FZ200 F2.8 600mm ISO400 100% crop

Started Aug 26, 2012 | Discussions thread
Erik Ohlson
Erik Ohlson Forum Pro • Posts: 19,465
Re: FZ200 F2.8 600mm ISO400 100% crop

A Girard wrote:

VincentR wrote:

A Girard wrote:

No really lol???? Your 1800.00 lens and a DSLR sensor compared to 599.00 point and shoot....I wouldn't even see the point to compare my lenses to the fz200...apples and oranges.

VincentR wrote:

I have to say that this does not appear nearly as sharp as my Canon 100-400 at 400mm and F11 on my 15mp Canon 50D, at ISO 800.

But circumstances differ, so any valid comparison must be of the identical scene.

If I decide to buy the FZ200, you can be sure I'll post comparison images on this site.

More like apples and papayas. One fruit is much lighter than the other. One can already compare the sensor performance of the FZ150 with the Canon 50D on the DXOMark site. The FZ150 sensor at ISO 100, in terms of all the relevant characteristics of SNR, Dynamic Range, Tonal Range and Color Sensitivity, is equal to that of the 50D at approximately ISO 500, on average. Dynamic Range and Color Sensitivity of the FZ200 sensor at ISO 100 is a bit better, equal to that of the 50D at ISO 300-350. SNR and Tonal Range a bit worse, equal to that of the 50D at ISO 600 (actual measured values). One might reasonably expect the FZ200 sensor to be at least marginally better.

I frequently use my Canon 100-400, when fully extended for birds and wildlife, at F8 to F11 and at ISO 400-800 to get the required shutter speed. ISO 400-800 on the 50D is actually ISO 306-618, but ISO 100 on the FZ150 really is ISO 100.

The only issues for me to sort out is the relative sharpness of the lenses. One > shouldn't judge the quality of lenses simply by their cost. It's always much cheaper > to design a small lens for a small camera.

My point was comparing a camera at 599.00 vs just a lens at 1800.00. It's also not just about straight visual comparisons. Your lens and sensor, like some of mine will produce images that respond to sharpening differently than a point and shoot. The focal "sweet spot" comes into play (can vary in different lenses), sensor quality, if the shot in question is a camera's internal processing of a jpg, quality of the picture itself etc...This is why I hate in depth comparisons. I take pictures, see if they please my eye and process what I don't like. In my world, too much science is bad for my health:)

Very well stated, Anne.

The POINT is to get the picture, not to prove how much you can spend and how much "gear" you can lug around.

SO......I "spent" about 100 bucks on software and ran the photo trough it - PSE8 + Topaz DeNoiser:

Golly - "I dunno" which would you rather have, a Canon Brick with a small car's worth of lenses, or a camera which can get the shot?

Now, with either camera, if we could have gotten the bird to hold it's head still so that slight motion blur of the beak......

["Original" size PP'd photo on my flickr site for a day or so.]

By way of contrast, here's one I took back in 2007 of a california Bush Tit, a slightly smaller bird which was so close I could hardly focus ;), and I recall that this bird and it's flock-mates were chirping which sounded so much like the camera's "Focus-lock chirp" that I think they thought I was one of them (little, if any PP) FZ18 camera:

Ya' just can't have everything

DP Review Supporter.

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

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow