Would you replace a G1 with a TZ3 ? Need help/advise

[xyt]

Hi =)

I own a Powershot G1 since roughly 6 years. Unfortunately the sensor has 2 pixelerrors since some months. A red and a green dot is shown on the pictures. This is annyoing. And the videocapturemodus is "bad".

I love to make some short clips and photos from my young daughter. And both isnt possible with my G1 anymore.

So i have to replace this very good camera. I tried a G7 for a weekend and i was really impressed. The digitalzoom, the quality and so on ... well .. G1 to G7. Roughly 7 years of improvement.

But now to the Panasonic TZ3. The videomode, the zoom, the optical stabilizer and the 28mm wide zoom is really nice.

Would you replace a G1 for a TZ3 ?
Or would you pick a TZ3 instead of a G7 when you want picture quality ?

I tested 2 Fujis with the superccd sensor (both roughly 1 year old) - and the G1 had "better" pictures. At least in my opinion. The G7 is really great ... Is the TZ3 great too ?

Advise and comments are more than welcome !

 

[puttin]

I have a G7 and a TZ3. The TZ3 is a great camera with a great lens and good IQ but I would rather have the G7. I think it is a better all around camera. I'm sure you will get many different opinions on this.

 

[puttin]

If you are thinking about Panasonic check out the LX2. It is a excellent camera with a lot of manual control. I would take that over the TZ3

 

[scphoto]

Panasonic just announced the FZ18 with an 18X zoom. It's not as small at the TZ3 but has a lot more zoom/capabilities and still weighs under one pound. It's suppose to be available in September for about $400US.

Just an idea ...

• Simon

http://scpics.smugmug.com/

 

[NIK11]

Would you replace a G1 for a TZ3 ?

Or would you pick a TZ3 instead of a G7 when you want picture quality ?

. The G7 is
really great ... Is the TZ3 great too ?

No compact has it all. The TZ3 has good daylight IQ. But its strength lay in providing a 28-280 lens in a pocketable DC with (probably) the best IS.

If you do not need 28WA (or 280 for that matter) or as pocketable, and IQ is your top priority, then there are better options out there - maybe the new FZ18 will be the closest compromise.

Wait too for Canon autumn releases in about 3 weeks.

Nick

 

[Tom Hoots]

Or would you pick a TZ3 instead of a G7 when you want picture quality ?

In general, I won't recommend any Panasonic camera to any Canon user. The in-camera processing is very substantially different, and anyone with a Canon background will probably be disappointed with Panasonic output.

That said, some Panasonics give you some control over the in-camera processing, so they might be "OK," if indeed you could choose a few settings and get the dang thing to spit out "Canon color."

However, the TZ3 gives you virtually no control over image quality -- just a "color" setting where you can choose from really dull and lifeless, semi-dull and lifeless, or cartoon-color vivid. And, the TZ3 has some of the worst "point and shoot ultra-ultra-ultra-boosted contrast" you'll ever encounter. In short, it'll blow out any highlight you might capture, while rendering anything on the dark side completely black.

Hey, it's a neat camera, with some great features and a great lens, but if you have a Canon G-series background in terms of image quality, you're probably not going to be happy with what the TZ3 can produce. You can use post-processing to a great effect and reverse some of that "Panasonic in-camera processing," but prepare to step up to the plate for every image you want to "publish."

I don't really mean to "bash" the TZ3 -- it's just that I =have= one, and this is an accurate portrayal of what you can expect from one. Click my ID and go look for my posts in the Panasonic forum -- I went into a ton of detail in regards to the post-processing you really need to do with TZ3 images to "fix" them.

Or, better yet, just stick with Canon. I currently have a TX1 on order, and "gadget or not," I'm now quite sure that I'd rather have one of those in my pocket than a TZ3.
--
Tom Hoots
My PBase galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/thoots

 

[ericN2]

If you are thinking about Panasonic check out the LX2. It is a
excellent camera with a lot of manual control. I would take that over
the TZ3

I totally agree with Wayne on the above.

The G7 is a fantastically good general purpose camera - forget the lack of RAW - you can well do without it on THIS type of cam .. and it WELL makes up for it in so many ways - the LCD is excellent - the whole feel is wonderful and SO much better than your old G1 - I have one !!

But an excellent alternative is the LX2 - very very compact , but VERY good indeed, and I really would be hard pushed to say the G7 is an outright better cam for results. Both are capable of as good a pic as you may get from most others in the compact type - handling and size are I think maybe the only things to really compare. If possible - try both - if not ... then it's a hard one to recommend , as the handling is so much a feature of the comparison.
But in the class - I just know of none better of the type and output.

By the way - I have a TZ3 also ... VERY excellent cam .. but I think in truth, the LX2 just pips it in my eyes...

--

eric-UK
I may not be there yet, but I'm closer than I was yesterday.

 

[gail]

Would you replace a G1 for a TZ3 ?
Or would you pick a TZ3 instead of a G7 when you want picture quality ?

To be honest, no, not if I could only have one camera.

The TZ3 is my second Panasonic (well, third, if you consider I had the FZ5 for about a week before returning it for the S2).

I'm really enjoying the TZ3 but a Canon would always be my first choice for a total combination of color preference, all around image quality and intuitive menu system.

As soon as Canon comes out with something like the G7 with a 28mm lens (ie. a G7 version of the TZ3 with manual controls), I will get it.

I'm biding my time now. Sold my s2 when I had the chance. My TZ3 and SD700 are covering most bases.

btw, it takes a lot more effort to get a good full zoom shot with the TZ3 than with the S2, in my experience.

--
gail ~ http://www.pbase.com/gailb
My digital camera BLOGs: Pany TZ3, Canon SD700 & S2, Nikon 5400
http://www.digicamhelp.com/camera-logs/index.php

 

[jimr]

Since things do change...I'd surely wait to see how both the Panny FZ 18 and the Fuji S8000sd test out. We can all make assumptions based upon history, sensor size etc. I think it only prudent to avoid assuming and wait for professional tests.
As for the TZ 3...Look at some of the results posted and judge for yourself:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=24181601

You might find these two newer comprehensive tests valuable:

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_panasonic_lumix_dmc_tz3_6.php

and:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/TZ3/TZ3A.HTM

 

[jimr]

Would you replace a G1 for a TZ3 ?
Or would you pick a TZ3 instead of a G7 when you want picture quality ?

To be honest, no, not if I could only have one camera.

The TZ3 is my second Panasonic (well, third, if you consider I had
the FZ5 for about a week before returning it for the S2).

I'm really enjoying the TZ3 but a Canon would always be my first
choice for a total combination of color preference, all around image
quality and intuitive menu system.

As soon as Canon comes out with something like the G7 with a 28mm
lens (ie. a G7 version of the TZ3 with manual controls), I will get
it.

Dear Gail,

IF Canon does. Canon has been 'stuck' with a one size fits all concept of a super zoom for a few generations now. Why they are sleeping while the competition provides choices in superzoom size, focal length ranges, feature sets and price points I have no idea. I was totally surprised to see the S5 come out with a 36 mm wide angle limitation after all the competition offers. Canon has seen what others have done, but has made no move to diversify its superzoom offerings in all this time. I don't understand why.

I'm biding my time now. Sold my s2 when I had the chance. My TZ3 and
SD700 are covering most bases.

btw, it takes a lot more effort to get a good full zoom shot with the
TZ3 than with the S2, in my experience.

--
gail ~ http://www.pbase.com/gailb
My digital camera BLOGs: Pany TZ3, Canon SD700 & S2, Nikon 5400
http://www.digicamhelp.com/camera-logs/index.php

 

[dfrost]

I don't really mean to "bash" the TZ3 -- it's just that I =have= one,
and this is an accurate portrayal of what you can expect from one.

