FZ200 - Final attempt to get focus at dog park

Rudy Pohl

Veteran Member
Messages
6,679
Solutions
4
Reaction score
6,331
Location
Ottawa, CA
Hi Friends:

Those of you who have been following my threads and my attempts to get my 2 new FZ200s to focus properly (I've already brought one back to the store because of this issue) know that I have done virtually everything I know to get this camara to focus sharply. I shot about 2000 shots at a rugby match last Saturday with almost none in sharp focus. Today I went to a local dog park armed will all the camera settings and suggestions that have worked for others on this forum with this camera. (1/1000th sec. exposure, AF-S, pre-focussing, 5.5fps burst mode, full bright sun, hold camera still, and more...) to see if I could get some success.

I shot a couple of hundred shots today and regrettably I have to report to you that not a single photogrpahy was in focus. A few of the shots were of running dogs but in many of the shots the pooches were barely moving and in some cases standing still. The bottom line is that is particular copy simply does not work properly when it comes to focussing. This is my second FZ200 in a row like this. While I'm no Ansel Adams by any means I simply can't believe that the fault lies with me.

In view of these very disappointing results I have decided to return this camera tomorrow for a refund and I do not plan on buying another FZ200 in the foreseeable future, certainly not until such time as a high percentage of users can consistently produce good quality images with it. Even if I just held the camera up to any scene with random settings and held the shutter down till the battery ran out, I should statistically get more focussed shots than I have been able to attain by all my serious efforts and corrections. I think that there is a good chance that I got two duds in a row, and unfortunately I don't feel like trying anymore, at least not for a while.

My greatest regret (besides not being able to enjoy this camera as I had hoped to), is that I will have to leave this forum. In only a matter of 3 weeks I have really come to feel at home here and I feel as though I know a number of your personally and I will surely miss this community greatly. Who knows, I may yet again buy another Panasonic P&S camera. I was actually considering buying and old panny cluncker just to stay connected with you folks. (no kidding, that's really true).

The photos of Bruno in Slovenia, Pierre in Quebec and Dov in Jerusalem have so inspired me to get back to doing some creative photography that I couldn't bear to be without some kind of camera at least, so because of the great comments the Canon S3 got on this forum lately, I read some reviews and found one here in Ottawa that was virtually unused in mint shape and bought it today for $120. I will be happily playing with it and hopefully getting creative as I sit on the sidelines and watch the developments in the megazoom world.

My best regards to all you and thanks again for all your kind words and helpful comments.

Cheers,
Rudy in Ottawa
 
From my "no question's too dumb to ask" list...
You're not by any chance using the same UV filter on both cameras?
Sherm
 
Hi Friends:

Those of you who have been following my threads and my attempts to get my 2 new FZ200s to focus properly (I've already brought one back to the store because of this issue) know that I have done virtually everything I know to get this camara to focus sharply.
I'm terribly sorry to hear that's the outcome. I'm somewhat in the same boat, but not so stongly. It leaves me on the fence whether to dump my FZ200 or FZ150. However, not nearly so drastic as what you report.

I'd guess you may have a faulty camera, but who knows? Maybe I have a faulty camera, but not nearly so faulty as what you report of yours. But who knows? Maybe there are lots of faulty FZ200s out there, in which case we should take it up with Panasonic. The promise was great, the realization was fine for some, not for others.

But in addition to the image problems we've been having, it seems we'll be losing you. I've been looking forward to your bright enthusiasm and continuing participation on this forum, but if that's not to be, well then it's not to be.

Cheers to you too,
David
--
http://www.pbase.com/morepix
 
Rudy,

I'm really sorry the FZ200 didn't work out for you. I know you gave it your best. Oddly, while I'm pleased with the FZ150 and FZ200, the ZS15 didn't work out for me, and neither did a second one.

The S3IS is a fine and much over-looked camera. The lens is very sharp and quite fast at f/2.7-3.5 over the 36-432 mm range. I had a couple of those, and two of mine are with my son and daughter now.

I did use several tele-extenders with mine - the Olympus TCON 17, the Raynox 1540 Pro, and the Sony DH1758. On that camera the Sony lens is the best. and it has 58 mm threads, the same as the Canon adapter. The Raynox 1540 also works very well on that lens, and it has 52 mm threads.

In addition to the Canon lens adapter, Lensmate also made adapters for that camera in 52 and 58 mm threaded versions. With all three adapters, you can leave the adapter on the camera with no vignetting. That allows keeping the adapter on all the time, and if a filter is used, the adapter plus filter puts the lens in a sealed chamber. So as the lens zooms in and out, it does not draw outsude air into the lens; but just exchanges air from inside the adapter with air in the lens. Great for misty or dusty conditions.

Enjoy!

BTW, you're welcome here any time. So drop in once in a while.
--
Jerry
 
I did not read thru all the replies on your other post regarding focus and stuff. I noticed you compared your shots to LTZ (you know who I mean). Did you try setting your FZ200 to the settings he uses, at least on his macro's. Contrast +1, Sharpen +2, Satuation -1, NR -2. Also, obviously, you had the lens zoomed out in which case the DOF was VERY narrow, which leads me to ask, why are you so hung up on iso 100. Why not bump it to 400 or even 800 which would allow you to have a smaller F stop and more DOF, especially with moving subject, lens zoomed out.. I would rather have a sharp image with a touch of noise, than a blurred image with no noise. I tried those settings, thinking they are a bit strange, but and I am happy as a clam with them. I tested right here in computer room with an old camera on the desk, just overhead flouresents. This is pretty much OOC, with just a touch of levels, and sharpening PS. Also to give you camera lens do the newspaper taped to a door with cam on tripod and do some evaluation at various settings, which would give you some best case senarios as to the lens ability in a controlled environment.



