Cannot sell my TZ7/LS3!

Ive posted this before about my disappointment with the ZS3 in low light, comparing it to a 4 year old Fuji. ZS3 loses alot of detail. I havent heard anyone say that the ZS3 picture I took was atypical, or that I didnt have the settings right, but happy to hear how I can get better low light pictures out of the camera.

Thronsen said:

I know my way around a camera, and I am also having trouble getting usable indoor photos with the ZS3. These arent particularly low light, at least by indoor standards, but inside a room with large windows in the middle of the day. Im not comparing the output to a DSLR, but to a 4 year old Fuji f31.

For the ZS3 I set the minimum exposure to 1/60 and the ISO to 1600. f/3.6 was what the camera gave me.



For the Fuji f31, I simply turned it to the 'N' (Natural Light) setting. The camera gave me 1/125 sec at f/2.8 at ISO 1600.



There is a bit more noticeable noise in the Fuji, but the ZS3 looks, well, smeared, a result I suspect of crude Noise Reduction. But what I found especially impressive/distressing is that while the ZS3 is limping along at 1/60 the Fuji is snapping the shutter at 1/125. And if this is a picture of a non-statue person, rather then a coach, thats a huge difference.

I was really pretty disappointed that after 4 years, the ZS3 not only couldnt handily beat the quality of the Fuji, but frankly I prefer the Fuji.

If anyone has any suggestions would love to hear them. Iven been looking forward to this camera for a long, but have been pretty disappointed.

Click to expand...

Disagree with the above poster - it is too simple to say that buyers are cheapskates (even though many are) ..... sellers are just unrealistic.

I bought my TZ7 for the original price of £350, it has little use (I mainly use my DSLR) I am really careful with my stuff and non smoker etc, my machine is almost as new .... even so, I would be surprised to get much more than £150 for it.

reasons to be more realistic

1. when you buy your camera (in the UK) you are paying 17.5% sales tax (VAT) that is just dead money in terms of camera value, so as soon as you buy your new camera, instantly wave ta ta to £55 - £60 of value the monet you buy it.... same for cars etc.

2. this is technology that is developing, so expect depreciation PLUS

3. loads of people treat their property badly, and some will move faulty goos on, as a buyer, you can buy someones crap (or faulty) machine for the same price as someone's prime machine (like mine), how is the buyer to know ungtil it turns up, so buyers, hedging their bets and to play safe tend to look at bargain basement prices..... I have sold quite a bit of stuff, but I am really be reluctant to buy 2nd hand and because there are lots of people with a similar view, 2nd hand prices are further driven down.

4. A rule of thumb for many traders of 2nd hand stuff is to buy for a third and sell on at half price.

Member said:

It's just a fact of life, I guess -- people are cheapskates.

Click to expand...

I think it's a fact of life that most people aren't as stupid as you'd like them to be. If I buy used I'm discounting for the hassle, the unknown, the unrealistic seller, the lack of warranty, the crooks and thieves, etc. Of course, that's why I usually don't buy used and certainly wouldn't pay what the OP is asking!

I've got an ebay Canon SD550 (really a great little camera) I paid $75 for. Actually I have three of them, two of which are under the drivers' seats of my two vehicles for "emergency" pics.

I think I'll start carrying my FZ50 as my go-to "emergency shot" camera. If my car gets broken into and it gets stolen (why I have the cheaper one there now) well, it's insured!

How exactly is eBay a hassle? I've sold 85 items on eBay, many of them my old cameras. Never had a problem. Every time I upgrade one of my cameras/computers, etc., I throw it on eBay and it's gone within 7 days. Easy as pie. Give it a try. It works!

John Tracy said:

Trensamiro said:

"Horses for courses". I on the other hand would have no use for an LX3 , so though my budget fully allows for it (or a Leica M9 for that matter) I would never buy one or accept one as a gift except to pass it on to someone else who would appreciate it.

-
See my Lumix ZS3 (TZ7) pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/

Click to expand...

Why not? It has a P mode just like your P&S has. Don't let the manual control scare you .

Click to expand...

.

A little patronizing we are today, aren't we ?

Thanks for your "concern" but manual control doesn't "scare" me in the least. I have 25+ years of experience using "manual control" with SLRs on my back and have achieved really great pics using it to the fullest. That was then and this is now.

Don't know your age and photographic experience, if any, but chances are I was using manual control when you were still crapping diapers so please think twice before trying to patronize me again.

-
See my Lumix ZS3 (TZ7) pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/

.

under a certain value makes you think: you want to give it away?

For real low light photography is a Nikon D3s or a cheaper (!??) D700 and some f1,4 lenses.
Is no substitute for that in PS category. Period.
Joe
http://joecan.smugmug.com/

.

