-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Review of FZ300 (30) just up on ePhotozine
- Thread starter northlondon43
- Start date
Interesting read :-D
I note that their performance measurements have it generally twice as fast as the the FZ200, and matching or exceeding their measurements for the FZ1000...!
FZ1000
Shutter Response <0.05secs
Wide - Focus / Shutter Response 0.1secs
Full zoom - Focus / Shutter Response 0.125secs
Switch on Time to Taking a Photo 0.9secs
Shot to Shot without Flash 0.45secs
Shot to Shot with Flash 0.9secs
Continuous Shooting - JPEG
(shots before slow down) 8.3fps (48 shots)
Continuous Shooting - Flash N/A
Continuous Shooting - RAW 8fps (9 shots)
FZ330
Shutter Response < 0.05secs
Wide - Focus / Shutter Response 0.1secs
Full zoom - Focus / Shutter Response 0.1secs
Switch on Time to Taking a Photo 0.9secs
Shot to Shot without Flash 0.4secs
Shot to Shot with Flash 0.8secs
Continuous Shooting - JPEG
(shots before slow down) 10.3fps (94 shots)
Continuous Shooting - Flash N/A
Continuous Shooting - RAW 10fps (20 shots)
GeraldW
Veteran Member
Possibly; but I seriously doubt you will be able to tell the difference a few hundredths of a second makes.
It even has a rubber eyecup!!! At last. One thing I noticed, that was fixed over the FZ200, is desaturation of colors at high ISO. The ISO series seems to maintain pretty much constant color saturation from ISO 100 to 1600. That was one of the areas where the SX50HS beat the FZ200, as it was better at 1600 than the FZ200 was at 800. I'd have to say that noise is better as well. I did note the dreaded yellow blotches at 3200 in the gray panel, but 1600 looked pretty darn good. Without a side by side comparison, it's just an estimate; but it looks to me like Panasonic has matched the processing on the SX50HS.
I'm sure there will be other reviews shortly; but this one was very positive, so I'll start saving for one. My SX50HS is getting very nervous.
It even has a rubber eyecup!!! At last. One thing I noticed, that was fixed over the FZ200, is desaturation of colors at high ISO. The ISO series seems to maintain pretty much constant color saturation from ISO 100 to 1600. That was one of the areas where the SX50HS beat the FZ200, as it was better at 1600 than the FZ200 was at 800. I'd have to say that noise is better as well. I did note the dreaded yellow blotches at 3200 in the gray panel, but 1600 looked pretty darn good. Without a side by side comparison, it's just an estimate; but it looks to me like Panasonic has matched the processing on the SX50HS.
I'm sure there will be other reviews shortly; but this one was very positive, so I'll start saving for one. My SX50HS is getting very nervous.
John McCormack
Veteran Member
Can't wait for IR or Cameralabs to compare the FZ300/330 with the SX50HS.
Mine is nervous as well, but it knows that birders may not be drawn to the shorter zoom range of the FZ. Canon may surprise us around Labor Day with a new SX camera with more reach than the SX50. Still, Panasonic seems to have the edge in features by quite a margin.
MissingLinkie
Senior Member
I guess this is at full resolution?
Do you know/have the numbers with 12Mp ??
I guess this is at full resolution?
Do you know/have the numbers with 12Mp ??
tia
Hans
Vandyu
Veteran Member
Yes, Jerry, as the review says, "... and the high resolution electronic viewfinder looks great, with a generous rubber eye-surround."
Music to my ears :-D
Music to my ears :-D
Vandyu
Veteran Member
4.5 Stars!
The Panasonic Lumix FZ330 offers a desirable package, that delivers both high quality images and video, and you'd be hard pressed to find a better camera for the price.
OK, DPR, it's your turn.
The Panasonic Lumix FZ330 offers a desirable package, that delivers both high quality images and video, and you'd be hard pressed to find a better camera for the price.
OK, DPR, it's your turn.
kkardster
Forum Pro
Music to your ears, but magic to your eyes if there's a prankster in the house:
Artist's concept
--
Bruce
You learn something new every time you press the shutter
Attachments
Last edited:
nicodimus22
Senior Member
I would hope so. The files are significantly smaller than the FZ1000's, so it should take less time to write them to the memory card.
tom1234567
Senior Member
Yeah, people say that. And at first the new camera doesn't feel much different... Until you've used it a while... and then you try using the old one again... and that's then you really miss that extra 25% "responsiveness"... :-D
But that's beside the point... which is: if the FZ300 can match/exceed the performance of the FZ1000 then
-that is exactly what I want from a superzoom
-it will leave my FZ200 in the dust
-it's far beyond the reach of most competing superzooms
I own both FZ200 and FZ1000, and the FZ200 is no slouch vs its competitors... but the FZ1000 wins hands-down for burst-to-burst speed ie. lack of delay between bursts, and also has noticably quicker AF speed, single shot-to-shot speed. Excellent for action photography.
