Panasonic Lumix DC-ZS200/TZ200 Review

Richard,

The way I count it, from the $800 of this camera, about $500 goes towards the lens (considering that the LX10 is 550). That is not exactly a small amount of money. Panasonic has a lot of experience with superzooms, I really don't think that we should cut them this much of a slack on manufacturing consistency.

It would be interesting to see what a "perfect copy" would be able to do. There is nothing you can do about f/ values given the form factor, and otherwise this is a highly desirable camera.

Lotzi

9 months agopermalink

Richard Butler

I wouldn't suggest cutting any slack if I'd seen anyone else doing much better. We've had a very similar experience with similarly-priced Sony and Canon compacts in recent years.

If I learned only one thing from my time as a mechanical engineering journalist, it's that manufacturing is hard. And manufacturing to high tolerances, at a mass-market price just makes that harder.

9 months ago*permalink

(unknown member)

Totally agree Richard. These relatively large hires sensors combined with tiny motorized multi-tubed complex lenses make them even more prone to variations than compact cameras with tiny sensors.
The only way I could get around this phenomenon was to buy them at a place where I could try the cameras and return them when not satisfactory. I payed a little more, but is was worth while. I got a razor sharp RX100 IV and later also a very good TZ100 (not as sharp as the Sony when pixel peeping at 100%, but about equal in print).

9 months ago*permalink

chse

Maybe, just maybe, the sample variation is aggravated by the usual lack of experience early in production. Or Leica allowed already to handpick optical assemblies for their version (rumored to come up real soon now) before end assembly ;->
Where I live, I can walk into a store, try the camera and will buy exactly that tried specimen.

And besides that, of course, everybody is confused.
Because the review confusingly fails to realize that the ZS200/TZ200 is in a class of its own. Just concentrate on the sections "Price", "Optics&Focus" and "Physical":
https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_g3x&products=panasonic_dczs200&products=sony_dscrx100m6&products=sony_dscrx100m5&products=sony_dscrx10iii
If you feel like it, add an LX10(0) to it. Does not matter.
Even the lower aperture at long end is mostly due to higher focal length when compared to Sony RX100V/VI.
Better cameras (optically) are either more bulky or have less zoom range.

8 months agopermalink

djohnfot

That's some surprisingly lousy IQ from a camera that promises better. In the recent past I've owned two different "premium compact" Panasonics and won't own another until the company improves it QC. The lens on my LX100 was downright terrible and Panasonic service was "unable" to fix the defects and took a very long time about it, too. Too bad Panasonic. Great handling cameras but your "Leica" lenses aren't up to standard. The "Zeiss" branded lenses on my current Sonys are completely satisfactory.

9 months agopermalink

Gregm61

An updated LX100 with a 20 or 24MP sensor is what they need to be coming out with.

9 months agopermalink

NYCman530

The LX200 should also have a built in flash and ND filter and perhaps expand the zoom range to 100mm. Panasonic also needs to address the issue quite a few people encountered concerning dust in the sensor.

9 months agopermalink

If I were a Panasonic decision maker, I'd stop this zoom race madness on this type of camera and concentrate on improvements.
- I'd fix the lens range at 24-300mm, but f/2.8
I'd then make this lens the standard lens on future iterations (ZS300, 400, 500, etc.) with continuous improvement until it's the sharpest lens in its class.
- Continue improving the "Cons" in the Conclusion section.
- 300mm in this type of camera should be sufficient.
- Kick Leica in the rear for lens variation, improve their QC, and stop them from getting their optics engineers drunk during work hours!

Just my 2 cents.

9 months agopermalink

Revenant

Actually, Leica isn't involved in the design, manufacture or QC of Panasonic's Leica-branded lenses. As far as I know, they only approved the lens design and production equipment, whatever that means.

9 months agopermalink

It doesn't really make a difference. Their NAME is on it, and, therefore, their reputation.

9 months agopermalink

Revenant

Yes, but Panasonic should kick their own engineers in the rear, not Leica's, because the latter can't do anything about a process they aren't involved in.

9 months agopermalink

BorisK1

"- I'd fix the lens range at 24-300mm, but f/2.8"

The FZ2000 is f/4 at 300mm, weights two pounds, and has 67mm filter thread. A lens that's a full stop faster, will need to be wider (up to 67x1.44=96mm). That will be hard to fit even into FZ2000-sized body. A TZ200 is a third of the weight and a fifths of the volume.

