Reading mode: Light Dark

FZ50 highly recommended...

Go to last post
You might say, now you bought this camera, no wonder you like it. Well thats not the case. I always liked SJ and PA's review. I have never seen a more thorough review for a camera anywhere. Considering all aspects their review even beat reviews for any other product such as a car or electronic appliances or even movie reviews.

There are other reasons to like the review as well. I have been using FZ50 for more than two weeks now and my experience exactly matches Simon's findings.
Its image quality is not as good as DSLRs.
Its image quality either equal to or slightly better than FZ30's.
Better handling and other minor and not so minor feature upgrades

Considering everything it is the best ultrazoom out there, slightly better than FZ30.
There is room for improvement.

In the past sometimes I didn't agree with SJ or PA's final rating. But Simon always said that go through the whole review and make up your own mind. This time I have no problem with Simon's final rating. If a camera is best(not perfect though) in its class, what kind of rating you think it should get?

I also urge you to look at Simon's samples, all of them. Aren't those simply beautiful pictures? Kudos to Simon.
aftab
 
Simon Joinson said:
If there had been a shift (which there hasn't) wouldn't the 20 page
review be enough for the really obsessive IQ junkie to make their
own mind up? I feel it would be wrong to give an AA to a camera
that is as good as this because it doesn't meet MY criteria for
image quality ( and i've pulled no punches in the review in this
regard ).
Click to expand...
Whatever I do there is critisism (i marked the FZ30 down
Simon Joinson said:
for minor IQ reasons and have never heard the end of it), and i
feel the FZ50 is good enough to squeeze an HR
Click to expand...
I agreed with the fz-30 getting marked down on this.
  • you don't; so don't
Simon Joinson said:
buy one. Incidentally there is NO WAY manufacturers are going to
drop out of the pixel race because of what we say. I wish!
S
--
Simon Joinson, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
Well its your call.....

They have made a rod for their own back...but this isnt the issue...cameras that tout high megapixels...(but use NR to cover up problems), and more importantly put big numbers on the box, including ISO 1600/3200 that isnt of any use...should be marked down IMO...simple as.

If you dont you are saying its ok to use marketing and not deliver results. You cant mark down for noise and not mark down for zealous over use of NR....RAW...great 20mb files! whats that then 10mb noise? 10mb pictures?

I expected DP to cut through the hype and judge on the real world results. but as ever...my calls were in vain.

--

 
Copusmaximus said:
Brian Mosley said:
And while we're at it, I seem to remember this quote :

"A troll posts to provoke a response....I just give you my
view....people may well eat a few words after the reviews are
out..."

Yum yum... would you like a little salt with those words Barry?
Click to expand...
LOL
Click to expand...
Thats kinda funny coming from the guy who cursed pannie and said he would never ever buy another one...(bits in the lens problem)!

--

 
Simon Joinson said:
Two Hands said:
Simon. Did you take all your sample pictures with the noise
reduction set to normal. And if so, what was the reason to do this?

The exif info gives all settings (normal) but not the amount of
noise reduction that was applied. In your review you say: " I'd
advise leaving the noise reduction, sharpness and contrast settings
to low if you want the cleanest images and don't mind doing a
little post-processing."

So why not the optimum (low) settings for your sample pictures ?

And last but not least, Thank you for this review. I was really
looking forward to it. You did a great job!
Click to expand...
It's our policy to leave such settings on default - always has
been. I am considering a change in this policy in cases such as
this, but for the casual visitor it may well give the wrong
impression (setting everything to low requires you to do some
post-processing. Maybe i'll start dropping a few in (with a note)

S
--
Simon Joinson, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
Thank you for responding Simon. I am looking forward to see those samples (with a note).

Keep up the good work!

That darn fz50 with it's agressive NR makes me wonder why those companies like Panasonic do the things they do. Is it strategy, evolution, balance or just teasing us custumers ? Is it possible they made that move just to read in this forum all those desperate remarks....Just plain amusement for crazy engeneers ????

Everybody can see that this NR thing is over the edge....What's the use to make the NR settings "high, higher and Highest?"

Aaaaaaaaaaargrh!!!!
 
On maintaining and improving the depth and attention to detail in your latest review... regardless of the final 'badge' rating, which is unnecessary imho - I feel that you have once more raised the bar in professional camera reviewing.

If you are able to match this attention to detail for the LX2, I am looking forward to a very interesting read... may I request you include a comparison of Noise and Dynamic Range for the LX2 vs LX1 in RAW? I think it will be very interesting to see how the noise and dynamic range have been affected by developing the new 10MP CCD... the user feedback so far has been very promising in this regard!

Kind Regards, and thanks again!

Brian

--
--



http://www.gopetition.com/online/9523.html
 
BF wrote Next years model will go out and take its own pictures, automatically download to your computer - and then present the prints to you, with a fresh cup of coffee while you enjoy!

I don't like coffee so does that mean it still can't have a Highly Recommended
--
My Galleries are at
http://birdsofhantspics.mysite.orange.co.uk/index.html
 
So many wait on these "godly" reviews and will not make a step without it. All the Naysayers said wait till the review and we will all see how bad the FZ50 is and now that it got a better rating, "its only a review!"