Tom,

You ARE bashing the TZ3, but you seemed to love it a few months ago!

Your comments are NOT "accurate protrayals" to me and what I see, including extensive review of the images you include in your Panasonic forum threads.

In general, I won't recommend any Panasonic camera to any Canon user.
The in-camera processing is very substantially different, and anyone
with a Canon background will probably be disappointed with Panasonic
output.

I came from a five years with a Canon G3, and am really enjoying my TZ3. The G3 was remarkable (and also has a great lens), but the TZ3 provides images that are impossible with the G3. Yes, there are differences, but I would say that there are trade-offs between the two brands.

My G3 has never been able to focus indoors (and often outdoors) on my mostly black dog. No problem for the TZ3.

The TZ3 offers image perspectives that are not available from any other relatively pocketable camera. And portability is an important consideration to some of us.

The A710IS I tried for a week was very frustrating, and the Canon IS (at least on my sample) was not particularly effective. I find the Panasonic/Leica OIS to be excellent and really effective in broadening the picture-taking possibilities.

That said, some Panasonics give you some control over the in-camera
processing, so they might be "OK," if indeed you could choose a few
settings and get the dang thing to spit out "Canon color."

I spent several hours taking identical pictures with an A610 and the TZ3. I clearly preferred the Panasonic images, and the Canon owner agreed. The exception was when flash was used, where the A6xx cameras are excellent, while the Panasonic is marginal. The A710's long flash recycling (and subsequent LCD black-out) was unacceptable, especially with IS that didn't allow indoor pics without flash.

However, the TZ3 gives you virtually no control over image quality --
just a "color" setting where you can choose from really dull and
lifeless, semi-dull and lifeless, or cartoon-color vivid.

Having looked at many of your comparison shots, I'd say that you have grossly over-stated the differences. Yes, we'd prefer separate controls over saturation, contrast and sharpness, but you make it sound like there are no decent possibilities with the TZ3. You're welcome to your opinions, but maybe with a little moderation?

TZ3 has some of the worst "point and shoot ultra-ultra-ultra-boosted
contrast" you'll ever encounter. In short, it'll blow out any
highlight you might capture, while rendering anything on the dark
side completely black.

I've also seen your shots and read all your commentary about the TZ3's contrast, and see very little, if any, noticeable difference between your pre- and post-pp'd examples. I also don't see any particular contrast differences in comparison shots taken with my G3, TZ3 and the A610.

Hey, it's a neat camera, with some great features and a great lens,
but if you have a Canon G-series background in terms of image
quality, you're probably not going to be happy with what the TZ3 can
produce.

Obviously I disagree.

With TZ3 and its capabilities, I'm encouraged to expand beyond 'picture-taking' toward 'photography.' I'm really having fun with this camera. Sorry you apparently didn't, Tom.
--
David Frost
Loving my new Trizzie; Gee Three has moved on.

 

[puttin]

Or would you pick a TZ3 instead of a G7 when you want picture quality ?

In general, I won't recommend any Panasonic camera to any Canon user.
The in-camera processing is very substantially different, and anyone
with a Canon background will probably be disappointed with Panasonic
output.

That said, some Panasonics give you some control over the in-camera
processing, so they might be "OK," if indeed you could choose a few
settings and get the dang thing to spit out "Canon color."

I'm on my 4th Canon and also my 4th Pany and I think the colors are very simular

However, the TZ3 gives you virtually no control over image quality --

just a "color" setting where you can choose from really dull and
lifeless, semi-dull and lifeless, or cartoon-color vivid. And, the
TZ3 has some of the worst "point and shoot ultra-ultra-ultra-boosted
contrast" you'll ever encounter. In short, it'll blow out any
highlight you might capture, while rendering anything on the dark
side completely black.

Hey, it's a neat camera, with some great features and a great lens,
but if you have a Canon G-series background in terms of image
quality, you're probably not going to be happy with what the TZ3 can
produce. You can use post-processing to a great effect and reverse
some of that "Panasonic in-camera processing," but prepare to step up
to the plate for every image you want to "publish."