9 months agopermalink

The ZS100 already has a 24-250mm, and an f/2.8 at the low end (f/2.8-f/5.6).
With continuous improvement on the lens, and its glass an f/2.8 to, perhaps, f/4 is not too far out.

9 months agopermalink

@Revenant,
I believe that the one whose name is on the part should be doing the QC.
At least they should audit random samples.

9 months agopermalink

With a moderate size increase to the lens, they might be able to deliver 24-200mm f2.8-4. Maybe.

That might be an avenue worth barking up.

24-300mm @ f2.8, on the other hand, is a fantasy.

9 months agopermalink

I did not say a constant 2.8. Please read again.

9 months agopermalink

If you were panasonic decision maker you would have access to a good market research and sales information instead of only dpreview review with few comments. You can also estimate your expertise in decision making by checking your current position - do you make any business decisions at all, let alone decisions worth milions or tens of milions?

9 months agopermalink

Franz Weber

I don’t know if the kicks are better applied to the Panasonic or to the Leica engineers, but obviously someone should receive some for shure. What is the Leica brand worth if nobody has to take responsibility? That’s what I can expect as a customer.

9 months agopermalink

https://camerasize.com/compare/#771,647

"Significant sample variation on lenses of three different cameras"
This was my "significant" surprise in the Conclusion section.
Did Leica start serving beer at lunch time???

9 months agopermalink

(unknown member)

Not really a surprise and already mentioned by DPR in earlier reviews. It's a problem with all these 1 inch sensor models with complicated retracting lenses from all brands. This is what they wrote about their findings (from the TZ100 review):
"Lens Performance

If there's one thing we've seen in the 1"-type camera market, it's that lens quality has been hit-or-miss. The DMC-FZ1000 has a really nice lens, while the Canon G5 X and G7 X's lenses are disappointing. We've had a lot of sample variation with the Sony RX100 III and IV, but when you get a good sample, the lens is great."

9 months agopermalink

BlueBomberTurbo

Leica even brands smartphone lenses these days...

9 months agopermalink

Jefftan

for 1 inch, rather have cheap rx100 I or g9x

canon m100 also good choice

9 months agopermalink

ZC Lee

My Japan tour with ZS200: http://bit.ly/2qyaNWq
(note: I am engineer, not photographer)
Yes, the lens is soft even in center.
However ZS200 let me recall the lovely memory with TZ1@2006.

9 months agopermalink

james s. kennedy

Magnificent!

Thank you for the lovely photos.

9 months agopermalink

ColnagoNico

would not have though I'd ever get a "real" camera again but this one is tempting.

9 months agopermalink

Mike FL

Will I buy ZS200? No b/c ZS100 lens is already too slow for me, but I will buy two things from ZS200 for my ZS100

1. ZS200's add-on grip if it is available, and

2. ZS200's Ever Ready case if is is available as no one makes a Ever Ready case for ZS100, and ZS200's size is very close to ZS100 as seen below:

9 months ago*permalink

SmilerGrogan

That ISO invariance theory is a lie. If you look at the ISO 1600 shots vs. the pushed shots, the ISO 1600 shot clearly has less noise. Do they think we're idiots?

9 months agopermalink

DarnGoodPhotos

I compared 1600 vs 400 +2 and didn’t see an appreciable difference in noise.

9 months agopermalink

SmilerGrogan

But you would agree, there is a difference, yes? Regardless of whether or not you think it's significant? It is easiest to see on the ColorChecker patches.

9 months ago*permalink

DarnGoodPhotos

I would never expect the noise to be identical, but I don't much additional noise. Of course you are missing the part where they said "...with a minimal noise penalty". This jives with what I see, you get the greater dynamic range of the 400 shot without much additional noise compared to the 1600 shot.

9 months agopermalink

Cango

"We don't have video stills for the original ZS100 or Canon's G7 X II so we're unable to compare the quality of those cameras in detail"

It's hard to believe that DPREVIEW does not have access to video stills of two very popular cameras.

9 months ago*permalink

DenImage

I used to own the ZS100, and it was just too soft and too slow.
Images looked noisy, flat, and soft.
The ZS200 is just gonna worse, because they've made it longer and slower.
What Panasonic should have done, is waited and negotiated with Sony to get access to their 1" sensor with PDAF, and designed a faster lens with a shorter more useful travel focal length like 24-120mm f1.8-f2.8, then they would have my money.
These companies clearly need to perform a needs analysis of their prospective customer base before designing their products. That's what's missing here.
Den

9 months ago*permalink

Mike FL

Canon G1X.Mk2, sensor is larger than MFT, 24-120mm f/2.0 - f3.9:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/point-and-shoot/advanced-cameras/powershot-g1-x-mark-ii

But the sensor is bad back to then even it is larger than 1" SONY, and larger than MFT.

