go "hold" the FZ20 in your hands, you will most
likely begin to understand the passion of the owners who are a part
of this forum and just maybe you will become one also, or maybe you
will just "continue to complain" about a camera you have never taken
the time to hold in your own hands...........
 
Thanks for the reply. I guess that answers the manual focus question. BTW, I saw this pic in your original post. Very nice indeed.

Mike
OaklandWoody said:
Medic1210 said:
Another question. As for the manual focus, is the EVF or LCD
really sharp enough for assuring fine focus? I know that the
center of the LCD will zoom in, but is it adequate for tac-sharp
manual focus?
Click to expand...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=11881373

Manually focused while sitting on my bum on my neighbors sidewalk
(swiveling screen would've been nice).
Click to expand...
--
I'm not resourceful enough to insert a witty quip here.
 
Thanks for the reply. As for whether or not I really need a DSLR, I am very aware of the hassle of carrying around a camera and bag full of lenses. I shot film for close to 10 years and will agree to the inconvenience of carrying all that gear. That is one of the main reasons I'm looking at the FZ20 for now, so I'll have a camera that I'm more apt to carry with me wherever I go. The reason I will probably get a DSLR in the future is because of it's low-light performance. I have shot weddings on numerous occasions, and the need for a camera that can track a subject walking down the isle in dim light and produce tac-sharp images consistently cannot be overstated. Also the ability to shoot higher ISOs without a flash and still get a relatively noise-free image is a plus. This is something that most EVF cameras cannot touch. That's a couple of the reasons why I'm willing to deal with the hassle of a DSLR with all it's lenses. My original question wasn't whether I should get the Canon D20 instead of the FZ20, it was to convince me on the FZ20 as opposed to another pro-sumer EVF camera.

Thanks again,

Mike
jcuknz said:
That is my tack on the subject which has been covered well.
I was saved from blindly going for a DSLR by a feeling that I
didn't want to burden myself with HP at the time ..so I bought a
Nikon 5700 for cash.

With the pro-sumer you have a camera type which we didn't have
available when we used film ..the ones with decent length zooms
anyway.

Over two years I have rarely felt the need for a DSLR and for the
average photog the pro-sumer will do all they want once they get
the hang of how the little beauties work .. the 5700 is a little
beauti unlike the FZ20.

I went to the FZ20, and bought an FZ3 for my wife who is
reluctantly stepping up from a rather basic Canon s20, becuase of
the speed of operation, the long lens, the IMO 'proper' zoom which
maintains it's aperture throughout unlike most except DSLR lens on
digitals.

Where it falls down, and I still have the 5700 as a companion
camera, is the inability to focus reliably with the zoom closer
than 6'6". To somebody coming from the 5700 which though to use
macro you have to be in mid-zoom it is possible to stand a foot or
two from the subject and use the zoom to get a tighter composition.

The other boon is OIS since I also have x2.2 teleconverter giving
me 950mm equivalent on the FZ20.

The 5700 gave me what I had in a heavy bag of SLR and lenses in a
small compact camera .. better as a casual camera perhaps than the
FZ20 .... and the FZ20 has considerably widened the field with
regard to nature work. But is not very good in coming in close
without CU lens.
From memory the subject size is 10cm across at the closest it will
focus on it's own in wide-angle [5cm]. The 5700 give you a 3cm
across subject.

But of course the 5700 is at least a four or five year old design
and that is OLD with digitals.

So to sum up ... unless you are brainwashed with regard to DSLRs ..
you could find a pro-sumer will do everything you want and way way
far ahead of the film camera you used to use. Good Luck.
Click to expand...
--
I'm not resourceful enough to insert a witty quip here.
 
I'm not criticizing the camera at all. I'm just wanting to make sure that I'm making the right choice. As for seeing other people's images, this is the only reason I have taken the time to ask this question. If the images posted were bad, my decision would be much easier. As for the Nikon and Canon not going to f2.8 at 12x, this is another reason I'm here, and not in the Nikon or Canon talk forum.

Thanks for the input.

Mike
Theresa K said:
most of the people that criticize the camera don't even own one.
As far as your if it isn't a Nikon or a Canon comment, I am sure
that they offer very nice alternatives. Of course, none of them
can go f2.8 at 12x zoom with IS.

If our pics don't convince you, nothing will.
--
Theresa
Constructive criticism always welcome! :)
http://www.pbase.com/theresa_k
Panasonic FZ-20, Oly C-5O6O & FL-4O

Click to expand...
--
I'm not resourceful enough to insert a witty quip here.
 
webguystl said:
Most point and shoot cameras do not even have a hot shoe.
Click to expand...
I wasn't comparing the FZ20 to other P/S cameras without a hot shoe. I was comparing it to the Canon G6 that has a dedicated hot shoe with E-TTL flash capabilities.
webguystl said:
I have to ask how it is that you even take the time to write the
following
since you have not taken the time to actually go look at this fine
camera.
Click to expand...
I don't need to hold the camera to see that the shutter release is placed in an unusual place, given the fact that the camera has the "modern" SLR type grip. It seems more logical to place the release on the grip where most other SLR's releases are placed. And please don't tell me that this isn't an SLR. It is designed to function and feel like an SLR. That is the reason for the comment.
webguystl said:
I too wish it had a tilt swivel panel, but I have
shot other digital cameras for many years and I can not remember
how many times I used that feature in the past, because it was
that few times.
Click to expand...
To each their own. I for one would pay the extra money for "extra" features such as a tilt/swivel LCD. I have used that feature quite a bit on my Nikon. Really helps keep me from looking like a contortionist trying to get a low-level shot of my little girl playing in the grass etc. It also is a plus when doing spontaneous self portraits when you don't have a tripod with you.
webguystl said:
Mike, take the time to go "hold" the FZ20 in your hands, you will most
likely begin to understand the passion of the owners who are a part
of this forum and just maybe you will become one also,
Click to expand...
If I had a store near me that carried the FZ20, then I probably wouldn't need to be here asking for all your input. I'm sure that if I did have a store that carried one, I would have allready bought one by now. Unfortunately, I am stuck with sifting through everyone else's opinions in an effort to form my own.

... or maybe you will just "continue to complain" about a camera you have never taken the time to hold in your own hands...........

Well, I don't feel that I'm complaining about the camera in the first place. As mentioned earlier, I'm on the fence right now, and leaning more torward the FZ20. I just want the final push to convince me that this is a good camera as a whole and not just a good lens. As for the comment of never taking the time to hold one, I wish I could hold one first. Would make my decision much easier.

Thanks for the input.

Mike
--
I'm not resourceful enough to insert a witty quip here.
 
An example of why I like the swivel LCD that I meant to place in my original reply. This quick and simple snapshot would have been impossible without the swivel LCD on my Nikon. It's simple images like this that mean so much to me. Spontaneous and simple, yet priceless.

Mike

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top