Digital Zoom Qestion

Pardon my ignorance but will using a digital zoom extends the maximum optical zoom?
i.e. with a 4X digital zoom w/ 600 optical, will it equal to 2400?

I'm looking at the new FZ200 w/ 2.8 lens all the way and the Nikon P510 w/ 1000 mm zoom for everyday cam.

I like the bright 2.8 of the new Pana. More likely I will not be using the digital zoom as much but I would like to at least double the 600 to 1200 using the 2X digital zoom when need be. I have read the comments of the FZ150 and if the performance and quality of the FZ150 output is as good with the FZ200 it will my a buy for me.

I like the reach of the Nikon at 1000.

I know that digital zoom IS NOT as good as optical zoom but using the 2X should not be as bad. If someone can post an example taken with the FZ150 using the digital zoom is very much appreciated.

Any comments/suggestions/recommendations is very much appreciated.

BTW, I currently use a Nikon V1. I'm leaning to the FZ200 for my first bridge camera because of the RAW capability.

Thanks for your time.

There is a very simple rule when it comes to "digital zoom". You just substitute the word "lie".

Like you and many others, I'm lurking waiting for real world reviews of the FZ200. I may try to wait a few months and see what Canon has to offer with the successor to the SX40, but the 200 seems like a great camera... which I guess is why the initial pricing seems high. That in itself will help me be patient.

I hope.

Of course this time last week I thought I wanted an FZ150 or a Canon SX40. This process reminds me why I tend to ignore all camera sites in between purchases. You just end up miserable. ;-)

I'm not a fan of digital zoom from my past experience. I just hope that w/ technology it should at least have some improvement.

I'm much into IQ nor I'm a pixel peeper. The way I look at it, if the pictures I take is good enough for my eyes, that all that matters. I don't consider myself as an enthusiast/advance amateur or anything like that. I just taking pictures that interest me.

Like you mentioned, I think I will wait for more reviews and field tests before committing to one. At this point, I have the budget to get the F200. I'm also contemplating on the LX7 to compliment the FZ200? Over-achiever??..hehehehe.

I assume that your reason for wanting the extra reach is to allow you to record more fine detail in your images of remote subjects such as birds.

The only way to obtain more detail in a digital image is to increase the number of pixels used to represent that detail by increasing the size of the image in relation to the size of a pixel. Unless the sensor is replaced by one with more pixels, that can only be achieved by using a lens with a longer focal length or by attaching a teleconverter.

The additional pixels which are generated by the use of x2 digital zoom are obtained by interpolation, i.e. by inserting an addition pixel between each pair and assigning to it values which are the average of those from the pixels on either side of it. The use of digital zoom does not therefore provide any additional information about the detail.

For a practical photographic comparison of EZ and DZ images with equivalent post process crops you may find this thread of interest. See:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=40331327

Jimmy
--
J C Brown

With the FZ200 at full zoom you have a lens which lets in 4 times the light of the Nikon. That's the difference between 1/25 and 1/100 sec, or the difference between ISO 200 and ISO 800.

That will make a big difference in the number of "keepers".
You can always crop in post processing if you need to.

Sherm

I have a Canon S100 and Panasonic SZ7. The S100 has a 5x optical zoom and the SZ7 a 10x optical zoom. The S100 takes sharper pictures than the SZ7, so I was curious what would happen if I used the digital zoom on the S100 to take a 10x picture and compared it to the SZ7. There was no comparison, the SZ7 at 10x optical zoom had a much sharper picture than the S100 at 5x optical/10x digital.

rgs_45 said:

I like the reach of the Nikon at 1000.

Click to expand...

Regardless of what you end up purchasing, if you intend to use such long focal lengths you will need a tripod.

trekkeruss said:

rgs_45 said:

I like the reach of the Nikon at 1000.

Click to expand...

Regardless of what you end up purchasing, if you intend to use such long focal lengths you will need a tripod.

Click to expand...

Wrong.

The latest Panasonics have VERY good OIS and in most cases handheld is just fine.

If you are really concerned, take a short burst, one of the shots will be fine, usually all will be OK. When I first got my 20x zoom ZS19 I often took bursts at long zoom for just this reason, but I have come to trust the OIS and usually don't take the time to set burst mode even though it's easy to do so with the Q-Menu.

A quick stab at Q-Menu is simply worlds better than lugging around & setting up a tripod, to say nothing of the time tripods take by which time the subject is usually gone.

This is a crop ("digital zoom", equalling something like 800mm equivalent) from a 20x zoom shot (480mm equivalent), handheld with my ZS19. Not a "pretty picture" but that Cougar Ct. sign is 6 inch high letters 3/4 mile away. Please note, no camera shake is evident - ISO 100 on a dull day in light rain. ("poor light") :





This is a satellite view of the setup with distance scale in the lower left corner - the camera position, Cougar Ct. sign, and traffic light distances are indicated with arrows.





For reference, this is the scene at full wide angle (24mm equivalent):





-Erik

--
DP Review Supporter.



'He who hesitates is not only lost - he's miles from the next Exit.'
http://www.flickr.com/ohlsonmh/ [email protected]

The first one I made with the normal zoom in burst function





And this one I made with the Digital zoom in burst function





I think it can be much better, but as I am a beginner photographer, you see I must learn a lot.

Hand held @ 844 MM using a ZS-8 in digital and some cropping. I would suspect the FZ 200 will do slightly better.
Pap
--

http://www.flickr.com/photos/34495676@N08

I would not use the digital zoom for any photos I wanted to "show off". The image quality is just not there. I tend to see the digital zoom as something you use as a last resort to just get the image recorded. Maybe a distant sign you want to be able to read what it says; maybe a bird/car/person you're trying to identify -- but not for capturing and displaying quality images.