9 months agopermalink

Mike, That lens was a great achievement (It was a bit heavy though)

But indeed the sensor technology in there was already ancient when it released. Holding back it's potential.

The LX100 has a similar story. While not ancient it could benefit significantly from a 20 mp m43 sensor. Because effecively 12 mp is just not quiet there.

9 months agopermalink

Gediminas 8

Since when is 24-120 more useful for travel than 24-360?

9 months agopermalink

DenImage

Post a poll and find out whether most users shoot between 24-120mm or 120-350mm when traveling, then you'll get the answer.

Whilst you're at it, ask whether most users would prefer a faster shorter focal length zoom lens (24-120mm f1.8-f2.8) over a slower longer zoom lens like in the ZS200?
Den

9 months ago*permalink

btwango

Are you suggesting that Panasonic hasn't carried out market research? Keep in mind the market is greater than just those who post here.

9 months ago*permalink

DenImage

By your question, are you suggesting they carried out market research, and determined from that research, that the prospective market wanted an updated ZS100 with a slower lens but with an extra 100mm at the long end???
Ridiculous 😏
Den

9 months agopermalink

NetMage

And yet they made the camera, so that is probably exactly what market research told them.
I realize it may be hard for you to comprehend, but your desires don't match everyone's.
Those going on Safari style / outdoor travel will take all the zoom they can get and already have more light than they need outside in the day.

9 months agopermalink

"Post a poll and find out whether most users shoot between 24-120mm or 120-350mm when traveling, then you'll get the answer."

Or maybe post a poll and find out whether users would rather shoot between 24-120 or 24-360mm, since that is what we are comparing.

9 months agopermalink

steviewa

Guessing they're head hunting you right now for knowing their customer base better than they do

9 months agopermalink

Gediminas 8

DenImage,
whether most users shoot 24-120 or 120-360 mm is not important because 24-360 INCLUDES the 24-120 range.
As for apertures, I was referring to your statement specifically on the usefulness of a focal length.

9 months agopermalink

yahoo2u

This camera is good for holiday snaps, around the house snaps, and any other snaps...snaps being the operative word.

9 months agopermalink

cliffordjnr

spoken like somebody who doesnt understand photography

9 months agopermalink

BigBen08

A lot of money for a snap camera.

9 months agopermalink

yahoo2u

@BigBen08 you should get decent 6x4's.

9 months agopermalink

yahoo2u

@cliffordjnr There is a saying Cliff and it goes like this.."Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him"

9 months agopermalink

"Crosses F10" is an exaggeration, based upon real-world tests with this and other 1" sensor cameras:
"The effects of diffraction due to the small equivalent apertures (which crosses F10 equiv. at 35mm) just amplifies the softness."

9 months agopermalink

noisephotographer

I would like to see a comparison between the Zs200 at 720mm (2x digital zoom at 360mm) and the Zs70/Zs60 at 720mm.

9 months agopermalink

BorisK1

The video crop is because of the stabilization and horizon leveling. It can be turned off on 1080p to shoot wide angle. From the specs on Panasonic.com, 35 mm equivalent focal length:

36 - 540mm in 35mm equiv. in 4K video recording
25 - 375mm in 35mm equiv. in 16:9 video recording / O.I.S. Off / Level Shot function Off
27 - 405mm in 35mm equiv. in 16:9 video recording / O.I.S. On / Level Shot function Off
30 - 450mm in 35mm equiv. in 16:9 video recording / O.I.S. On / Level Shot function On

9 months agopermalink

To achieve this huge range, they use many multi-surface, specialty lens elements, and these probably have some POLYMER surfaces — unlike the stellar LX100 lens that uses ONLY GLASS elements. This is bound to make a significant difference in contrast and sharpness, but isn't mentioned in reviews.

Why is the Sony's RX10 IV so sharp in comparison, and has an even larger range? Perhaps they used more glass and less polymer.

9 months agopermalink

NG Resonance

That is a huge part of the problem.

9 months agopermalink

quiquae

Even Canon's G3 X, which is much smaller than the gigantic RX10 (though still far larger than this one) looks noticeably better while having a larger range. I can't believe I just complimented the G3 X, with which I was thoroughly disappointed, but there ya go.

9 months agopermalink

rpm40

the rx10 IV is huge compared to this camera, and much more expensive.