--
http://www.pbase.com/davidjaseck



Be careful how you interpret the world: It is like that.
 
I'm really sorry to hear that the FZ did not work out for you. I think cameras are very personal to each user, and you have to find what works for you. I hope you find your match, and enjoy photography with whatever camera you end up with. Good luck, and you are always welcomed here.

One thing I noticed about your latest post (this one). You said you tried a setting you thought would work. Keep in mind there are many, many different combinations of setting that work for a particular shooting condition. I recommend you try several different settings when you go out and find the one that works for a particular outing condition. Don't assume what worked for somebody else will work for you.
--
yuki
 
Motorized zoom camera is not for sports photography unless you are shooting stationary/pre-focused players or if you are shooting at wide angle. Coley's shots are not hard shots at all. They are pre-focused so his AF-S will definitely work. Kids are a lot slower than your rugby players so don't be surprise if you cannot achieve similar results.

-=[ Joms ]=-
 
Oh for heavens sake buy an old clunker FZ50. Nothing would swill around in this forum like ownig an FZ50. It would be different to whatever else you buy, add spice to your own camera comparisons and ruin your life forever cos there's yet to be a replacement for it. ;-)

--


The FZ50: DSLR handling of a bright Leica 35-420mm lens that's this good: http://www.flickr.com/groups/panasonicfz50/pool/show (some real gems in there). With the FZ200 performance so good, I live in hope that Mr Ichiro Kitao has triggered the update to the FZ50. Our desire for IQ was taking us in the wrong direction. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=42366095
 
LTZ (you know who I mean)
:-) :-) :-)

So I suppose as Cole's prowess with photography continues on the up we gradually remove more letters. And the jealous among us will be cursing 'bloody L' :-)

--


The FZ50: DSLR handling of a bright Leica 35-420mm lens that's this good: http://www.flickr.com/groups/panasonicfz50/pool/show (some real gems in there). With the FZ200 performance so good, I live in hope that Mr Ichiro Kitao has triggered the update to the FZ50. Our desire for IQ was taking us in the wrong direction. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=42366095
 
Rudy, sorry to here this. I am still using the older FZ100, and happy with it in good light. I am buying an FZ200, and know it will be better. Come back anytime. Warren
--
wjmund
 
what i find a bit disturbing about these posts as i posted some sharp shots taken with no replies or comments. one word sums it up for me TROLL

cheers don
 
I have a Canon S5 and it is a great series. Too bad they threw all that out, when they replaced it with the SX-Series.

The S3 will take great shots, but where will you post and discuss them? Certainly not on the Canon Forum. If you put a group of excellent photos from it up there, it's likely that not a single reply would be made. Some forums are friendly and welcoming and some are not.
--
Steve McDonald
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22121562@N00/
http://www.vimeo.com/user458315/videos

Click below for My Places on Google Earth
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=229807ce52dd4fe0#cid=229807CE52DD4FE0

 
OK this may seem like a stupid suggestion and I'm sure you probably checked, but is the switch on the side of the lens on Macro focus by any chance.
--
Cheers
CK
 
Sorry to hear about your bad experience and consequently the decisions :( .. good news is that you choose to carry on with photography and already have a new camera - a tool that regardless of brand is "created" for one purpose only - taking the pictures!.. your concern about drifting away from this forum is irrelevant since you can actively participate in all weekly threads regardless the camera used..

N.B.: only today I noticed you are talking about two FZ200s - it is hard to believe you have picked two "lemons" - wouldn't you agree?

Best regards, :D
--
Bruno
 
That's why I was wondering if there might be something in common- like an unmentioned UV filter - in the mix.
Sherm
Sorry to hear about your bad experience and consequently the decisions :( .. good news is that you choose to carry on with photography and already have a new camera - a tool that regardless of brand is "created" for one purpose only - taking the pictures!.. your concern about drifting away from this forum is irrelevant since you can actively participate in all weekly threads regardless the camera used..

N.B.: only today I noticed you are talking about two FZ200s - it is hard to believe you have picked two "lemons" - wouldn't you agree?

Best regards, :D
--
Bruno
 
This happend to me and was affecting accurate focus during sports shooting. I now doublecheck the focus switch setting before shooting at all times.
 
It's quite possible that two cameras from one dealer might have been given the same defects at the factory. I once bought a series of three Sony cameras from a local shop and each lasted about one week, before a faulty shutter assembly went bad. Their serial numbers were only a few digits apart. Thousands of people around the world got these duds, but Sony never acknowledged it, other than to replace the shutters.
--
Steve McDonald
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22121562@N00/
http://www.vimeo.com/user458315/videos

Click below for My Places on Google Earth
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=229807ce52dd4fe0#cid=229807CE52DD4FE0

 
There's a lesson here. The FZ200 is capable of taking magnificent images and Rudy has put in quite an effort to achieve the results he wanted, on two different samples of the same camera, without success.

This is where the weakness of Panasonic's documentation really shows through. Introducing an innovative new camera means that no matter where on the skill spectrum people are coming from, customers won't have the skill set to immediately comprehend its workings. In most cases, as with Rudy, it means that many skilled photographers will be forced to unlearn their familiar systems in order to learn the FZ200. That, it turns out, is an insurmountable frustration for a lot of people.

Rudy, I hope you will change your mind and greet the challenge that is facing you. Obviously the cameras are not at fault, which fact should encourage you that the only thing standing in your way is your technique, and you can perfect that with lots of (fun) practice and experimentation.

I encourage you to read the manual over and over again (the full one). It takes quite a bit of time to get into the minds of Pana engineers and designers, but the experience is worthwhile and rewarding.

If nothing else, give it another try for the sake of your camera shop.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top