FZ50; still the best bridge superzoom camera in 2010!?

ah ok, I didn't even think to check that. That negates the gain then bummer
--
Photography shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/invisodude/

Snap shots
http://s618.photobucket.com/albums/tt266/randsphoto/

Indeed, the FZ30 had a larger sensor yet the lens brightness was still kept relatevely high at 2.8 to 3.7. I think people were too caught up with the 2.8 figure which was one of most frequently mentioned strengths of the Panasonic superzooms going back to the FZ1, which used an even smaller sensor (1/3.2", that's tiny)

Now that I have the GH1, one thing I really miss is the internal zoom. I find that it's really much more convenient to have a camera without an extending lens barrel. Also I think the ergonomics of the FZ50(30) is significantly better than the pricey GH1.

Ron777 said:

ah ok, I didn't even think to check that. That negates the gain then bummer
--
Photography shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/invisodude/

Snap shots
http://s618.photobucket.com/albums/tt266/randsphoto/

Click to expand...

My question is off the topic, but with DOF calculator, how bohen arround the bird can be explained? I didn't have TC at that time and had to crop a lot. The bird picture is ~ 50% crop at least. This is just a curious question for mine education.
--

How so? IYO.

--

The FZ50:

I refer to the small sensor gains that saw the canon G11 drop to 10MP.

--

The FZ50:

hwalker said:

I know it's been discussed to death, but there's no proven relationship between reduced mega pixels and better image quality. Likes of Canon 7D and Nikon D90(and D300) all performed better than their lesser mega pixel siblings in image quality.

Click to expand...

You are mixing apples with oranges.

Namely, largish CMOS sensors that have still a lot of room to go before hitting their resolution threshold with smallish CCD sensors that have already crossed that resolution threshold (in the name of competition).

To illustrate this. Canon 7D has mere 5.4 MP/cm² pixel density. Compare it to a typical pixel density of 23-40 MP/cm² found in Canon's point and shoot cameras. No match indeed.

I believe that an ideal resolution for a 1/1.7" sensor is 8-10 MP and 6-7 MP for a 1/2.3" sensor. Anything above it is pointless, IMHO.

The thing is that the latest pocket cameras featuring 10-14 MP sensors do not longer give us per-pixel resolution. Instead, we now have several adjoining pixels defining a basic resolution unit.

That simply wrong. Not speaking about poorer dynamic range of these new sensors.

IMHO, the FZ50's deeper grip is more comfortable to hold. Also what the deeper grip makes it easier for my index finger to reach the front dial where as the GH1 dial is placed in a rather vague spot. For the same reason, I find the quick menu button on the FZ50 to be a lot easier and quicker to use because I can access the dial better. I think it'd been better if the movie mode button switched its place with the quick menu button on the GH1.

Also the FZ50 has that extra dial at the back whereas the GH1 relies on the push-down action on one dial. I mean it's OK, but when you try to quickly change the exposure compensation, it can get pretty fiddly. Not only the two-dial FZ50 makes it easier, some other one-dial DSLRs do it better with the Exp. button. Some of it is because there's little space on top of the FZ50, but Panasonic at least shoulde've made the film mode button customizable IMHO.

John Miles said:

How so? IYO.

--

Click to expand...

And once upon a time, the "ideal" resolution was 4MP (I clearly remember when the Canon G5 was criticized for having too many pixels) and soon it became 7MP(8MP cameras were bad) Also even the large APS-C sensors' sweet spot was once widely considered the 6MP and many have claimed it was pointless to go over the 10MP since it was already shown the 10MP DSLRs were worse then the 6MP ones and things would only get worse with more mega pixels. That was not too long ago and happened on this forum.

On the same-sized sensors, the dynamic range and noise, if anything, have been improving. The main problem is often heavy-handed image processing and the fact most manufacturers have abandoned the high-end compacts with 2/3" sensors and even the 1/1.6-1/1.7" sensors. So we're left with really small sensor compacts but that doesn't mean they are worse than the old cameras of similarly sized sensors....well provided that the manufacturers didn't try sledge-hammer the noise in JPG.

Robiro said:

I believe that an ideal resolution for a 1/1.7" sensor is 8-10 MP and 6-7 MP for a 1/2.3" sensor. Anything above it is pointless, IMHO.

The thing is that the latest pocket cameras featuring 10-14 MP sensors do not longer give us per-pixel resolution. Instead, we now have several adjoining pixels defining a basic resolution unit.

That simply wrong. Not speaking about poorer dynamic range of these new sensors.

Click to expand...