9 months agopermalink

https://www.outdoorphotographer.com/sonys-new-cyber-shot-rx10-iii-with-extreme-25x-zoom-range/

I just found out the Sony RX10 III/IV has all-glass elements. So even though it extends almost twice as far, 600mm, it's much sharper throughout. RX10 III:

"It features eight ED *glass* elements, including one super ED *glass* element, five ED *glass* elements and two ED aspherical lenses."

9 months agopermalink

Quiq,

The problem with the G3X wasn't the lens.

It was the lack off built-in EVF and outright atrocious shooting speed in Raw. 0.8 fps with AF servo is just too damn slow for a consumer camera.

Yes if it has a M5 style body with EVF. The G7x MK2 processor at roughly the release price it could very well be successful.

9 months agopermalink

Jeff, somehow you omitt an elefant in the room i.e. size and weight of the lens. Sony fanboy?

9 months agopermalink

arbux, the only Sony I've ever had was the original RX100.

I'm into excellence, instead of what Panasonic is settling with in these substandard optics. They had the right attitude with the LX100's excellent glass.

9 months agopermalink

arbux, I should add that I carried daily a LX5 for two years and a LX100 for three. I now have the ZS200, which has this wonderful zoom range, but is disappointingly soft. I also miss the multi-aspect sensor, which really should be in *all* mirrorless cameras, since the limiting SLR 3:2 mirror box is gone, and much of what the lens sees (the image circle) is wasted. Sony has really dropped the ball on multi-aspect, building the best sensors, but only in the standard 3:2 ratio.

9 months agopermalink

rpm40

Dude....

http://j.mp/2s4QcKb

Whether you look at the mk i, ii, iii, the rx10s are massively larger and heavier than the Panasonic, with the same sensor size. The Sony is known to have a very good and far less compromised lens. The Panasonic is full of compromises to make it small. These are as far apart as two 1" sensor models can get in terms of lens design.

9 months ago*permalink

rpm40, the Panasonic FZ1000 also has a massively larger lens, a similar zoom range, and a 1" sensor. And the image quality is no better than the ZS200 according to this test — perhaps because it also uses polymer instead of all-glass: "TZ200 vs FZ1000 sample pictures comparison at 360mm and f6.3" https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4285531

9 months agopermalink

Well the much larger Fz1000 has a maximum aperture of F4.
And with these relatively small sensors that does make a significant impact because despite being rather excellent ISO's still need to be kept at reasonable levels.

9 months agopermalink

i want to love the camera in this review

9 months agopermalink

needs a 360mm equivalent telephoto lens, especially typical point-n-shoot photographers. Frequently, they are taking photo's of very distant landscape objects because they are either too lazy to get closer for a clear shot, or are stuck in the motor coach. The atmospheric conditions almost always preclude a good photo in those situations.

TEdolph

9 months agopermalink

btwango

Right. Because one can always walk up the side of a building to get closer to an architectural detail or get within 1 meter of a crocodile to take a picture of its face. I guess using longer focal lengths to increase subject isolation is out of the question as well.

9 months agopermalink

200mm effective focal length is more than enough.

TEdolph

9 months agopermalink

In your backgarden maybe.

9 months agopermalink

Mateus1

There is still no 1" camera that I am tempted to buy.
I thought it will be Nikon DL 24-85 f/1.8-2.8 but Nikon made fault not bringing it.

9 months agopermalink

zerlings

Canon already has the G7x ii (1" 24-100 f/1.8-2.8)

9 months agopermalink

Mateus1

And nothing more to offer. No other camera maker offers so little for highest price. For me Canon does not exist, in last 4 years it lost all credibility.

9 months agopermalink

i like the LX10 personally.

Just pretend it's a 24-72mm F1.8-2.8 because at F1.4 it's pretty soft

9 months agopermalink

davids8560

It's a thin line between love and hate.

9 months agopermalink

ovatab

It's a thick red wobbly broken line printed with "caution: severe sample variation"

9 months agopermalink

Widdldo

The reviewer called the 4K video „noisier“ compared to the Sony competitors. Yes it is, but the reason for this is not just the lack of oversampling. Have a look at contrast edges. Sharpening artifacts all over the place! Wayyy too much sharpening! That’s what makes the noise so apparent in the ZS200‘s 4K video. And it makes those videos look very unnatural. Panasonic should fix this soon.