Hi, ANAYV :

ANAYV said:

Trensamiro said:

....and then only to present it to someone as I would never buy used something so complex and delicate and risk ruining a unique, memorable, priceless ocasion.

Click to expand...

Have to disagree with you,on that one.

You must be new to Panasonic camera's.Maybe pretty new to digital camera's,too .

Click to expand...

No and no , I've been using digital cameras since they achieved acceptable quality, many years ago. The TZ7 is my 7th digital camera and my 2nd Panasonic one.

ANAYV said:

All my camera's ,right now , are used. [...] I must be a 'used junkie',lol [...] Not sure I will buy new,after my experiences,with used equipment. But to each it's own.

Click to expand...

Exactly. To each their own, horses for courses, etc. In my case, I never buy anything used and I couldn't care less if I would save some money or not by doing it as I have no special need to save that kind of money and I value very much the experience of getting the items I want first-hand , brand-new , complex and delicate items in particular.

ANAYV said:

ANAYV said:

ANAYV said:

Am selling the TZ7 because the low light noise is way out of order [...]

Click to expand...

BS . Seems to me to be yet another case of someone blaming their tools, etc, etc.

Click to expand...

Depends on what he was used to.

Anyone coming from a D-SLR,will surely not like to see any noise,at the lowest iso settings .

Click to expand...

Agreed, but I don't think that's the general case. I own a Sony A850 full-frame DSLR with great glass to boot, yet I'm not particularly distressed to find "some noise" in my ZS3 pics at base ISO because I value the picture itself, what it is and what it represents, much more than I value the anal-retentive pixel-peeping perfection some people continually obsess about.

The last thing I'll look for or notice when I see a great pic is whether it might have some noise in the dark zones when pixel-peeped at 100% or whether it shows some marginal distortion near the left edge of the frame or the dynamic range is this or that, and so on and so forth ...

Thanks but I'm not into photography for that crap. For me, the represented image is first and foremost, and the nitpicking technicalities last if at all.

ANAYV said:

Of course,on has to 'pixel peep' to see such noise...but some do..and they have that right,if they choose to .

Click to expand...

Good for them. I'll pass.

ANAYV said:

Since many post to the web,and hardly print over 8" x 10" ,pixel peeping tells a different story,than the 'real world'.... but you knew that already

Click to expand...

Yes, I did. Thanks for your always interesting point of view, appreciated.

-
See my Lumix ZS3 (TZ7) pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/

.

Thanks for setting me straight. I assumed the reason you would refuse an LX3 as a gift was because you didn't know how to use it's manual controls. However since you did use manual for 25 yrs in the past I have to ask, did you forget how?

Trensamiro said:

John Tracy said:

Trensamiro said:

"Horses for courses". I on the other hand would have no use for an LX3 , so though my budget fully allows for it (or a Leica M9 for that matter) I would never buy one or accept one as a gift except to pass it on to someone else who would appreciate it.

-
See my Lumix ZS3 (TZ7) pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/

Click to expand...

Why not? It has a P mode just like your P&S has. Don't let the manual control scare you .

Click to expand...

.

A little patronizing we are today, aren't we ?

Thanks for your "concern" but manual control doesn't "scare" me in the least. I have 25+ years of experience using "manual control" with SLRs on my back and have achieved really great pics using it to the fullest. That was then and this is now.

Don't know your age and photographic experience, if any, but chances are I was using manual control when you were still crapping diapers so please think twice before trying to patronize me again.

-
See my Lumix ZS3 (TZ7) pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirepapa/

.

Click to expand...

Trensamiro said:

Agreed, but I don't think that's the general case. I own a Sony A850 full-frame DSLR with great glass to boot, yet I'm not particularly distressed to find "some noise" in my ZS3 pics at base ISO because I value the picture itself, what it is and what it represents, much more than I value the anal-retentive pixel-peeping perfection some people continually obsess about.

The last thing I'll look for or notice when I see a great pic is whether it might have some noise in the dark zones when pixel-peeped at 100% or whether it shows some marginal distortion near the left edge of the frame or the dynamic range is this or that, and so on and so forth ...

Thanks but I'm not into photography for that crap. For me, the represented image is first and foremost, and the nitpicking technicalities last if at all.

Click to expand...

What about the serious smudging and loss of detail in the blue chair picture above? This isnt a 'bit of noise', this makes the picture borderline unusable for many applications.

Im not flaming. I have read your thread promoting (if thats the right word) the ZS3 low light capabilities. I have found them lacking, and Im trying to figure out if Im doing something wrong or we just have different tastes/needs/expectations.

Thanks.