View Single Post
  #3  
Old May 7th 07, 06:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.misc,uk.rec.photo.misc
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Canon G7, Panasonic FZ50, Nikon P5000 vs. low end DSLRs

On May 6, 4:39 pm, wrote:
I am still slowly considering for my next digital cameras. It was
still either the high end point and shot camera, or a low end DSLR
(which they are basically on the same price range). As some readers in
these newsgroup suggested, I went to the photo shop and try the
cameras in my hand. The following are my impressions. I welcome the
comments from others.
- Low end DSLR have a "cheap" plastic feeling. I know that this should
not be a factor for photo qualities. However, I feel uncomfortable
with the cheap plastic cameras. My old SLR cameras are all heavy and
made of metal... including the lens' casing.
- For P&S, I am still not comfortable for the fact that Nikon camera
was not made in Japan (as compared toCanonG7and Panasonic FZ50).
Again, some readers already suggested that where the camera is
manufactured should not effect the camera's quality). I am also sure
that a lot of the components of the cameras were not made in Japan.
- FZ50 is much bulky thanG7. I am still not 100% sure whether this
will affect my choice. I like to have the camera fit into my pocket.
The Ultra compact does not have extra features as the high end P&S.
- I tried couple of shots in the shop with theG7. If I am not
mistaken, the quality in FZ50 seems sharper than theG7.
- I do like the feel of theG7- solid. Except for the protective
shutter. If I handled roughly into my pocket, the shutter may be
dislodged. I wish they have a sliding steel cover (like in smaller/
compact Sony or Olympus models). I recall that theCanonA series that
I used for work had the cover shutter damaged during rugged uses and
it does not close properly now - although the camera is still
functioning.
- I checked at DPReview for side by side comparison betweenG7and
P5000. They seem to have similar features across. However, someone in
the newsgroup indicated thatG7has more manual features than P5000.
P5000 is smaller and lighter... but I can feel thatG7seems to be
built better and stronger. Picture quality that I tried in the shop
was not that great, but it could be the lighting too.
At the end of the day, I am still thinking eitherG7or FZ50... and
now tend to weight more on theG7for its compactness.... unless
Panasonic made one which comparable in features and price asG7. I am
a little turn-off my plastic quality of low end DSLR. If I am going to
that route (perhaps next time), I may think about higher end DSLR
instead.


I've got a G7 I carry in my pocket. It's on the heavy side, I've got
a big pocket, but still I've finally got a camera in my pocket with
better resolution my eyes. (The canon has 10MP and 6x optical zoom,
that's 10x6x6=360. My eyes seem to be around 250. My previous pocket
camera, a Fuji F10, weighed in at 6.3x3x3=57, really didn't cut it.
Though it was smaller and lighter.)

The G7, on macro and completely unzoomed, can focus close enough to
the lens that I can't avoid casting a shadow. Great for flowers and
ants and mushrooms, though I struggle with focusing on the right
thing. Picking up craters on the moon, the digital zoom actually
improves resolution, and the IS helps a lot. Images at 1/5 sec blur
but 1/20 sec are OK. Normally I keep the camera in program mode, with
digital zoom turned off, no flash, 10mpix images, lowest quality
("normal"). The G7 is interesting in that lowest quality results in
images between .5MB and 2.5MB, depending on how much detail it picked
up. Pictures with grass lawns tend to have high MB. Focus/motion is
always more of an issue than than image compression artifacts, so the
higher quality settings are pointless. I usually don't have a tripod
handy (doesn't fit in my pocket). I've tried taking pictures of
swallows flying by; even on manual focus it's pointless due to the
delay between pressing the button and taking the picture. I've been
reminding myself lately to take more story and cute-kid pictures --
even though they don't challenge the camera in any way, they're more
often what people want to see than closeups of moss spores.