9 months agopermalink

Geir Ove

I have the Panasonic DMC FZ 1000: Fantastic camera, Fantastic Focus system: I never used my DSLRs again after getting it. But I stopped using it! Why? Well, seems like the Compact Camera producers are not keeping up with inventions:

See P1010345 in my album

I'm funny : I like to know where my pictures are taken (without Fuzz):
a) My Samsung S7 phone records this for every picture
b) It takes good enough Pictures for most situations
c) It has an Innovative Feature called Motion Pictures that records 2 sec video

I use c) together with PhotoStory to create Videos of Stills where Pure stills are zoomed and panned a bit, and where the Motion Pictures shows the short 2 sec Video then the Zoomed and Panned Still.

And Compact Camera Manufacturers wonder why their sales are stagnating?

IMHO they have fallen behind in the Innovation Department. so much so, that People. like me, that loves Picture Quality, are willing to accept to trade poorer IQ to Innovative Features!

No GPS: Not for me!

9 months ago*permalink

AksCT

"Significant sample variation on lenses of three different cameras"
That is exactly that same problem I had with two ZS100 I bought.

9 months agopermalink

ive owned 3 fuji x30 cameras one was lost [stolen?] one the lcd died [rain still "works"] the last bought minty from a nice long island gentleman for 275

all 3 had superb consistently sharp lenses from near to far ... it why i love fuji

9 months agopermalink

and

9 months agopermalink

.....it is clear evidence of better quality control in lens creation for complex zooms one sees in zoom enthusiast compacts ... it is also a superior lens period showing Fuji prowess in zoom design and building .................. and....[ your turn!]

9 months agopermalink

Elliot H

"significant sample variation" is significantly unacceptable

9 months agopermalink

The X30 is physically larger, with a much shorter range and a much smaller sensor. It's clearly a significantly less ambitious optical design, so it's no surprise that the quality within that narrow design objective is better.

9 months agopermalink

and I don’t care what you have owned

9 months agopermalink

Marty4650

Elliot H is absolutely right.

This is NOT a cheap camera. You shouldn't have to buy multiple copies to find a "good copy." Something is wrong with Panasonic's quality control if so many bad copies can get to customers.

9 months agopermalink

esmu, you care enough to let me know you dont care.... and that is more than enough. much much more . anyway you miss the point i was making about consistency in sample variation in fuji compacts. high quality\ same quality over 3 ownership experiences.

androole, true ,but the entire camera is built to a higher standard, the sheer robustness of zoom, a helicoid built better than many slr lenses and its sure manual action are a joy .making plastic power zooms are a letdown ,. the sensor , at 58 sqmm is exactly 1\2 the size of the "1" inch sensor[116 sqmm] by way of comparison apsc sensors are much less than full frame
, which they compare favorably with at normal isos or m43 sensors at about a quarter of full frame , but have great image quality

A 2\3 sensor produces beautiful files & decent sensor size wells considering the class of camera to which it belongs
at 20 mp on a 116sqmm sensor ,this class of 1 inch camera has a small noise advantage to the x30

9 months ago*permalink

STILL DON"T CARE this is not about Fuji

9 months agopermalink

its about sample variation and a dozen other points .... my example shows its possible to do it properly ..... by building a certain way .... thats extremely relevant

9 months ago*permalink

Its not a compact point and shoot ,,,,,,,, better of with the XE3 size wise and weight wise

9 months agopermalink

https://camerasize.com/compact/#688,569,563,647,ha,t

I guess I just don't understand why you believe that the performance of a 4x 28-112mm lens on a 2/3" sensor is relevant to the performance of a 15x 24-360mm lens on a 1" sensor.

Why not compare it the Panasonic LX15 or the LX100, both of which have much, much better lenses than the ZS200, and have larger sensors AND faster lenses than the X30, despite being the same size or even smaller physically?

9 months ago*permalink

There is always at least one fuji troll in each thread. My nikon d850 with 200mm f2 destroys your fuji x30 in iq. Thats why i love nikon, fuji is el cheapo brand for wannabe leica admirers.

9 months agopermalink

the lx100 is a crop of a crop sensor and 10 mp not as many as the 12 mp of the x30 it also has a poorer lens and is flimsy in its build

fuji is el cheapo brand ?? lo what idiocy .... i think you got the troll thing down all by yourself wanna compare cheaponess ?? look at fujis kit zoom compared to nikon or canon plastic inferior crap ..lololololol

why not mention a 40 lb view camera while you are at it?

the entire point of my post was fujis lack of sample variation in enthusiast compact lenses .... "reading is fundimental "

9 months ago*permalink

err..."reading is fundamental " so is spelling ....the shame

9 months agopermalink

arbux cosinaphile is writing about fuji fiction

9 months ago*permalink

first dates are always the best

9 months agopermalink

aris14

Given that 99% of the pix shot from this cam from the 99% of its buyers will be shown at its best in a 4K monitor, its performance is more than enough... Even pricing is fair for its USP... No..?

