FZ30 review's up

GrahamD said:

Vaards said:

I wery like that you used "sharpest" lens and most popular DSLR to
show real diferences in pictures. I hope nobody will ask for low
end zooms "to be fare"

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

GrahamD said:

I would like to see it pitted against something like a KM D5 with
kit lens + cheapo zoom, not to be "fair" but to see what the
nearest priced DSLR competition can do.

Click to expand...

This might be a tip to Phil when he comes around to testing the KM D5. Not only comparing it to the Nikon D50 and the EOS350D, but also to the FZ30 - which, despite Simon's reservations, still seems to be the class leader among superzooms in terms of resolution.

and with the prices so similar, it's a no-brainer. The S2 hasn't even got a manual zoom, for crying out loud! How such an amateur camera with a useless electronic zoom (I consider all electronic zooms useless) could beat the clearly semi-pro FZ-30 at a very similar price point is beyond me.

I give it a Highly recommended and I think most people who are picture takers like me, rather than Photographers would also find it to be the absolute greatest superzoom yet.

I really feel that, for what I do with a camera, the FZ30 is a huge improvement over the FZ20 which I still think is a great camera.

And while Simons review is most likely dead on, His conclusion will most likely cause people that would be as happy with the FZ30 as I am, to not buy it and I think that is a shame, As I am amazed by this camera.
--
Gene
From Western PA.

Panasonic FZ-10 and FZ 20 and FZ30
B300
T Con 17 --two Tcon 14Bs -- Raynox 2020 pro -- DCR 720
http://imageevent.com/grc6/toshareonnet



Just trying to learn and it's slow going!

Here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz30/page14.asp

it is said:

"One of the reasons image stabilization is so popular with big zoom cameras is that they simply cannot produce acceptable results at anything over ISO 200, whereas Canon's CMOS sensor is producing results at ISO 1600 - two stops more sensitive - that have almost as little noise as the FZ30's ISO 80 images."

ISO 1600 is 4 and 1/3rd stops faster than ISO 80.

I've checked the pics in the gallery. I've downloaded some at high-res that seemed to offer much detail, and had a close look. Maybe I shouldn't have done so. To summarise: I see sharpening, not sharpness (=details). Below I'll mention a few areas where I expected to see more detail at the pixel level. The look OK at 50% (except for lack of details in highlights), though.

p1000159.jpg - blonde girl and older lady - no detail in the hair. Has a bit of motion blur, but that's limited to the girl's hand, I think. Shades on their skins have tiny black spots - probably a noise reduction artifact.

p1000197.jpg - bee on a red flower - no details in the petals

p1000216.jpg - yellow flowers, nice leaves - no details in petals (highlights)

p1000252.jpg - castle with flowers in the foreground - no details in the flowers, bushes, kid's face (there's a girl behind the fence)

p1000283.jpg - sleeping dove - perhaps that's the photo whose sharpness I'm most satisfied (least dissatisfied) with. The feet and the stone seem to be OK, but the head is blurred.

p1000349.jpg - red-haired girl - look at the tiny hairs on her arm, her skin around her knee, her chin (in shadow), her hair

p1010427.jpg - speckled lady in glasses - her hair around the forehead, eyebrows, her skin in general, the lighter spot of hair above hear temple

p1010439.jpg - girl with the cell phone - the hair coming out from under her cap in front of her ear, the necklace, the fingers

picture-054.jpg - group of people - the girl facing the camera: her skin, hair

picture-162.jpg - girl smiling into camera - her eyes and hair

I really wanted to like this camera. To give my camera history, I have had the Canon a40, s45, G6, Minolta A1, Sony V1, and now have the Rebel XT. (as I side note I bought a FZ20 for my father-in-law this past Christmas. he loves it and i love it too. it was his first digital coming from a film slr). I like the rebel xt...and it takes wonderful pictures...(but here's the catch) if you have expensive glass. I really don't have money to sink into that right now. I find myself taking relatvely few low-light pictures and mostly outdoor. I have decided to sell the XT for an all-in-one. I really was pulling for the FZ30...but in the end photo quality drives my decision (more so than bells and whistles). Sure the FZ30 has some great features, looks great, built well, manual this and that, higher MPs...in the end, if photo quality does not match the feature set, what is the point?

It really reminds my of my brief 4 month stiint with the Minolta A1. It was all the craze...image stablization and all. I knew going in that noise was an issue but people in the fourms downplayed the review and raved about its feature set. While it did handle well, the noise/image quality was what is was and I could not stick with it. (in the end, the picture is what you have to show).

I think that the people that are going to LOVE the FZ30 are the panasoicites. They have bought into the system and will rave about it. But coming in as an outsider and reviewing the real life pictures in the sample gallery, the noise is simply too much. (look in the shadows of the ISO 80 pics!)

In the end I think that I am going for the FZ5 (the price to quality/feature set is excellent)...after all in this higher and higher megapixel market in which we live...do most people need more than 5 anyway?

heh. Not likely.

donation to the Red Cross on its way

--
http://www.SMLG.ca - Twice Daily Photoblog
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smlg/ - Flickr
Panasonic FZ30

genece said:

I give it a Highly recommended and I think most people who are
picture takers like me, rather than Photographers would also find
it to be the absolute greatest superzoom yet.
I really feel that, for what I do with a camera, the FZ30 is a huge
improvement over the FZ20 which I still think is a great camera.
And while Simons review is most likely dead on, His conclusion will
most likely cause people that would be as happy with the FZ30 as I
am, to not buy it and I think that is a shame, As I am amazed by
this camera.