People want it both ways, I personally have never waiting on these reviews and feel sorry for anyone who needs this to make a camera purchase. It used to be that Phil got these cameras first but now there is more than enough info from owners before the review is even posted!

--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two Xs
Leica M7
 
IF dpreview has no clout then why the nonsense rating here "just barely". When I see reviews of Fuji S3 as Above Average, from a company that wrote the book on low noise, then I see Panasonic's smear infested, "barely useable" ISOs I gotta think that something is wrong.

This panasonic was slammed only in the wording and not in the final recommendationm, which does show the inconsistent nature of the reviews here. This was obviously a camera made just to sell a camera, and this review site needs to let everyone know by a poor recommendation.

I must admit I will not read the reviews as much now....this is poor.
 
FWIW, the 30" x 20" print of the Orchid taken in RAW on the FZ50 arrived today and is VERY good. Not sure that hair/fur would stand up as well at that size though and it would probably be unreasonable to expect it from any prosumer camera, or even a DSLR unless you've got an EOS 1D MkII.

Only problem with the print was a lack of saturation compared to my own print on the inkjet. Guess I'd have to go the custom ICM route and get a profile from the printers, but very happy with what PhotoBox produced.

--
Colin
 
Trevor Carpenter said:
BF wrote Next years model will go out and take its own pictures,
automatically download to your computer - and then present the
prints to you, with a fresh cup of coffee while you enjoy!
Click to expand...
no that's a sony you're thinking of.

part of its new firmware they're working on is to auto-record audio and video of the user taking the photos and mail them to the CIA/NSA. you think that GPS thing they now sell was for the USER'S BENEFIT??

all the rootkit stuff before was them JUST GETTING PRACTICE.

;) ;)

--
Bryan (pics only: http://www.flickr.com/photos/linux-works )
(pics and more: http://www.netstuff.org ) ~
 
Adam-T said:
Yep - the FZ7 and 30 should have been also but I guess Simon was
going through a Noise Hate phase when he did those two.. the 7 was
a Significant upgrade from the 5 ergonomically and functionality
Click to expand...
I would agree.

for the fz5 to get HR and yet the fz30 and fz7 to not get it, that makes no intuitive sense to me.

I guess I'm still annoyed that the fz30 (which I think was panys best superzoom, still, to-date) got a lower grade than the image-inferior fz50.

even TODAY, I think the fz30 has a better value than the fz50 (other than the 50 coming with sort-of free software for raw. sort-of because it IS hobbleware and that very much WOULD affect MY review of this cam+sw pkg). its not hobbleware for functions FOR the fz50, but come on - its very much hobbleware since its limited to ONLY the 50 and lx2. that really should have been mentioned in the article - I think its VERY relevant indeed. not for new buyers but CERTAINLY for us older pany supporters...

it also indicates a direction of the company that I have to say, I strongly disagree with. they sent out an odd message with that 'current generation only' raw converter.

--
Bryan (pics only: http://www.flickr.com/photos/linux-works )
(pics and more: http://www.netstuff.org ) ~
 
that's not even 2 cents. You'll have to add something around 16 öre next time...

:)

George
 
Brian Mosley said:
If you are able to match this attention to detail for the LX2, I am
looking forward to a very interesting read... may I request you
include a comparison of Noise and Dynamic Range for the LX2 vs LX1
in RAW? I think it will be very interesting to see how the noise
and dynamic range have been affected by developing the new 10MP
CCD... the user feedback so far has been very promising in this
regard!
Click to expand...
Let me second that request. As Simon mentioned in his review,
the noise graph is really more of a "noise reduction graph"
since it is merely a measure of luminance/chrominance standard
deviation on a standard colorchecker chart, which is heavily affected
by noise reduction. For those cameras that support RAW (though
a dwindling breed in the digicam arena), it would make much
more sense to convert in some standard RAW converter like ACR
or dcrawand then do the measurement; then the result has more
to do with the native capabilities of the sensor. One would want
to present both this result and that of the standard test using the
camera's jpeg engine; the latter is what jpeg shooters would care
about, the former the figure of merit for RAW shooters.

Since dynamic range tests are done for DSLR's at dpreview, why not
"bridge cameras" that purport to be a substitute? There is already
a comparison to the Rebel XT here.

--
emil
--



http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/
 
linuxworks said:
for the fz5 to get HR and yet the fz30 and fz7 to not get it, that
makes no intuitive sense to me.
Click to expand...
the FZ5 was £425 on launch, £25 MORE than the Still in production FZ20 ! it dropped to £399 pretty quickly and stayed there for ages - the still in production FZ7 is now £215 , the FZ5 was never that low and the FZ3 only got that cheap on end of line blowout ! ..

Of course there are more UZs out there now with IS than there were in the FZ5 days but I still trawled through the lot with extensive research in the SLR styled tiny UZ area and ended up with the FZ7 and it wasn't a price related thing, it was Lack of heavy NR (Which plagues the Sonys), and lack of Bulk (which plagues all bar the the FZ7) and long term reliabiity (KM AS systems have been failing / Micro USM Motors driving the S3 IS Zoom are short lived) which were my reasons - the image quality isn't far off between the lot of them , I'd say the S3-IS was the best on that score in this level of camera (Small UZ'er) an excellent balance between NR and Noise but it'll be a cold day in hell when I buy a Digicam with a Micro USM Timebomb motor in it!

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 
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