9 months agopermalink

Yes, but if the ZS60 takes better pictures with a longer zoom and one third of the price...

9 months agopermalink

BlueBomberTurbo

The ZS60 has a smartphone sensor...

9 months agopermalink

Most people will not show there photo's on 4k monitors.

Most people don't have 4k monitors.

TEdolph

9 months agopermalink

*their photos

9 months agopermalink

Damn spell check.

Tedolph

9 months agopermalink

</grammarnazi>

9 months ago*permalink

KonstantinosK

At ISO 125 images from the SZ60 look better than this.

9 months agopermalink

kharlow

Oops! The wrong camera is referenced in text of the "What's it like to use" link up top, the one with the picture of a roller coaster.

9 months ago*permalink

Jeff Keller

Good catch, thank you.

9 months agopermalink

Chris 222

Jeff Keller, thanks for this very interesting review (the new layout is great too!) Could you please chime in on the issue of the lens possibly having some polymer surfaces that some on these forums say explain the softness?

9 months agopermalink

AbrasiveReducer

Maybe if the zoom range a was a little bit less the lens wouldn't be as soft. Eventually people will catch on that putting Leica or Zeiss on a lens is no longer a guarantee of anything.

9 months agopermalink

The ZS100 was just as bad with a shorter zoom.

You are right, putting the name Leica on this lens is a cruel, cruel joke. I don't think that it does any service to Leica or Panasonic. I mean, we know that these lenses are not designed nor manufactured by Leica, but maybe Panasonic could use the name license to genuinely mark products they want to sell based on the strengths of the lens?

9 months agopermalink

To achieve this huge range, they use many multi-surface lens elements, and these probably use some POLYMER lenses — unlike the stellar LX100 lens that uses ONLY GLASS elements. This is bound to make a significant difference in contrast and sharpness, but isn't mentioned.

Why is the Sony's RX10 IV so sharp in comparison, and has an even larger range? Perhaps they used more glass and less polymer.

9 months agopermalink

Cal22

While the real world images here look quite decent, the studio scene comparison tells a different story. You may enjoy better JPEG colors now, but when it comes to resolution the predecessor wins: Compare king of hearts in the upper part of the studio scene!

You may doubt if this new camera model is worth a Silver Award!

9 months agopermalink

Ben O Connor

I love these new reviews, "jump to comclusion" :)

9 months agopermalink

JEROME NOLAS

The lens is so soft, it's not funny!!!

9 months agopermalink

rcl100

It gets 10 bonus points for being the only travel longish zoom camera still made. Doesn't make up for not so good iq.

9 months agopermalink

quiquae

If you aren't greedy with sensor size, long pocket travel zooms like Sony HX90V, Canon SX730HS, Panasonic TZ90 still exist AFAIK.

9 months agopermalink

rcl100

I might try out the TZ90.

9 months agopermalink

Oh well. This did not work out.

What is sad is that the quality, at least at low ISOs, is actually worse than the ZS60. What a waste of a sensor.

9 months agopermalink

daqk

I have ZS100 and gladly I bought used. At low ISO 125/200, the noise of daytime is right there and picture is not clear comparable to my FZ1000 (actually even slightly worse than my ZS40 @ a sunny day!). Looked through this review the image quality did not improve either (same sensor, more issues possible with longer zoom?), I guess we'll have to wait or I will just use my Sony RX100, lens is short but IQ is better. - No perfect "travel" camera.

9 months ago*permalink

Akgbkd

modern smartphones have better quality.

9 months agopermalink

Not better, but about the same. And at exactly 1 focal length (~28mm) only.

How's your smartphone at 360mm?

9 months agopermalink

JEROME NOLAS

@Androol-as fuzzy as this lens!

9 months agopermalink

Let me help you. A 360mm crop from a 12MP / 28mm smartphone sensor would give you less than 0.08 MP for your entire image.

That's about 336 x 224 pixels.

9 months agopermalink

Ebrahim Saadawi

And a DOF equiv to f/124795

9 months agopermalink

bolt2014

How can they give this an 81% rating with all the dislikes and the poor image quality rating? I always consider image quality number one in buying a camera!

