FZ30 review's up

good review simon thank you. I completely understand why a camera produced 2 years after it's predecessor would have a lower rating when it doesn't produce significant PQ improvements over it's older sibling. There was only one real issue holding the fz series from being excellent everything camera, and it was an issue that wasn't addressed at all. Anyone who doesn't have cash to burn on the dslr market, and likes long exposures i think would agree. It really burns my butt sometimes when i'm sitting in a surreal setting in low light and i can't share it with anyone not there with me. I see it as a serious handicap to an otherwise f'n awesome camera. If it could produce the same HQ pics in low light then i would easily drop a grand on this bad boy, but it doesn't, and leaves me with the conclusion that if i want to capture the interesting changes that happen when the sun goes down on a scene then i will be left either purchasing a dslr or a film slr.
--
http://photobucket.com/albums/a325/Mr_Sanchez/

Martyn Welch said:

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.

Click to expand...

Previously, I had thought you could not see noise on A4 FZ30 prints. However, yesterday I used NeatImage to reduce the noise (35% lum, 100% chrom) on an animal image (with lots of blue sky) and cut and pasted an image with half noise-reduced and half normal. When printed at A4, the noise in the sky was visible in the normal compared with the noise-reduced half (on very close inspection). The slight stippling in the paper finish made it hard to see. I could not detect any difference in level of detail.

Turning noise reduction to low and using noise reduction software where necessary seems to be the best option. An option to turn noise reduction off altogether in-camera would not necessarily be a good thing. The image would then apparently contain very high detail and the amount of jpeg compression would need to increase, with associated loss of sharpness and increase in artefacts. Using raw mode is really the only alternative.

Thanks Simon,

I thought the FZ30 review was quite fair. Now that is out of hte way, is hte LX1 review coming up next?

Thanks for your hard work!
Steven
--
Just having fun with my cams:
http://www.pbase.com/swhatleys/

Simon,

Why did you consider the images soft at 100% and also consider these images very sharp (the sharpest results for this kind of cameras)?

This conclusion is related to the noise reduciton algorithm used?

Alvaro.

My theory that the first batch of Panasonic cameras are faulty is gaining credence. I will buy the FZ-30 six weeks from introduction in the brick and mortar stores - probably around 15 Nov 2005.

I will be looking at the R1 with a very jaunice eye. The R1 has raised the bar - the question is why did Sony go to a less precise focusing system for the R1. Don't make sense.

So far I see that focus, image stabiliztion, noise and low light are the demons the FZ-30 is plagued. Why Panasonic stays with the poor contrast focusing system defys logic.

That is like someone crying because they have no shoes - all the others have no feet. Now that is the time to cry.

Cheers, Ray of Alabama

alien3333 said:

Simon Joinson said:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PanasonicFZ30/
S
--
Simon Joinson, dpreview.com

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

acuberos said:

Simon,

Why did you consider the images soft at 100% and also consider
these images very sharp (the sharpest results for this kind of
cameras)?

This conclusion is related to the noise reduciton algorithm used?

Alvaro.

Click to expand...

They have very high resolution (lots of detail) but a slight 'softness' which is almost definitely down to processing. Sharpness and resolution aren't the same thing! Fortunately they sharpen up well in Photoshop

S
--
Simon Joinson, dpreview.com

There were no surprises in your review for me, in fact my heuristic feeling that the FZ30's new lens was a dramatic step forward in sharpness was totally borne out by your "off the chart" resolution conclusions. As for the noise issue, you and Jeff Keller seemed to be on the same page there, but for me and my FZ30, it seems like I don't have to do much if anything about noise until ISO exceeds 200. And for the shots I've taken thus far in "Auto ISO" mode, NONE of them have been set at ISO 400 anyway.

I guess it's a qualitative, "gut feeling" type of thing, but one thing the FZ30 has done for me is to restore the "confidence of capture" feeling that I used to enjoy with the FZ1, but lost somehow with the FZ10 and FZ15. That is to say, when I click the shutter with the FZ30, I can be pretty sure of capturing what my eyeball is perceiving through the EVF. And the sharpness brings in even more detail than the FZ1 could ever muster. For that "Phoebe" series of shots I posted yesterday, I actually took several others that I discarded, but every ONE of them was tack-sharp!

You didn't even mention the EZ modes in your review, a surprise, since they're really quite useful for allowing the user in the field to "get up closer" (albeit through up-front cropping) to subjects, as I did with the Phoebe. And I have printed some fine long-distance portraits of people at 8X10 (A4?) size taken in the 3MP EZ mode.

Well, thanks again. Though your review may steer many folks away from trying this wonderful camera, I'm happy as a clam with mine, and don't mind being in the blissful minority!
--
Just let a smile be your umbrella!