Thanks for putting that down.

I know I'm not qualified to decide what makes a camera worth manufacture, but so help me I am dumbstruct at the reality that Panasonic do not consider the FZ60 worth the effort. The good points are are there in barrel loads and the bad points have all been aced by Panasonic on other cameras.

--

The FZ50:

because Panny is now in the DSLR and Glass business, and camera's like the Big FZ's and LX's clearly jeopardize DSLR and Glass sales. Prior to that, they were leading the way with some very innovative stuff, and it included MEGA OIS, etc...OTH, in the US, Panny's presence in stores is now almost non-existent. Whatever there marketing plan for the US is, it is a complete failure. Even P&S's are hard to find. It is almost the end for them here...Hugh disappointment for us Panny fans here.

Larry.
--
Olympus E-510 DSLR with 14-42 mm & 40-150 mm Lens

Lumix FZ 35, FZ 50, FZ 20, TZ5, TZ3, FX 07, TCON 17, MCON 35, RDS, Sunpak 383.

Fuji F-20.

John Miles said:

Thanks for putting that down.

I know I'm not qualified to decide what makes a camera worth manufacture, but so help me I am dumbstruct at the reality that Panasonic do not consider the FZ60 worth the effort. The good points are are there in barrel loads and the bad points have all been aced by Panasonic on other cameras.

Click to expand...

I saw it written that an official reoly from panny went along the lines of an upgrade to the FZ50 would be more expensive than alot of people would pay.

I do belive this as I got my FZ50 in late 06 for significantly less than other stores had it
$775 AUD

I couldnt see an upgrade selling for much under a grand and for that money i would be trying to strike a deal on a D5000 or simular

An ILC migh be mirrorles but there is still the expense of providing the sensor cleaner and lens mount. My guess is that saving thos two items in the production of an FZ50 would offset the inclusion of the bigger lens than any kit lens.

A truly magnificent FZ60 could be realised for under GH1 single lens kit prices IMO.

Had Panasonic just kept the plant making FZ50's, what would the upgrade to the LX3 sensor have done to DSLR sales I wonder? A review here that beginning: - Whilst virtually identical to look at, bar some styling detail to bring it in line with the G series, the new FZ60 is truly state of the art inside. Gone are the high ISO noise issues with images surpassing those of the LX3.

--

The FZ50:

Robiro said:

. . . I believe that an ideal resolution for a 1/1.7" sensor is 8-10 MP and 6-7 MP for a 1/2.3" sensor. Anything above it is pointless, IMHO. . . .

Click to expand...

Yup . . . FZ9, please . . .

Mike

John Miles wrote:

. . . . A review here that beginning: - Whilst virtually identical to look at, bar some styling detail to bring it in line with the G series, the new FZ60 is truly state of the art inside. Gone are the high ISO noise issues with images surpassing those of the LX3. . . .

In discussions of the FZ60, I keep coming back full circle to my original thought:

The FZ50 only needs better JPEG processing, as the FZ8 does.

Everything else on it (them) is brilliant.

Mike

Sometimes I feel like the Polar Bear treading the same old track in the zoo, swinging his head from side to side; day in, day out. Only my bewilderment is born of knowing how good a camera is, that was just dumped. How often can I say how good the camera is. Maybe if I just say it often enough something will trigger an FZ60.

I've stopped all such repetition here because I was getting on peoples nerves; unfair when all we want is to enjoy the forum. But I seriously have lost all interest in new cameras. I test a couple of review shots, they're never crashingly better than the FZ50, so I move on. I've picked up the GH1 and GF1. They did nothing for me; felt funny; had bits missing.

If there's no LX4 soon, there'll be a few more Polar Bears wandering around hereabouts as well.
--

The FZ50:

Simple matter of $$$ I would think.

If the FZ60 bombs, then, well, Panny loses out of all investments put into the FZ60.

If the FZ60 is a smashing success, it cannibalizes Pannys much more lucrative m4/3 line (including lens sales etc.).

Heck, even if it has middling success it still takes away from the m4/3 lines, let alone the current FZxx line.

Either way it seems the FZ60 is doomed to fail.

(Don't get me wrong, if they come out with a new FZ60 I am sure it would be a sweet camera)

--
Hubert

My cameras: GF1, TZ3, recently fixed (I think) Minolta Hi-Matic 7s, broken Konica Auto S2(couldn't fix, who the heck GLUES screws in??), K1000 and my wife's old K110D



http://www.flickr.com/photos/peppermonkey/

I believe that the FZ30 and FZ50 are by far the best bridge superzoom cameras ever made.