9 months ago*permalink

Because it's still one of the only compact cameras with such an incredible zoom range, and seems to get many other things just right enough. (But yeah, it seems a little high to me, too... I guess many of the tradeoffs are expected.)

9 months ago*permalink

durask

The good thing, their reviews go into detail which tells you what you really need to know about the camera.
Me after seeing headline - wow, compact zoom up to 360 mm wow I want.
Me after reading the review - ugh, no thanks.

9 months agopermalink

samhain

I think the days of DPreview giving ANY camera a bad score/review are over.
Now that DPR is linked to seller(s) of the cameras, they'll throw every camera a bone.
Everyone gets a trophy... :/

9 months agopermalink

Jeff Keller

@samhain We are, and have always been, editorially independent of Amazon's retail business. They have no influence on our reviews or ratings.

9 months agopermalink

@samhain, that's a pretty cynical outlook. I've been reading DPR for 15+ years and they're as critical now as they have ever been (if not more).

Look at the cons. Look at the comparisons to other cameras. There is no effort to make any camera seem better than it really is.

9 months agopermalink

anticipation_of

No other camera has this much zoom in this small a package with this large a sensor. That alone is worth something.

9 months agopermalink

ralphthemagician

Even today's "poor" image quality is amazing. The reality is that sensors have gotten so advanced the we have to judge them by zooming in 100%. And the #1 way that photographs are displayed now is 1080px by 1080px on a 4"-5" screen.

9 months agopermalink

thx1138

The cons seem have no influence on the final score. When the list of cons is greater than the list of pros as is the case with many Sony cameras and they still get glowing endorsements something is not right.

No not all cameras are great or even close, giving a camera 60-70% is realistic. I suspect dpreview would give the god awful Corolla a 90% score if they reviewed cars.

9 months agopermalink

AntonJA

I suppose that whatever the likes and dislikes of individual consumers, all cameras have both shortcoming and redeemable features, and it is the reviewer's job to find and mention those. Failing one or the other is what displays a bias on the part of the reviewer.

9 months agopermalink

NetMage

And yet Toyota sold 100,000 of them in the first quarter. A good thing you aren't running their business.

9 months agopermalink

The length of the list of pros and cons is largely irrelevant. It's how important each of those is.

When I reviewed my LX100, I came up with a list of minor annoyances a mile long. But I still gave it 4/5 stars because of its core strengths in spite of the annoyances.

9 months ago*permalink

photoguy622

Three samples and none of them had a great lens. That's disappointing. I wonder how many consumers will be given the opportunity to try out multiple copies before they buy.

With that said, I've always liked Panasonic cameras, and this one seems like a nice one despite the soft lens. I have an FZ300 and enjoy using it.

9 months agopermalink

AksCT

Based on my past experience, bad copies returned by buyers may not go back to Panasonic to be fixed. It seems some of them are put back on the shelf to be sold again.
Last year when I bought my second ZS100 from another large/reputable vendor, I received a used camera (it was advertised as new and I paid for it as new camera). Most likely, it was one of bad quality cameras returned but put back in circulation. Thus, to find a good one it may take several attempts.

9 months agopermalink

(unknown member)

It seems to be a weak point of many if not most 1 inch sensor cameras with complicated small retractable lenses. The following text is from the earlier DPR review of the TZ100 model:
"If there's one thing we've seen in the 1"-type camera market, it's that lens quality has been hit-or-miss. The DMC-FZ1000 has a really nice lens, while the Canon G5 X and G7 X's lenses are disappointing. We've had a lot of sample variation with the Sony RX100 III and IV, but when you get a good sample, the lens is great."

9 months agopermalink

anticipation_of

I suspect that designing a sharp lens that's this small and has this much range is just really, really hard.

9 months agopermalink

MannyZero

Thanks to: Jeff Keller & Dan Bracaglia for their well informed and valuable report on this camera. Although I'm kind of disappointed on some of the images IQ. I was expecting more definition and less fuzzy results. Which has NOTHING to do with the well intention from the testers. I was planning to buy this camera for my wife and her trip to China. I'll keep on looking for future tests.
Keep up your excellent work, gentlemen.

9 months agopermalink

Grumpyrocker

Horrible horrible lens. I'd love to own a Panasonic compact like this - so many great features. But they keep pairing these cameras with a dreadful lens. I'm not asking for miracles, just don't want a smeary mess anywhere but dead centre.

9 months ago*permalink

The LX100 has a spectacular lens, but obviously that's a different class (though they were drawing comparisons to the Sony and Canon equivalents). Also getting a bit long in the tooth.