John Reed

EffZeeOneVeeTwo, EffZeeFifteen; EffZeeThirty

I honestly can't see why anyone wouldn't keep their FZ30! It's a wonderful camera. I just wish they'd used a different sensor. When the ACR 3.2 plug-in is released, open a raw file with no noise reduction and you'll see just how sharp the lens is, and just how much noise there is at ISO 80. It's a real pity they have to use so much NR... But i'd keep it if I didn't have to send it back!
S
--
Simon Joinson, dpreview.com

Hi Simon...great review, thanks you... At the moment i currently have a Fuji S7000 which for my faults i really like...If you had this camera and had the option to upgrade to the Fz30 would you take the plunge...is image quality much better in your opinion? thanks again...
--
Kind Rgds

Heath

(The Amateur amateur in training)
FZ30 80%-- S9000 20% both possible buys..
S7000
Tcon17
WLFX9
Raynox DCR 150 & DCR 250
Nikon SB24+omnibounce
Vivitar 2800D
Tripod
CamCane

I love the new improved controls , compared to my Fz20....But I am not happy with same old noise issues....My Fz20 is going up for sale and am looking at Dslr's ...)

gbye Pana

--
Ed in Arizona...fz2O

http://arizonadaze.smugmug.com

Simon-

If shooting as jpg, does dpreview have any recommendations on noise removal - i.e. post process with neat image, noise ninja, picture cooler, or pure image?

And suppose one does not need those extra megapixels to crop. Is there a best way to turn a noisy 8 megapixel shot into a great 5 megapixel shot, i.e. downsize while making the best use of all that extra information.

Simon, maybe you can help me, I own a Nikon Coolpix 5700, and I am pretty happy with its image quality, but I am really worried to take a step backwards if I buy a FZ30 regarding this issue.

If I print in 8x10, and have some, but not a lot, iso 400 shots, would I see and improvement in quality with the FZ30? (features wise, the 30 seems great, but the noise issue is holding me back to make the "upgrade")

Thanks for your comments

--
Patrick

[U] Patrick said:

Simon, maybe you can help me, I own a Nikon Coolpix 5700, and I am
pretty happy with its image quality, but I am really worried to
take a step backwards if I buy a FZ30 regarding this issue.

If I print in 8x10, and have some, but not a lot, iso 400 shots,
would I see and improvement in quality with the FZ30? (features
wise, the 30 seems great, but the noise issue is holding me back to
make the "upgrade")

Click to expand...

Since FZ 30 has IS and a better lens (i think?), iso 400 is not needed so much as with your 5700. ISO 200 is much better and of cource FZ 30 is not to be considered as downgrade !!

--
Costas[/U]

cons :
Limited dynamic range

what it means?

Simon: Thanks for the excellent review of the Fz30.

Simon, you got it right about the Fz30: "A stunning camera, but not a perfect one." You concluded "Noise is the FZ30's achilles' heel" but pointed out "The FZ30 sets new standards for resolution in this class of camera," and "virtually none of the purple fringing." In regard to responsiveness and performance, you state "..Very impressive stuff."

I detect a mature and pragmatic assessment of IQ (and noise) which is appreciated (albeit overdue.) You clearly indicated "ISO 400, which is hardly usable for anything except small prints" for the Fz30. Had you stated this as strongly in your earlier reviews (CP8800) it may have influenced my decision. I found its ISO400 output just as useless albeit its ISO50 output IQ is unbeatable.

I've just sold my slow-lens CP8800 and anxiously await a new Fz30. With its fast 420mm Leica, I expect to be doing most of my shooting at ISO200 and under.

Thanks again

BTW: achilles' is spelled "Achilles"

====================
johnimage

dobbs-rb wrote:
Why Panasonic stays with the

dobbs-rb said:

poor contrast focusing system defys logic.

Click to expand...

The high speed focussing system on the FZ30 is almost instant, I don't see the problem?

I was only talking about image quality, in any other aspect the fz30 wins hands down I think.

What I fear is to find a lot of noise in my everyday photos... and I am not a "touch everything in photoshop and noise ninja" type of guy.

--
Patrick

[U] Patrick said:

I was only talking about image quality, in any other aspect the
fz30 wins hands down I think.

What I fear is to find a lot of noise in my everyday photos... and
I am not a "touch everything in photoshop and noise ninja" type of
guy.

Click to expand...

Why don't you download some full photos from dpreview.com library and see for yourself if it suits you or not ?

--
Costas[/U]

hamster_ken said:

cons :
Limited dynamic range

what it means?

Click to expand...

I do not understand that either I think it has much better range the FZ20.

Limited compared to what?

I have no photographic skills and that must mean I do not have the same needs in a camera as somone that has "Skills"

I really appreciated the FZ cameras as they allowed me to take better photos than any camera I had previously tried.

And the FZ30 just goes a step or two beyond that.

--
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!

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.

Click to expand...

The only "system" I'm bought into is the UZ system, after owning a Oly C-2100 UZ (the mother of all UZ camera's) and a FZ10 the FZ30 is a major improvement in almost every aspect.