Indeed, if I point my Panny near shadow I'm asking for PP grief. And low luminance means low contrast, lost detail. At the other extreme there's purple fringing etc. And if I'm really hamfisted I'll get all of the above in the same frame.
Once the photographer has reached a certain level of competancy then the better IQ and capabilities of superior optics and sensors can only enable the photgrapher to achieve more. At that point a compact will limit the range and scope of the works that can be accomplished. That is not to say that there is not a place for compacts as they are compact and easy to carry around.
--Hi Gil,
You have really good shots, but I've notice that they are all (or
most of them) taken in quite good lighting conditions. Am I right?
What I've said earlier about the Fz not being able to make it
is spoken in the context of poor lighting condition.
cheers,
Calv
Now tell these nice people which camera, lens and other goodies you used to get such an excellent capture. People are so enamored with what they have that they wish it to go beyond its capabilities. OK, in most cases the camera out strips the person pressing the shutter release. But once you get past that, the camera can make a difference.
So Randy is that what so many people are so preocupied with, how they'll spend 500 smackers on a camera and it'll outperform cameras costing much more. And a general purpose one lens options will outperform specialty lenses costing over a grand each. I don't think everyone here is under that illusion, maybe a few. Those few should take a good look at what the 70-200mm VR Nikkor can do and get some reality orientation, what do ya think? I got the FZ7 and after two weeks upped it into an FZ30 which ain't bad but it's no DSLR. Can't touch my D70 but it's useful in its own context and I have no unrealistic expectations of it. It can take some nice pictures within its limits and how I use it.
NO., but they have an optical VF that shows real detail without weird time lags or the need to squint. I consider the FZ30 EVF to be one of the better EVF's but it is pretty weak compared to my DSLR's VF. I also find that the AF in my DSLR to be much faster and much more accurate and reliable. That's probably one reason why it costs a bit more.
Good to have both, agreed.
Minolta had one camera with an EVF close to 1MP (I think it was an A2 or something), that was sweet but it was still too slow responding. Panning in an EVF is not a fun experience.