I don't really mean to "bash" the TZ3 -- it's just that I =have= one,
and this is an accurate portrayal of what you can expect from one.
Click my ID and go look for my posts in the Panasonic forum -- I went
into a ton of detail in regards to the post-processing you really
need to do with TZ3 images to "fix" them.

Or, better yet, just stick with Canon. I currently have a TX1 on
order, and "gadget or not," I'm now quite sure that I'd rather have
one of those in my pocket than a TZ3.
--
Tom Hoots
My PBase galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/thoots

 

[jimr]

especially in color rendition and degree of saturation are very SUBJECTIVE. What one views as over the top, the other views as colorful. Think of Fuji film in its heyday. Think of Kodachrome. Prefernces are just that..INDIVIDUAL. I find it amusing when one person tries to convince the other that their prefernce is the BEST. In truth, with PRINTED images...the actual printing process is far more critical in the color rendition than what is in the file. Take the same file and have three different commercial providers make prints. The differences can be astounding. I prefer punchier colors...vivid. I surely understand why some prefer more natural renditions. I use the V Moda Bass headphones with my Ipod Nano. Absolutely love the combination. For some the bass would be over the top and unnatural. From many of the sample images that I have seen from the TZ 3, I can see that it is capable, in skilled hands, of making beautiful images. The focal length range is wonderful for me. I do NOT own one. But...I surely would be very happy to do so. I would not be happy with a 36 mm max wide angle coverage. That's my personal bias/choice. I would never consider the S5. Does that make it a lesser camera? For those who like the focal length range that it provides..it may very well be their present ideal superzoom. That does not make them wrong or me wrong. It's all about choices and preferences. As I have said before..I just think that it is incredible that a company that is as capable as Canon has not provided for choices in preferences with their superzooms. If the Panny FZ 18 and/or the Fuji S8000fd test out well from an IQ point of view....and that is a definite IF...then they would definitely be MY superzoom of choice. The Panny's RAW capability alone can give SOME people a reason to choose it. Tests and time will tell. As I said we need patience and not prejudgments.

 

[gail]

As soon as Canon comes out with something like the G7 with a 28mm
lens (ie. a G7 version of the TZ3 with manual controls), I will get
it.

IF Canon does. Canon has been 'stuck' with a one size fits all
concept of a super zoom for a few generations now.

Well, they're stuck with more than just a one size fits all concept, if you ask me. They have so many similar models out but opt to leave at least one key feature off each: some have IS, a similar camera does not; this one has a viewfinder; the other does not; etc. Try to get a Canon digital camera with the vast majority of useful features like Panasonic offers, and you may be out of luck. For example, every Panasonic camera for the last several years has had image stabilization. Not so with Canon.

I think the imaging-resource review summed the TZ3 up very nicely (don't gloss over the first five words):

"Despite some image quality issues, the Panasonic TZ3 has many strengths, most notably its 10x optical zoom lens and its MEGA O.I.S. Add good performance, an above average feature set, a compact body, and an affordable price, and it's easy to see why this camera is so appealing regardless of the type of shooting you like to do."

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/TZ3/TZ3A.HTM

Panasonic got my money. I like the camera.

However, as mentioned, if Canon came had something similar on the market at the time, for reasons already stated, I most likely would have bought the Canon.

--
gail ~ http://www.pbase.com/gailb
My digital camera BLOGs: Pany TZ3, Canon SD700 & S2, Nikon 5400
http://www.digicamhelp.com/camera-logs/index.php

 

[Tom Hoots]

David,

You ARE bashing the TZ3, but you seemed to love it a few months ago!

Sorry. I've just grown tired of post-processing the begeezus out of everything I take with the camera.

Your comments are NOT "accurate protrayals" to me and what I see, including extensive review of the images you include in your Panasonic forum threads.