Here are some of ePhotozine's measurements for the FZ200 and FZ1000 for comparison:
FZ200
Shutter Response 0.05 seconds
Wide - Focus / Shutter Response 0.2 seconds
Full zoom - Focus / Shutter Response 0.3 seconds
Switch on Time to Taking a Photo 1.5 seconds
Shot to Shot (without flash) 0.98 seconds
Shot to Shot with Flash 1.28 seconds
FZ1000
Shutter Response <0.05secs
Wide - Focus / Shutter Response 0.1secs
Full zoom - Focus / Shutter Response 0.125secs
Switch on Time to Taking a Photo 0.9secs
Shot to Shot without Flash 0.45secs
Shot to Shot with Flash 0.9secs
And just for completeness...
Canon SX50
Shutter Response 0.1 seconds
Wide - Focus / Shutter Response 0.35 seconds
Full zoom - Focus / Shutter Response 0.4 seconds
Switch on Time to Taking a Photo 1.9 seconds
Shot to Shot (without flash) 2.6 seconds
Shot to Shot with Flash 3.3 seconds
Continuous Shooting 0.9 fps
Continuous Shooting with flash 0.5 fps
Continuous Shooting in Sports mode 5.0 fps
High-speed Burst HQ 12.9 fps
With that kind of performance, SX50 is simply unusable for my purposes. If I was going to use a Canon it would have to be the SX60 which is close to the FZ200 in performance. But even that never tempted me away from the FZ200 with teleconverter, 1020mm f2.8 (Much as I'd like to ditch the teleconverter)
And now of course, FZ200-like speed isn't good enough any more...! Now that I've used the FZ1000 and the FZ300 is coming soon.
Now, if only Panasonic would make a successor to the FZ70 with this kind of performance...
Last edited:
kkardster
Forum Pro
IQ wise, yes, the FZ1000's 1" sensor (which is 4X the size of the FZ300 sensor) will provide superior results with better dynamic range and less noise at all ISOs. The higher ISO performance makes up for the FZ300's constant f/2.8 lens and the better sensor with higher resolution (20MP vs. 12 MP) also make up for its reach advantage. So, unless you need weather sealing or a somewhat smaller camera, I'd recommend the FZ1000.
--
Bruce
You learn something new every time you press the shutter
Last edited:
windmillgolfer
Forum Pro
Thanks for the heads-up. Looking good 
Sorry, but the figures are from ePhotozine. They make the measurements and post them in their camera reviews. I don't have any further figures/information.
Vandyu
Veteran Member
That's a good one, Bruce. Can't tell you how pleased I am that it only took 10 years of whining to get Panasonic to add the rubber eye cushion to the FZ line. See, whiners aren't all bad :-D
John McCormack
Veteran Member
In the FZ's favor the FZ300 has more reach (600mm at f/2.8) and is considerably cheaper.
myssvictoria
Veteran Member
Vandyu, I want to thank you. I don't think it would have happened without you lobbying relentlessly for the rubber eyecup. If we don't speak up about what we want, we won't get what we want.
Vickie
Please Mr. Ichiro Kitao, give me a Wildlife Zoom camera (WZ) with a 200 - 2000mm reach and able to take a TC, and with a fast lens and all the goodies to make it fast operationally. And with a big, beautiful EVF. Come on, let's exploit the strengths of a small sensor.
myFlickr
myP900pics
myFZ200pics
myFZ70pics
--
Vickie
Please Mr. Ichiro Kitao, give me a Wildlife Zoom camera (WZ) with a 200 - 2000mm reach and able to take a TC, and with a fast lens and all the goodies to make it fast operationally. And with a big, beautiful EVF. Come on, let's exploit the strengths of a small sensor.
myFlickr
myP900pics
myFZ200pics
myFZ70pics
Last edited:
kkardster
Forum Pro
I disagree on all counts.
On paper at max FZ300 (12 MP) resolution, the FZ1000 outreaches the FZ300 due to its higher sensor MP:
20 MP/12 MP = 1.666 * 400mm = 667mm @FZ300/35mm EFL
I won't bother with the native aspect rations being 4:3 for one and 3:2 for the other. Suffice it to say they're nearly the same while the FZ1000 also provides bigger/better pixels.
The lower noise and better ISO noise performance of the FZ1000 allows it to be even faster than the FZ300. Even at full telephoto, the 1-stop advantage of the FZ3000 gets beat by the ~2-stop ISO advantage of the FZ1000 with its larger sensor.
The post I replied to stated that both were about the same price for them today, so it is not considerably cheaper - yet.
After all that - with no clear advantage for the FZ300 other than weather sealing and a slight size advantage - since the FZ1000 matches the FZ300 at the long end and likely trounces it at shorter focal lengths, I stand by my original FZ1000 recommendation for best IQ of the two.
--
Bruce
You learn something new every time you press the shutter
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum