No interest in the E1??? That's a tough little 5mp that's going cheap & if it'll accept the Leica 'OIS' lenses, assuming more than just that initial 14-50mm will be offered, ya might get your 'OIS' cake & eat it too eventually...
Its a big focal legth range to cover even with budget glass. It will cost money and it is more expensive. You are kidding yourself if you believe otherwise.
A natural upgrade for FZ owners is the KM5D? What do you base that on, the fact there is IS in the body?
If you own the telephoto lens in the first place!
One of the attractions of the FZ series is its flexibility. A slightly bigger bag? Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself. Nonsense!
Yep, dealers want rid!
I got a temporary ban for lord coe on the oly forum freaking out at me!
No not at all, the slower lenses are made up for with the better ISO performance..the edge would even go to the SLR, leica make great optics dont get me wrong, what lets the show down a little is the pannie sensor
Yes...!
No you are wrong, the standard lens covers 27mm-105mm, then pick up a 70/75-300mm takes you all the way up to 450mm
Maybe that is so...every user makes his own mind up on things, the fact remains its a solid cam, lots of lenses out there new and sh...and continued mount support...its not an issue really..
Wider is available on the FZs... all you have to do is slap a WA converter on... and don't say you don't want to have to do that because toy obviously don't mind swapping lenses on a DSLR... I'd eve say its easier to slap a WA converter on an FZ then it is to swap 2 lenses...
make that... 323mm to 714mm with the Teleconverter (with no vignetting)
Dont try to tell me wa convertors give the same optical quality as a dedicated lens, they just dont. Add to this the better sensor..its an inferior package altogether
Great but who has the best image quality? and dynamic range? and high ISO and better AF, and accurate metering.????
I own a LC1 and a km7D with some fine and expensive lenses. I need the Km for fast action and situations in very 'bad' light (theater). I like my KM7D and I love my LC1. With the LC1 I capture life and with the 7D I take pictures. Don't give up your FZ30.
again i thought we were discussing focal range capability... i guess you bring this stuff up because you can't make a suitable counter arguement well staying with the origional disagreement topic (Focal Range)
True... i do plan to get an SLR some day... maybe the L1 maybe something else... but how much did you pay for the body, and 2 lenses you speak of? and were they used or on sale? did you get a warrenty? i'm willing to beileve that i spent quite a bit less then you did and i won't be selling my FZ30+accessories to get a DSLR anytime soon... speaking of cost... i saw some of the lenses i wanted ... but at least one was $2500us others were cheaper but still were 4 digits... my car cost me $2000ca ... i am not about to spend more on glass then i've spent on my car just yet.
Absolutely. Buy a proper SLR with a bag full of primes for optimal quality. But thereagain, that defeats your argument for a small bag and small price.
Primes used to be better 25 years ago, now thats not the case.
High ISO, fast AF, much better dynamic range, faster fps, battery life over double,more powerful flash,OVF, you can change the lenses etc etc
Sure you like the canon stuff and its good, but the km is a great cam..
Lets put it like this, the cost of the camera and the standard lens is about what an fz 30 costs...guess which one takes better quality pictures? If the 30 were a good bit cheaper then yeah go for it, now that the SLR's are in the same range...the fz series is in for a very hard time
Blown highlights, overexposes in high contrast scenes.....image noise inferior..
It is dont get me wrong a great little camera, but times have changed. not long ago you were looking at £600 for a cam and lens, now its in the same price range. Sure the fz price has come down, but it needs to come down a lot more IMO..
High ISO... (still don't need it)
Perhaps but your talking about the price of the body right?... or is it the price of the poor quality kit lens with the body?
You've used the line.. "Learn to walk" before... well i'll adapt that line and say "Learn how to use a camera" what you describe as camera problems are really photographer problems and a DSLR won't do any better if the photographer doesn't bother to learn how to use the camera appropriately
you should read this...
Well its up to each person what they do glad you are happy with your gear..
Um well thats a little bit silly to state that. Sure the kit lens is no leica, but its decent anyhow. And the leica fz's are softer at the tele end...not enough to worry about..but no lens is perfect.
So you are saying I dont know how to take a picture or use a camera?
Well thats you take. I for one think that film is close to digital. But I dont not believe the smaller sensors challenge film, they are not far off..but not enough as yet.
Agreed
Agreed and therefore i also think its silly to compare the price of a body and poor kit lens with the price of an FZ30
Only in the same way you tell people who see a benefit in cropping that they don't know how to use their legs or their cameras properly... I actually don't use the histogram at all... i keep the optimal settings for the scene knowledge in my head and more often then not come out with a good result on the first picture
Agreed but it doesn't have to be as bad as the default settings make it.
As long as that is what you are suggesting and you are not making people who choose a prosumer out to be idiots then i'll respect that opinion. and i won't bash DSLRs if the FZs aren't being bashed.
and thats your take... i've seen results from both... i've even seen picture being sold as postcards taken with high ISO film that are just horrible and yet they are good enough to be sold as a post card... IMO prosumers are darn close and most newer DSLRs are beyond film... close enough for me and many others to be comfortable staying with our original choice.
Use the camera that gets it done for you!
I have.