Sure, there are a couple that beat them in image quality, but all other aspects considered, the FZ30 and FZ50 win big time!

Ergonomics, manual focus and zoom rings on the lens, ease of use, build quality, that wonderful Leica lens . . .

What more can I say . . . it is just one beautiful piece of craftsmanship!



If I had to get rid of all of my digital cameras but one . . . the FZ50 would stay, the DSLR's would go!

Although . . . I'd hide my FZ10 somewhere as it is a pretty awesome camera, too!



--
J. D.
Colorado

Robiro said:

Perfectly doable. But, unfortunately, there is no will on Panasonic's part.

Click to expand...

Indeed Panasonic in interviews with senior planning staff have made it clear that their camera business for the next few years will be focussed on two main areas of development: the LX series and the G Micro series. The reason for choosing these two is blindingly obvious...

Panasonic makes considerably more money from selling these lines than any others and believes that the improved technologies they have in the pipeline will earn the best return in these two camera areas. If they divert development effort into the hypothetical FZ60 then they will dilute the earning potential from these other two areas. I have worked in a high tech business (specialist pharmaceuticals) where we were obliged to orphan certain product lines in order to be able to plough/plow our development effort into more profitable areas. You may want a FZ60, but if Panasonic's market research indicates that the world at large does not share your opinion in suffficient numbers, then it may not happen. I choose my words carefully. Saying that it may not happen is not the same as saying that it will not happen.

Several years ago Canon orphaned their Powershot G series of cameras at the G5 to moans of despair from dedicated users. Then they developed and launched the G6 and now we have models up to the G11.

Competitors to the LX3 such as the Canon S90 will drive development of its successor, while competition in the interchangeable lens mirrorless camera market from companies such as Samsung and maybe Nikon will drive the G Micro development.

Perhaps if another company can demonstrate that it is earning good margins on an equivalent of an upgraded FZ50, Panasonic may develop the FZ60. Don't expect it to be cheap though!

As I have said i would really like to see an FZ60 and can cite how I think Panny could do it with their existing technologies. But thinking about it the last day or so, I do not think it will happen. And the reason is because I think Panny see's the G1 type camera (The G2?) as being the real FZ60 that when they get it right will satisfy most FZ30/50 users. They may be right. To be fair with its good evf, spot focus, high resolution, EZ-zoom, and compact size it has a lot of features to like and perhaps has the possibility to mature into something good for the FZ30/50 users. I know we all say we like having an all inclusive single lens, but a system in which you can choose the lens best for you (if you want and use mainly wide field or best if you want and mainly use long zoom) has a lot of possibility. Particularly given the small size and lightness of the lenses.

The problem is that they blew it, sort of like with the over-aggressive noise-reduction on the FZ50 JPEGS. The FZ50 was an almost perfect camera and they bombed it. The fact that it is still as loved as it is, proves just how close they were with the FZ30/50. If they had brought out the G1 camera with in-body stabilization, with an at least 300 mm zoom of good quality (available upon introduction of the camera), and with a dual lens combo (including the 300 mm zoom for those who wanted it), at a price to compete reasonably well with the Olympus and Pentax dual lens kits, I suspect many long zoom FZ owners would have been tempted. But without the long zoom available and inbody stabilization not present, the camera doesn't do it and is too expensive. I hope I am wrong, but I suspect that a G1 type camera that finally puts it together right in features, zoom ability, and price is the best hope for a new FZ60 replacement for the FZ50. And I think this is where Panny is headed, and that high level bridge cameras are no longer in their long range plans, and will be replaced with small G1 type cameras. They don't have it right yet, but hopefully eventually will. Until then we keep our FZ's or jump ship.

wow you'd really keep the FZ 50 over a DSLR? you must really love that camera! What makes you feel that way, just curious?

MusicDoctorDJ said:

I believe that the FZ30 and FZ50 are by far the best bridge superzoom cameras ever made.

Sure, there are a couple that beat them in image quality, but all other aspects considered, the FZ30 and FZ50 win big time!

Ergonomics, manual focus and zoom rings on the lens, ease of use, build quality, that wonderful Leica lens . . .

What more can I say . . . it is just one beautiful piece of craftsmanship!



If I had to get rid of all of my digital cameras but one . . . the FZ50 would stay, the DSLR's would go!

Although . . . I'd hide my FZ10 somewhere as it is a pretty awesome camera, too!



--
J. D.
Colorado

Click to expand...

--
Photography shots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/invisodude/

Snap shots
http://s618.photobucket.com/albums/tt266/randsphoto/