FZ150 from dslr

Donald M Mackinnon said:

Many thanks Kevin for understanding my motive on these questions.

I am never quite sure what definition forum users have for good light and poor light and where the light I shoot in fits in to these definitions.

Kevin: Can I ask a favour please, will you take a look at my flickr page and let me know if you think the FZ150 would do well in this light ?

My Flickr page
http://www.flickr.com/photos/donaldm/

Click to expand...

You seem to be shooting mostly wide angle landscapes at base iso 80-100. Say f2.8, iso 100, 1/100 second should not be a problem for the FZ150 at the wide angle setting, but zoom out to to 600mm at f5.2, 100 iso and your shutter speed is going to be too low for hand held.

--
Kevin Coppalotti
http://maxhr.zenfolio.com/

Kevin

I do shoot mostly at the wide end and at base ISO as you have noticed. The FZ 150 looks to be all I need but it's a lot of money for what it is, now Now comes the agony of deciding :-(

Donald M Mackinnon said:

Donald M Mackinnon wrote:

I am going to have to take a real plunge on this one and go for the FZ150 but despite every encouragement I read on here I still remain nervous.

Click to expand...

That's understandable. Kevin C is "shooting straight" with you. Do not underestimate the "I chose to purchase and now use one - therefore it must be good/better than X" factors that may (in some cases) be at play on this thread.

Why not keep the D3100 around until you are convinced that it has (for your intended functional purposes) been adequately "superceded" by the FZ150 ?

A look at the (as I perceive it) "image-quality" shows that while the FZ150 is (in all cases) clearly a better choice than a FZ100, it is (still, in all cases shown) easily "blown away" by the D3100 - and (even) appears (to me) to be meaningfully challenged by your LX3. Have a look at these comparison of what high spatial-frequency (finely-detailed) subject matter looks like through the "eyes" of these various camera models:

RAW, ISO=800 :

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocompare.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=panasonic_dmcfz150&masterSample=p1040113.acr&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=panasonic_dmcfz150&slot0Sample=p1040113.acr&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=nikon_d3100&slot1Sample=dsc_0010.acr&slot2Camera=panasonic_dmcfz100&slot2Sample=panafz100_iso800.acr&slot3Camera=panasonic_dmclx3&slot3Sample=panalx3_iso800.acr&x=0.6175267463813717&y=-0.3793486306439675

JPG, ISO=400 :

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studiocompare.asp#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=panasonic_dmcfz150&masterSample=p1040111&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=panasonic_dmcfz150&slot0Sample=p1040111&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=nikon_d3100&slot1Sample=dsc_0008&slot2Camera=panasonic_dmcfz100&slot2Sample=panafz100_iso400&slot3Camera=panasonic_dmclx3&slot3Sample=panalx3_iso400&x=0.6175267463813717&y=-0.3793486306439675

Is the D3100 really that much larger and heavier to "lug around" than a FZ150? Neither one of these camera models are "pocket-able" in any sense of the word.

I submit that it is the lens-systems themselves that are the dominant (size/weight/cost) issue here. Do not lose sight of what one gives up in exchange for a (smaller/lighter/cheaper) lens-system ...

If you feel that the lighting conditions will most frequently require a (mere) ISO Sensitivity Gain of 100 or 200, and that your subject-matter will not be in-motion, then (it seems to me) that the FZ150 may have chance of satisfying. If not, perhaps you would be wise not to part with your D3100 until you are satisfied that the FZ150 really can "fill your bill" ?

Ye, it is true that Gary S , LTZ470 , and Kevin C (in certain conditions, often using tripod-stabilization, and with mild to exotic post-processing applied) have yielded some impressive results from the FZ150. In high light levels, a few other posters have demonstrated some pleasing results.

But only you will know what all of that (and all of the "sizzle" bubbling-away) really adds up to (for your applications, and through your own set of eyes).

The more wildly optimistic testimonials become, the closer one (quite rightly) ought to scrutinize ...

For those who may (as in the past) took umbrage to my thoughts, please answer my words with actual FZ150 images with full EXIF (or at least ISO, F-Number, Shutter Speed, and user-control setting information provided). Words and emotional gesticulations have a way of only going "so far"

DM ...

You are spot on, it's not the D3100. A very impressive tool especially at high ISO, which I never use, but once lenses are factored in then it becomes a system of expensive components which gives superb quality but is cumbersome.

I have downloaded the 600mm bird shot from the cameralabs review which I think is very impressive. Viewed at 100% it's a mess but I am not going to print to that size where noise/artefact's becomes an issue.

I am struggling on this one as my head would by the FZ150 tomorrow, but right now the heart remains unconvinced.

The cameralabs review has some amazing video footage though and maybe I need to think of doing more on video but photography is my real joy.