Well, let me post a couple of perfect examples of what I'm talking about. These are not my images, I'm not using them with permission of the original owner, but again, they are some of the best examples of what I'm talking about that I've seen so far.

These are from the Niagara Falls area, I recall. I'll post the original shot, and then my "processed" version. Please pay VERY SPECIAL ATTENTION to the little bit of instructions I'll mention below in regards to the differences you can see in these images. Again, original shot, then my version, of two different pictures:









Now, let me give you those VERY SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS, in reply to this bit:

Having looked at many of your comparison shots, I'd say that you have grossly over-stated the differences.

It sounds like you have compared images "as displayed on this forum," instead of using these VERY SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:

OK. If any of you haven't noticed it before, this forum "filters" images to a certain extent. I suppose it has something to do with the forum's ability to "expand" images beyond the forum text frames. I never noticed this until I posted some TZ3 images, when I noticed that "as displayed in this forum," they weren't nearly as ultra-ultra-ultra-ultra high contrast as they appeared in my editing programs and other software.

So, PLEASE DOWNLOAD THESE IMAGES TO YOUR HARD DRIVE, AND THEN COMPARE THEM.

You will find MUCH BIGGER DIFFERENCES between the images than you will "as displayed in this forum." I'm just not really even TALKING ABOUT how they display in this forum -- you've got to get them out of here to truly understand what I'm saying about the TZ3's usual image quality.

That said, let's discuss the two pairs of pictures I've posted. Both have "the worst thing you have have in a TZ3 image" -- overcast skies, or at least lots of clouds in the sky. In both of the "original" pictures, the clouds are so blown out that they lack all kinds of detail that I restored with my processing. Far worse, though, that "bright" contrast has nearly ruined the usefulness of the rest of the images -- especially so in the Ferris Wheel shot. Virtually "everything on the ground" is dark and relatively color-less -- all the people, the storefronts, and so on.

"This is the essential TZ3 image quality" I'm talking about. But you won't see it so much viewing these images here in this forum -- again, download them and compare them in some other program, and you will immediately notice the rather huge, substantial change in the images, compared to my processed versions.

So, again, that's what I'm talking about. It's like a co-worker who bought a TZ3 after seeing mine -- he told me how he took pictures of his family on a trip over the weekend, but all of the people came out so dark, he had to crank up the brightness so much that the pictures looked awful. He asked me what he might have done wrong. Instead, I asked him one question:

"Was there a lot of overcast sky in the backgrounds of these pictures?"

Yes, indeed, it turns out that there was =plenty= of overcast sky in the background. "Please note the Ferris Wheel picture, above." =Exactly= what I'm talking about.

Oh, sure, if you get shots without a whole lot of blown-out sky or whatever in the background, then the TZ3 will do much, much better. Some of the examples linked to above were indeed just those very kinds of images. In the end, though, the TZ3 contrast is "cranked up more than I've ever seen in a camera before," which in simple terms "makes the brights brighter, and the darks darker."

Color-wise, I think the two examples above are quite typical of the TZ3's "Standard" color setting -- probably not helped at all by the contrast "problem," they're quite a bit less saturated than "Canon versions" of these shots would be. And, the TZ3's "Vivid" color setting is quite a bit more saturated than what a Canon would produce at its default settings. Sure, color (especially) is more of a "personal preference" than most anything. Personally, I think Canon always nails it =very= closely to my preference, but the TZ3 misses it at both the Standard and the Vivid settings.

Finally, let me just say that "most compact cameras have rather 'high contrast' at their default settings." It's the nature of things for "consumer" cameras. But, with any of the new Canon cameras with the "My Colors" settings, I highly recommend going into the "Custom" setup, and turning down the contrast the two steps you can. You'll get (at least to my eyes) much more evenly-lighted images, you'll get far less "blown highlights," and you may well get less "purple fringing" if your camera is a bit more susceptible to that.

