TZ3 - How Good is Low Light Shots

I've been on the brink of buying a new camera for the past week or two. I've flip flopped between the TZ3 and the Fuji 31FD. I shoot a ton of typical indoor shots. I wouldn't say night club shots or real dark but your typical house that may not have the best lighting in the world. With my canon I was always disappointed because to my eyes the lighting looked fine in my living room but the pics always came out dark and very warm (orange) colors to me. (not sure if I'm explaining the colors exactly right but you get my drift). Anyway, I don't need to take shots by candle light but I do want awesome shots for a typical room with the lights on. This has never been provided by the canons I've had. From everything I've read the Fuji has this down pretty good with the 30 and 31Fd that I was thinking about purchasing. The only thing keeping me from purchasing a 31Fd is this TZ3 but I'm still unsure about the low light capabilities of the TZ3. I saw one post from a person on this forum who had pictures of a room upstairs and it had a white stairwell leading down. He had pics from a canon and then the TZ3 and they showed what I've noticed from the canon with the dark pic in normal light and it seemed the TZ3 looked awesome in the same light. Any comments?

I'll be using my camera 60% indoors, 30% my son's sports and 10% for other. Not sure if that helps with opinions. I know I'm posting in a panasonic section so it may seem unfair but the Panasonic seemed to be the cam with the biggest question mark to me. The Fuji seems established to be a well rounded camera with awesome low light. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles that the TZ3 has though..hence my post. Thanks in advance.

The "orange" problem is actually down to the white balance capabilities of the camera. I believe Panasonic are pretty good for auto WB.

I understand that the Fuji's are better at high ISO than the Panasonic, but the Panasonic is image stabilised (I don't think the Fuji is) so it's swings and roundabouts...

--
http://www.phildrinkwater.co.uk

Right, OIS will give you about a two stop advantage, so you can use ISO 100 when the Fuji needs ISO 400. I'm guessing your Canon did not have IS, too.

However, I noticed that you wanted to take sports pictures of your son. If the sports are indoors or basically not in sunlight, you'll be better off with the Fuji. Well, you'll lose the wonderful 10x zoom.

Jason Pugh said:

... I saw one post from a person on
this forum who had pictures of a room upstairs and it had a white
stairwell leading down. He had pics from a canon and then the TZ3
and they showed what I've noticed from the canon with the dark pic
in normal light and it seemed the TZ3 looked awesome in the same
light. Any comments?

Click to expand...

To be fair, I believe the TZ3 picture was taken in better lighting conditions than the Canon. If both pictures had been taken within a minute of each other, the comparision would have been better.

From all that has been said here on DPReview, the compact Fuji's do very well in low light-- much better than ANY other manufacturer. But as far as image stabilization, lens, screen, usability, etc., the TZ3 will be better. If quality of indoor shots is REALLY important, go Fuji. If you are willing to compromise a little in that one area to get more in every other area, get the TZ3. --Paul.

jinhamasaki said:

Right, OIS will give you about a two stop advantage, so you can use
ISO 100 when the Fuji needs ISO 400. I'm guessing your Canon did
not have IS, too.

However, I noticed that you wanted to take sports pictures of your
son. If the sports are indoors or basically not in sunlight,
you'll be better off with the Fuji. Well, you'll lose the
wonderful 10x zoom.

Click to expand...

These are all assuming your subjects are still, and not moving.

The Fujis will always have an advantage of shooting subjects in motion because their high ISOs will look cleaner.

However, in terms of shooting normal everyday shots, especially indoors, a Fuji NEEDS high ISO just to compensate for the lack of OIS in order to have a faster shutterspeed. I had a Fuji F20, and it was literally impossible to shoot under ISO400 in room lighting. Every photo even when the camera was braced against a wall and every effort to hold still would result in blurry photos. When zoomed in, anything less than ISO 1600 was blurry basically.

As to the posters original question, the TZ3 does well in high ISO situations, but not nearly as great as the Fujis in question. I would say a Fuji F30's ISO 1600 looks like a TZ3's ISO 800. And TZ3's ISO 1250 looks like the F30's ISO 2000.

But of course, the OIS lets you take shots at slower ISO speeds and slower shutter speeds. If you have a slow shutterspeed, you don't need high ISO to get as much light, and with OIS, it's possible to get a sharp picture. So I would say most pictures come out about the same for the same scene, except the two cameras will use vastly different settings to achieve them.

