lumix fz70 compared to lumix fz300

Gdt said:

my fz70 has twice the zoom of my fz300 but the fz 300 is newer

i guess ill be taking out my fz70 for wildlife :-D

Click to expand...

ukmark62 said:

I notice on the EXIF that the model says FZ80 and not FZ80D. I don't know if you own DxO Photolab but this suggests to me that the FZ80D/FZ82D and FZ80/FZ82 use the same DxO camera profile for RAW noise reduction etc??

If you do own DxO can you pls verify that the FZ80D RAW images are accepted under the existing FZ80/FZ82 profile? Many thx.

Click to expand...

Gdt said:

my fz70 has twice the zoom of my fz300 but the fz 300 is newer

i guess ill be taking out my fz70 for wildlife :-D

Click to expand...

Stevie Boy Blue said:

Gdt said:

my fz70 has twice the zoom of my fz300 but the fz 300 is newer

i guess ill be taking out my fz70 for wildlife :-D

Click to expand...

By all means feel free to share any photo examples from your FZ70 as and when you're ready to post. Although not strictly necessary, I'm sure many viewers here will appreciate them.

In my experience, though, 1200mm EFL is only as effective as the glass/camera used to capture each image, with the rendering of fine fur and feather detail arguably of paramount importance for wildlife subjects. At least, in all of my 50 plus years as a photographer, it always was/is for me, and which is why I prefer the Fujifilm S1 bridge camera over the FZ70 (or FZ80) when 1200mm range is a must, albeit rarely the case that I require any focal length over 600mm.

Whilst in my experience the Fuji S1 renders much more detailed results than the FZ70 (or 80) at 1200mm when shooting OOC Jpegs in like-for-like conditions/ISO settings, neither long-range model is a match for the FZ300 up to 600mm EFL. For me, the FZ300 has two distinct advantages over longer reaching bridge cameras utilising the same size sensor: 1) fewer megapixels covering the surface area and 2) a much faster lens overall. Fewer pixels means more light gathering capabilities, whilst faster apertures afford lower ISO settings for given shutter speeds, often culminating in lower noise levels and increased fine details compared to slower and more pixel-dense alternatives.

With the FZ70, FZ80 and Fuji S1, by the time any of those models is at 600mm, they’ll only afford aperture settings of F5 or smaller, whilst the FZ300 can be kept at F2.8 from wide angle through to full 600mm telephoto. It could also be argued that in many cases, an FZ300 to which a TC is added to almost double its native optical reach would still outperform the FZ70 and 80, with the S1 coming in at a closer second place due to its comparative better rendering in the Jpeg format. In some cases, shooting raw files and post processing may help raise the quality of the generally slower camera, but not by much from what I’ve seen from those who preach and practice that particular gospel here and there. It’s pretty much a must to keep the FZ70 under ISO 400 if not 200 maximum while the FZ300 remains capable up to at least ISO 800.

All in all, I don’t recall the last time I needed above 600mm for wildlife photography here in the UK, mainly because I’ve always adopted adequate field craft skills that enable me to get close enough to fill the frame with most subjects. For me, the main challenge and a great deal of satisfaction from wildlife photography is drawn from the preparation side of things, although I appreciate that not everyone has the patience and time to devote to the task.

And so, whilst your observation is correct inasmuch as the FZ300 is newer than the FZ70 you mention, it is at least debatable as to which of the two models is most suited to wildlife photography. Me? Faced with the choice of one over the other, I’d opt for the FZ300 every time for the reasons stated above. Of course, yours and other readers’ mileage may vary, and that’s fine with me.

FWIW, I submit the following five FZ300 images, all of which are Jpegs as they appeared straight OOC save for some cropping and resizing for uploading purposes plus the addition of my watermark for photographer ID.











For anyone who may be interested, parts one and two of my FZ300 (330) user review can be found via the following links, both of which contain more photo examples that indicate the camera punches well above its weight in terms of image quality for its minuscule sensor size. In fact, I’ll take this as likely my final opportunity to reiterate that in the 1/2.3” sector of all Bridge Cameras made by all manufacturers over many years, the FZ300 is by far the best Panasonic offering I’ve ever used bar none. In terms of bang for the buck re what it offers as a whole package, nothing does or has come close to what the FZ300 offers in handling and results.

FZ300 Review Part 1: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4437570

FZ300 Review Part 2: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4565945

In my experience, the only way to improve on the FZ300 is to move up in sensor size, which in turn and inevitably means an increase in body bulk and weight for the equivalent range, albeit that we must forsake the F2.8 constant aperture that helps make the FZ300 so attractive for starters.

So, whether you choose an FZ70 or arguably the more suitable FZ300 as a do-it-all option including wildlife photography, enjoy your time out shooting and have as much fun as your camera affords you.

In closing: As my visits to this site are becoming sparser these days, I’ll say best wishes and kind regards to all Forum users and DPR’s ever-splendid admin team.

Cheers everyone...

Click to expand...