In the end, the TZ3 =is= a very cool camera, with a great lens and some fine, very useful features. But I definitely want to "put this warning out" to anyone who is happy with "Canon picture quality." Maybe you'll like the TZ3. Mine will wind up sitting around the house just as soon as I get the TX1 I just ordered. I will turn its contrast down and I expect I'll be quite happy with its image quality.
--
Tom Hoots
My PBase galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/thoots

 

[Tom Hoots]

I was totally surprised to see the S5 come out with a 36 mm wide angle limitation after all the competition offers. Canon has seen what others have done, but has made no move to diversify its superzoom offerings in all this time. I don't understand why.

Gail said it well, and I'll jump in with my thoughts.

Mainly, "Canon sells more cameras in a month than Panasonic sells in a year." Or something to that effect. Canon is doing what it is doing because it is ROLLING IN THE MONEY by selling what it has produced.

I'm definitely not saying "that's a good thing," but I think that's the essential fact of life in the market today.

Panasonic =is= "doing the right things" to a very great extent -- wide-angle lenses, IS on every camera it makes, and so on. But I would buy a Canon version of anything they made instead, because I much, much, much prefer Canon image quality over Panasonic image quality. In fact, I'll buy a Canon version with half the capabilities of a Panasonic because I much, much, much prefer Canon image quality over Panasonic image quality.

Also, "I want that flip-and-twist LCD," dangit. To shoot the world "without a camera attached to your face" is a VERY powerful advantage in many situations. So long as Canon has one and Panasonic doesn't, I'll be buying the Canon, thank you.
--
Tom Hoots
My PBase galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/thoots

 

[jimr]

With the A series Canon has permutations of every sort...as you say. With the Superzoom it is one model. The A series is an incredible line with an excellent price/performance ratio. You are right about about them leaving out features...perhaps with the idea that some might steal sales from the G7. But with the superzoom....the S5 or the S5 or the S5.

As soon as Canon comes out with something like the G7 with a 28mm
lens (ie. a G7 version of the TZ3 with manual controls), I will get
it.

IF Canon does. Canon has been 'stuck' with a one size fits all
concept of a super zoom for a few generations now.

Well, they're stuck with more than just a one size fits all concept,
if you ask me. They have so many similar models out but opt to leave
at least one key feature off each: some have IS, a similar camera
does not; this one has a viewfinder; the other does not; etc. Try to
get a Canon digital camera with the vast majority of useful features
like Panasonic offers, and you may be out of luck. For example, every
Panasonic camera for the last several years has had image
stabilization. Not so with Canon.

I think the imaging-resource review summed the TZ3 up very nicely
(don't gloss over the first five words):

"Despite some image quality issues, the Panasonic TZ3 has many
strengths, most notably its 10x optical zoom lens and its MEGA O.I.S.
Add good performance, an above average feature set, a compact body,
and an affordable price, and it's easy to see why this camera is so
appealing regardless of the type of shooting you like to do."

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/TZ3/TZ3A.HTM

Panasonic got my money. I like the camera.

However, as mentioned, if Canon came had something similar on the
market at the time, for reasons already stated, I most likely would
have bought the Canon.

--
gail ~ http://www.pbase.com/gailb
My digital camera BLOGs: Pany TZ3, Canon SD700 & S2, Nikon 5400
http://www.digicamhelp.com/camera-logs/index.php

 

[jimr]