Namely trying to choose between Fuji F30 and Panasonic TZ-3. I suppose the question should be how helpful is the OIS of Panasonic, compared to the better sensor of Fuji, as far as low-light capabilities are concerned. Currently I use Sony DSC-H2, and I'm quite happy with it, save its low-light performance (and it does have OIS). So I'm also looking for a compact camera (the Sony is a bit bulky), with at least decent low-light performance (better than H2 or, say, the A series Canons). And I'd also like to know if TZ-2 fits the bill. Perhaps we have to wait for an 'official' review here .

I have the F30 (which my wife mainly uses) and now have a TZ3 on order. I also have a D80 with various lenses. I'm buying the TZ3 for a number of reasons. Mainly for times when i'm in no humour to lug the dslr kit and for when I want more zoom than x3 on the F30 which is very limiting. You might experience this if your action shots are outdoors. You will need to be in REAL close with the x3 zoom.

I had a Canon A700 and regretfully sold it as the x6 zoom was excellent. I was thinking of the TZ1 a while back, but I wasn't totally convinced about the noise and IQ. I also was thinking of the A700's replacement (A710IS) with image stabilisation but now the TZ3 has come along I just can't resist this package now. The 28mm wide plus 280mm range in the one package is nothing short as awesome. Throw in now a little bit better ISO than the TZ1 and a lovley 3 inch screen and new OIS then it becomes a no brainer for me. Also the live histogram is very welcomed too as the F30 sadly lacks any histogram at all even in playback.

As for the F30, well this is a great performer in it's own right too especially indoors which might suit you better. For indoors in ordinary tunsten lighting you will be shooting at about at least ISO1600 without flash which can be acceptable on the F30. Or you can shoot with the iflash in auto at ISO800 and get very good results too. But both cameras have their trade offs. The F30 you will have to shoot wide indoors as the lens is might be too slow at x3 zoom (f5) to handhold without OIS. Also the zoom is a trade off too and very limitied in certain situations. I expect the TZ3 to have trade offs too, but for my type of shooting not as much as the F30.

I'm expecting (from the samples i've seen) at least a fairly acceptable ISO400 on the TZ3. If my subjects are not moving and just posing then the OIS will take care of the slower shutter speed. It certainly won't be a problem for the TZ3 for my indoor stills of museams and churchs and the 28mm will be excellent. But the F30 won't be totally redundant. If i'm up front at a rock concert this is a ideal performer which the TZ3 might not far out as well against. Here's some F30 rock concert shots in the link here:
http://picasaweb.google.com/patsweb/UFO

And here is some ISO1600 F30 shots:









And low ISO with fill flash:



--
*****************************************
Packy

http://picasaweb.google.com/patsweb .... try the slideshow option!

The pics look very impressive, for 1600 ISO - did you do any post processing? On my H2, which is terrific in many respects, I get more noise even at ISO 400.

I also had A700 and sold it - lol - but while its zoom was impressive, it wasn't too useful in low light, like indoors or at night.

Perhaps I should wait now 'till you get your TZ3 - it will be interesting to hear the opinion of someone who's actually used both of those cameras, 'cos I still can't quite make up my mind between them, and can't really afford both. On the one hand, the Fuji is much cheaper, but it doesn't have IS, and it's manufactured in China, while TZ-3 is apparently made in Japan - so you kind of expect it to be more reliable, and for me it's an investment for at least a few years. Or maybe the manufacturing country isn't that much of an issue these days... I'll just wait for Simon's review of TZ-3, I guess .

Paul Rahoi said:

From all that has been said here on DPReview, the compact Fuji's do
very well in low light-- much better than ANY other manufacturer.
But as far as image stabilization, lens, screen, usability, etc.,
the TZ3 will be better. If quality of indoor shots is REALLY
important, go Fuji. If you are willing to compromise a little in
that one area to get more in every other area, get the TZ3. --Paul.

Click to expand...

I think you are getting at exactly what I'm trying to find out. I'm willing to sacrifice a little in low light shooting to have a more rounded camera for everything I do. The key word being LITTLE. My current cam is a Canon G3. I have a 2x zoom lens add on as well as a pretty nice Flash that cost me around $200 or so. The thing is, who wants to go around carrying a camera with a huge flash to anything but VERY special events? I would feel like a numbskull going to a friends house for a get together and whipping out all the G3 and a huge flash.