Click to expand...

While i don;t see any huge improvement over FZ 30, i also think FZ 30 is a very very good camera (as FZ 20 is). A few people will be bothered by the slighly increased noise (if ever).

Hey most of my friends with digital cameras don't even know what ISO is

--
Costas

jbn8 said:

I think that the people that are going to LOVE the FZ30 are the
panasoicites. They have bought into the system and will rave about
it. But coming in as an outsider and reviewing the real life
pictures in the sample gallery, the noise is simply too much.
(look in the shadows of the ISO 80 pics!)

Click to expand...

Well, i check ISO 80 of my FZ20, i check FZ30s, and i check also my Sony V1 at ISO 100 and i SEE NO DIFFERENCE in noise.

--
Costas

wim #13414 said:

Ergonomics en features are very good
now, it's only the noisy ccd that takes the camera down.

Click to expand...

What's the point of great ergonomics and features if the image is noisy? I just don't get it - so many people saying they 'realise the pictures are noisy, but . . .' There are no 'buts' if the picture's not crisp and clean and the story ends there as far as I'm concerned.

thw said:

Here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz30/page14.asp

it is said:

"One of the reasons image stabilization is so popular with big zoom
cameras is that they simply cannot produce acceptable results at
anything over ISO 200, whereas Canon's CMOS sensor is producing
results at ISO 1600 - two stops more sensitive - that have almost
as little noise as the FZ30's ISO 80 images."

ISO 1600 is 4 and 1/3rd stops faster than ISO 80.

Click to expand...

Sorry that's slightly badly worded - i'm referring to the ISO 400 picture in the comparison - i'll look at it in a minute
S
--
Simon Joinson, dpreview.com

I've just sent most of them to be printed in a pro lab in various sizes (approximate sizes (4:3 aspect ratio): 15x11 cm=6x4", 17x13cm=7x5", 20x15cm=8x6", 28x21cm=11x8"). Will report back once I have them.

Pixel peeping or printing?

Martyn Welch said:

What's the point of great ergonomics and features if the image is
noisy? I just don't get it - so many people saying they 'realise
the pictures are noisy, but . . .' There are no 'buts' if the
picture's not crisp and clean and the story ends there as far as
I'm concerned.

Click to expand...

--



Smile and nod at those who say it can't be done
http://www.pbase.com/ramblin_mo/galleries
Oly C8o8oWZ, Oly FL -36 flash
Can DR 3ooD Can 18-55,17 -85 IS, 75 -300 D0 IS
Panasonic F Z 5K
Panasonic F Zee thirty K
Qimage, PSP 9.1

I'm hanging on to my panny FZ20. I.m real happy with it. We'll just have to see what's next on the list for Panasonic.

Thanks Simon

Please report back what you find...thanks!

Nah... the FZ-30 is a much better choice than either of those three (C8080, CP8800, Pro1). Ok, the oldies do have a 2/3" CCD, vs the 1/1,8" in the Pana, but IQ, as far as I can see, is very very similar (actual size difference between 2/3" and 1/1,8" isn't really that great). Where the FZ-30 really smokes the competition, however, is when it comes to features like tele power (420mm vs 140, 350, 200), IS (only CP8800 has it too), focus speed, and last but not least, manual zoom (have I told you how utterly useless I find electronic zooms?) The F-828 and the A2 come closer to the FZ-30 in this department, but they too lose big time when it comes to speed, zoom range and IS. As I see it, the FZ-30 is THE state of the art in digicams today. Only the Samsung Pro-815 with an even better zoom range and a 2/3" CCD will probably be able to compete, but on the other hand that one's without IS so ISO performance will have to be better. The R1 will of course be in a different league, but then without the awesome tele power.

Don't compare the FZ30 to my S2 IS, they're different. One is for the masses and one is for the niche. Considering that niche market is pretty big too. I love my S2 IS!!!

Ramblin said:

Pixel peeping or printing?

Click to expand...

Either - the image must be crisp and clean whichever way you look at them. I need my images to look razor sharp at A4 - the maximum size they're ever likely to be printed in a national magazine that occasionally uses my shots. I use a Pentax DS for these and they're fine but I hoped to use the FZ30 for certain shots requiring far greater depth of field than the DSLR can manage, but they must be clean images with no noise.

Seen at 6x4 or 7x5, I'm aware you won't be able to see the individual pixels looking smudged, but you will (or should) be able to sense the overall image may just be lacking something. It may look reasonably bright and colourful but if the individual pixels aren't truly clean and the skies are noisy, you'll instinctively know something's not right.

Well, the FZ30 doesn't come with a niche price; it is very
close to the price of the S2 IS actually, so I think it is a
relevant comparison.

Tekkanano said:

Don't compare the FZ30 to my S2 IS, they're different. One is for
the masses and one is for the niche. Considering that niche market
is pretty big too. I love my S2 IS!!!

Click to expand...

I'm sure it is a great camera, as is most modern cameras. It is amazing
how much better they are compared to just a couple of years ago.

Just my two öre
Erik from Sweden
F Z 5, now with up to 16x zoom ;-)

jbn8 said:

...but in the end photo quality
drives my decision (more so than bells and whistles). Sure the
FZ30 has some great features, looks great, built well, manual this
and that, higher MPs...in the end, if photo quality does not match
the feature set, what is the point?

Click to expand...

Finally hear someone else thinking the same things aloud! Couldn't agree more.