With all due respect. Look at ALL the latest Panny P&S Optics test ratings on this site. Look at ALL the latest Optics test ratings for the Canon P&S cameras on this site In virtually every case the Panny lens scores higher than the Canon lens. Now IF Panny finally gets a better sensor and with its already formidable and very diverse SuperZoom range...Canon had better get its act together because it cannot rest on its previously earned laurels. It will be interesting to see how both the Panny FZ 18 and the Fuji S8000fd test out. Had Fuji put a Super CCD in the S8000fd...I'd be a betting man(but of course even then not sure). Without it...I have no clue. These tests will be important. IF either or both have an IQ of 8.0...then Canon better have a response waiting in the wings now...not in a year. Who knows. We have history...but it doesn't always indicate the future. Panny and Fuji may test out as poorly as some others who have pushed the envelope and fallen in IQ or AF. Time will tell. As I've said before Canon is a superb company with a storied past. I loved my AE 1 ! I wished that I could have afforded a EF. But time marches on... I respect your love for Canon and its IQ...but Matsushita is a giant company and so is Fuji....so money is available there too. Enjoy whatever you own and respect each others opinions, preferences...but we all will be better off if we don't make assumptions until the actual tests are in. Smile! Hey..it's only a device and not a human. We treasure people...and enjoy equipment. May competition bring us all progress and lower prices! You are very creative and talented people. In your hands beautiful images emerge...and I'd bet that many different cameras and brands would shine if handled by gifted photogrphers such as the two of you!

I was totally surprised to see the S5 come out with a 36 mm wide angle limitation after all the competition offers. Canon has seen what others have done, but has made no move to diversify its superzoom offerings in all this time. I don't understand why.

Gail said it well, and I'll jump in with my thoughts.

Mainly, "Canon sells more cameras in a month than Panasonic sells in
a year." Or something to that effect. Canon is doing what it is
doing because it is ROLLING IN THE MONEY by selling what it has
produced.

I'm definitely not saying "that's a good thing," but I think that's
the essential fact of life in the market today.
Also, "I want that flip-and-twist LCD," dangit. To shoot the world
"without a camera attached to your face" is a VERY powerful advantage
in many situations. So long as Canon has one and Panasonic doesn't,
I'll be buying the Canon, thank you.

By thhe way, I understand the adavantage that some enjoy with the flip and twist LCD, but it cannot add Grandma Mary to the picture when you are standing in a room taking a group picture and the 36 mm limitation cuts Grandma Mary out...or standing at the Grand Canyon and part of the vista is cut out because 36 mm isn't wide enough. Nice adavantage...but I'd take the greater lens coverage any day. Please don't mention convertors that so few of us would pay for financially or would be willing to tot along when all we want is lighter and smaller all in one packages. Respectfullly..Jim

Tom Hoots
My PBase galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/thoots

 

[xyt]

I was really disappointed when i "tested" the 1-year-old superCCD Fujis. That made me unsure about the "picture quality" of the Fujis superCCD.

I have no experience with Panasonics. The facts of the new announced Panasonics are very interesting.

The new announced Panasonics and Fujis keeping me interested in what Canon will announce. Maybe a better TX1 ?

Really important for me is:

• Picture quality (I dont want to regret the G1 in that)
• a very good IQ (auto-modus) or the ability to easy "adjust" the camera one time. I dont use PhotoShop or something like that. I dont want to edit every single photo i make ...
• at least 640x480 (30fps) video modus for short clips

Less important, but still nice to get:

• Size does matter (the smaller the better). Otherwise im sure i wont carry it around "every day"
• 28mm wide zoom. 36mm can be a "pain"
• Zoom power with the ability to crop and still getting details.

I absolutely dont need RAW.

I do thought about the TX1. But since i am from Germany and cant hold it in my hands here ... im unsure.

Sometimes i realize that i do need 2 or more different cameras to be "prepared" all the situations i need them.

 

[ericN2]

Also, "I want that flip-and-twist LCD," dangit. To shoot the world "without a camera attached to your face" is a VERY powerful advantage in many situations. So long as Canon has one and Panasonic doesn't, I'll be buying the Canon, thank you.

Have you actually ever tried a G7 with either a high-angle shoot (over your head) or a low-angle (waitst-level) ??

It is actually VERY usable , and whilst not of course like having the old flip-and-twist , it is actually a MUCH better LCD for it - bigger size than could ever be so on the camera as a flip-type , and an excellent improved resolutiion than ever the old ones were. Maybe Canon DO know what they're doing - it's a lot of buyers that DON'T understand and appreciate the merits.

--
eric-UK
I may not be there yet, but I'm closer than I was yesterday.