Anyway, indoors is most important not only for get togethers but also low light places I may go on vacation but I'm willing to trade a little for what the TZ3 offers. I just don't want to get the TZ3 and it be no better than all of the canons that I've had. If I find that the TZ3 does well indoors then I'll be fine. I don't need to take shots that are only lit with candle light.

On the other side of the spectrum I don't think the Fuji is just a one trick pony, as said in the review on this site if I'm correct.

Ygrec said:

The pics look very impressive, for 1600 ISO - did you do any post
processing? On my H2, which is terrific in many respects, I get
more noise even at ISO 400.

Click to expand...

My post processing mainly entails just levels adjustment and sharpening. No NR was applied on all those shots. I try to nail the exposure right which minimizes the noise but it is a bit of trial and error on the F30 as it has no histogram.

I found the A700 not too bad indoors if the subjects are closeby and not moving too much. I really enjoyed the A700 and its bigger than normal zoom so the TZ3 will be a boon for me with x10 and 28mm wide! And I have OIS as well to help to overcome some of it's limitations. Once subjects are not moving too much and just posing indoors then the TZ3 will cover most of my shooting requirements and probably even give me more possibilities with it's wide angle and it's zoom over the F30. It certainly will be easier for exposure too with a histogram and bracketing features.

I used flash with ISO400 for acceptable results on the A700. I expect the TZ3 to be along the A700's performance, so I will work around it's limitiations. I guess you can't have you cake and eat it all the time. If the F30 sensor was in the TZ3 then it would be a dream camera. But at least now it seems to be half decent at ISO400 which has tempted me to take the plunge.

Here's an A700 balanced with ambient light with flash at ISO400.



--
*****************************************
Packy

http://picasaweb.google.com/patsweb .... try the slideshow option!

When taking shots indoors, if the subjects are moving the Fuji will have the advantage. If they're relatively stationary then the Panasonic will probably edge in front.

Ygrec said:

Namely trying to choose between Fuji F30 and Panasonic TZ-3. I
suppose the question should be how helpful is the OIS of Panasonic,
compared to the better sensor of Fuji, as far as low-light
capabilities are concerned. Currently I use Sony DSC-H2, and I'm
quite happy with it, save its low-light performance (and it does
have OIS). So I'm also looking for a compact camera (the Sony is a
bit bulky), with at least decent low-light performance (better than
H2 or, say, the A series Canons). And I'd also like to know if TZ-2
fits the bill. Perhaps we have to wait for an 'official' review
here .

Click to expand...

--
http://www.phildrinkwater.co.uk

Ygrec said:

Namely trying to choose between Fuji F30 and Panasonic TZ-3. I
suppose the question should be how helpful is the OIS of Panasonic,
compared to the better sensor of Fuji, as far as low-light
capabilities are concerned. Currently I use Sony DSC-H2, and I'm
quite happy with it, save its low-light performance (and it does
have OIS). So I'm also looking for a compact camera (the Sony is a
bit bulky), with at least decent low-light performance (better than
H2 or, say, the A series Canons). And I'd also like to know if TZ-2
fits the bill. Perhaps we have to wait for an 'official' review
here .

Click to expand...

Currently I've Fuji F30 and Canon S3 IS. The Image Stabilization is much more effective way than hight ISO of F30 to deal with picture blurr under long exposure condition.

Moreover, F30 with flash results are very disapointing because some pink overcast I obtain in every picture. I really hope for better flash results with TZ3.

Adam
--
http://www.pbase.com/adam3544

Yeah, most of the pics I take indoors will be people posing. I don't anticipate needing to have clear pics with people moving around in low light. I just need something that will shoot well without washing out the subjects with the flash at 7 feet or so. I'm leaning towards the TZ3 for all the extras you get but hope to hear from a few other TZ3 owners and their indoor shooting.

I have the FX01 and with OIS + Flash, I've rarely gone past ISO160 in Auto mode.

From the Review that has been put up here at DPreview it appears that the low light isn't much better, if any than the rest of the pack. Seems Fuji still stands alone in the low light shooting.