9 months agopermalink

Grumpyrocker

A new version with perhaps a slightly longer lens would be very welcome.

9 months agopermalink

gehairing

Isn't there a mistake in the Scene picture ?
Compare the image with a Sony RX100 V in Jpeg 125 on the bank note.
I can't imagine the Panasonic is so bad.

9 months agopermalink

Jeff Keller

Nope that's correct. Our third test camera was at least that bad. The second was sharper in the center but lousy everywhere else.

9 months agopermalink

samhain

Right?
And yet DPR still gives it an overall positive review & rating. SMH.
Camera companies putting out duds, cameras with bad QC, etc should be raked over the coals and given no quarter.

9 months agopermalink

Prognathous

Thanks Jeff for sharing this information. I was thinking about replacing my Sony A77 with this camera, but the seeing this QC roulette I don't consider it to be a an appealing option any more. I'll stick with what I have.

9 months agopermalink

malcolml1

I read the FZ2000 review and it said the same thing about the zoom lens quality. I know cost is a consideration, but to me I'd pay that extra 20% (or whatever) to get better (sharper, not necessarily faster) lens performance.

9 months ago*permalink

AntonJA

The early days of the old IBM PC saw an 'open system' to which programmers and hardware manufactures, many of them individuals with a high degree of inventiveness, could contribute. Now we have major PC vendors and closed systems.

The auto world has, sometimes, allowed 3rd party add-ons and does a lot of cross licensing.

I wonder what the camera wold would be like if vendors opened up their software and published hardware interface specs. Some of those features could be used elsewhere; the lens system could be replaced; the sampling/sharpening software could be hacked for a better -- or at least 'different' -- performance.

But none of that is going to happen.

9 months agopermalink

Marty4650

Nice review. Well written, with a very useful new format.

I'm really not happy with the slow lens, but I suppose it cannot be avoided at this high zoom range. This actually makes the ZS100 look like a better buy, and an LX10 or LX100 look like a much better choice for anyone who plans to use their camera indoors or at night.

But you really need to give Panasonic a lot of credit here. They created the Travel Zoom niche with their TZ1 back in 2006, and they still keep offering us improved versions of the concept.

9 months agopermalink

ogl

The photos from 1" sensor is not better than rom 1/1.7". IMO. Strange....

9 months agopermalink

Marty4650

Only if you never go any higher than ISO 100 and never shoot in poor light. In that case, my 1/1.7" sensored camera is "just as good."

But these newer 1" sensored cameras can perform pretty well up to around ISO 800 and can do pretty well in dim light. The bigger sensor really does make a difference, but only if you shoot in less than ideal conditions.

9 months agopermalink

tkbslc

The lens is too slow to use in "less than ideal" conditions, though.

9 months agopermalink

ogl

The details are not better

9 months agopermalink

Chuckmet

I have been looking seriously at new 1" sensor cameras but when I compare image quality to my several year old canon G15 the increase in image quality is not enough for me to spend several hundred dollars and abandon my G15 yet. I shoot dslr's mostly and use the G15 as a pocketable carry around camera. And no I don't use it at high iso's so that is not an issue for me.

9 months agopermalink

Mariano Pacifico

I like the format of this DPR review .... it has a button for me to jump to conclusion ... which I always do.

9 months ago*permalink

vicsin

I can't believe someone would say they like this camera. I bot one and shot with it for approx 2 months and it let me down in 90% of the situations I shot with. Very fuzzy, grainy pictures. 4K Burst is a bust. All photos are either blurry, fuzzy or grainy at any setting including its own intelligent auto. Please don't waste time with this and definitely not money. I literally threw mine in the garbage cause I didn't want to be tempted to use it again and be let down again.

9 months agopermalink

samhain

But but but... DPR says it's a good camera overall and gets an 81% score!

I'd be furious if I was an unknowning consumer with a limited budget and bought this camera due to DPR giving it a good score.
Hopefully potential buyers will click on the comments and see posts like yours before they spend their hard earned money.

9 months agopermalink

KodaChrome25

I think it's appropriate to send out props to Carey Rose, Dale Baskin, and Scott Everett for the beautiful gallery for this camera. Well done guys! You have good eyes.

10 months agopermalink

Dale Baskin

Thanks! Always nice to know when someone enjoys a gallery.

9 months agopermalink

Kawika Nui

Does anyone have a link to download a PDF manual for this camera? The Panasonic website does not provide one.

10 months agopermalink