Panasonic DMC-FZ20

"Ken" writes:

"Michael Meissner" wrote in message ...

My main quibble has always been the external flash interface -- when you shoot
in manual mode (which you need to do with non-TTL flashes), the EVF/LCD
reflects the actual aperture you select (ie, f/4, f/5.6, etc.) which means it
is very dark, and hard to frame.

Yes, it would be nice if the display gained up in low light situations. The darkend display
is actually a design "feature" that backfired on them.

I can understand it in the FZ10, since it was there first camera with an
external flash. But to repeat the mistake in the FZ20 after tons of people
have complained about it is just hard headedness. Every camera vendor seems to
have their own areas of blindness, that no amount of clue-by-4's seem to
overcome.

A secondary quibble is the placement of the memory door in the battery
compartment, which means you have to remove the camera from the flash bracket
or tripod just to change memory cards. Having the tripod screw that close to
the battery door means you can't use any of the standard quick release
adaptors.

I solved the tripod hole problem by making a simple adapter. I can keep a tripod quick release
plate on the camera and still change the battery or memory card. Still have to take the camera
off the tripod but at least I don't have to remove the quick release plate.

http://ken.smugmug.com/photos/17316489-L.jpg

There is a guy on ebay that is selling a FZ-20 tripod adapter for $12. Not quite as versatile
as the one I designed but better than nothing.

http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZrobobear

Yep. I just don't get why manufacturers seem to go out of their way to put in
tripod sockets that aren't at the nodal point, made out of metal, and far
enough away from the battery door so quick release mechanisms can be used. I
get the sense that some of the designers just don't understand how a camera is
used by higher end users.

--
Michael Meissner
email:
http://www.the-meissners.org

"Michael Meissner" wrote in message ...

Yep. I just don't get why manufacturers seem to go out of their way to put in
tripod sockets that aren't at the nodal point, made out of metal, and far
enough away from the battery door so quick release mechanisms can be used. I
get the sense that some of the designers just don't understand how a camera is
used by higher end users.

Even thought I have never cracked the case on my FZ I have always presumed that
it was a design trade-off to accomodate the placement of a much more important
part of the camera's internal mechanisms. If it was placed there intentionally the person
responsible should be burned at the stake.

"Ken" writes:

"Michael Meissner" wrote in message
...

Yep. I just don't get why manufacturers seem to go out of their way to put
in tripod sockets that aren't at the nodal point, made out of metal, and
far enough away from the battery door so quick release mechanisms can be
used. I get the sense that some of the designers just don't understand how
a camera is used by higher end users.

Even thought I have never cracked the case on my FZ I have always presumed
that it was a design trade-off to accomodate the placement of a much more
important part of the camera's internal mechanisms. If it was placed there
intentionally the person responsible should be burned at the stake.

That's because manufacturers don't think it is important to do the job right.
They know they have to put a socket in, but don't take the time to design it
properly, possibily because they assume their market segment doesn't care. For
95-99% of the users, that is probably true.

--
Michael Meissner
email:
http://www.the-meissners.org

"Michael Meissner" wrote in message ...
"Ken" writes:

"Michael Meissner" wrote in message
...

Yep. I just don't get why manufacturers seem to go out of their way to put
in tripod sockets that aren't at the nodal point, made out of metal, and
far enough away from the battery door so quick release mechanisms can be
used. I get the sense that some of the designers just don't understand how
a camera is used by higher end users.

Even thought I have never cracked the case on my FZ I have always presumed
that it was a design trade-off to accomodate the placement of a much more
important part of the camera's internal mechanisms. If it was placed there
intentionally the person responsible should be burned at the stake.

That's because manufacturers don't think it is important to do the job right.
They know they have to put a socket in, but don't take the time to design it
properly, possibily because they assume their market segment doesn't care. For
95-99% of the users, that is probably true.

The consumer is as much to blame as the manufacturer. If the consumers were willing
to pay for what it costs to design a product for maximum functionality the manufacturers
would be more than willing to provide it for them. Consumers are typically frugal *******s
who want the best products for prices much less than what manufacturers can afford to
produce them. Manufacturers have to keep product costs down to appeal to the market
segment that can afford them and if that means placing the tripod socket off to one side
the consumer shares in the blame. I don't think it fair to blame the manufacturers exclusively.
The old adage that you get what you pay for is as true today as it was when it was
first coined.

Ken wrote:

"Michael Meissner" wrote in message ...


"Ken" writes:



"Michael Meissner" wrote in message
...



Yep. I just don't get why manufacturers seem to go out of their way to put
in tripod sockets that aren't at the nodal point, made out of metal, and
far enough away from the battery door so quick release mechanisms can be
used. I get the sense that some of the designers just don't understand how
a camera is used by higher end users.


Even thought I have never cracked the case on my FZ I have always presumed
that it was a design trade-off to accomodate the placement of a much more
important part of the camera's internal mechanisms. If it was placed there
intentionally the person responsible should be burned at the stake.


That's because manufacturers don't think it is important to do the job right.
They know they have to put a socket in, but don't take the time to design it
properly, possibily because they assume their market segment doesn't care. For
95-99% of the users, that is probably true.



The consumer is as much to blame as the manufacturer. If the consumers were willing
to pay for what it costs to design a product for maximum functionality the manufacturers
would be more than willing to provide it for them. Consumers are typically frugal *******s
who want the best products for prices much less than what manufacturers can afford to
produce them.


That because they want the consumers to support those piggish upper
management *******s. Look at Carli at HP. That is bull****!

Manufacturers have to keep product costs down to appeal to the market
segment that can afford them and if that means placing the tripod socket off to one side
the consumer shares in the blame. I don't think it fair to blame the manufacturers exclusively.
The old adage that you get what you pay for

Yeh, that is why a DSLR costs about 4 time more than an SLR.

is as true today as it was when it was
first coined.

Yep. I just don't get why manufacturers seem to go out of their
way to put
in tripod sockets that aren't at the nodal point, made out of
metal, and
far enough away from the battery door so quick release mechanisms
can be
used. I get the sense that some of the designers just don't
understand how
a camera is used by higher end users.

With many cameras, having the socket under the lens centre would add
6mm to the camera height to allow for the socket depth. I think it is
a case of trying to keep the dimensions down.

BTW, as with other computer driven projects, does firmware for cameras
get updated/new versions???? Has anyone managed to extract and reverse
engineer a cameras "BIOS". I would have thought that with a USB
connection, this should be possible.

wrote:
[]
BTW, as with other computer driven projects, does firmware for cameras
get updated/new versions???? Has anyone managed to extract and
reverse engineer a cameras "BIOS". I would have thought that with a
USB connection, this should be possible.

Yes, the firmware for my Nikon Cameras has had one update for each model,
as I recall.

Someone reverse engineered the Canon BIOS for the deliberately crippled
300 DSLR, and uncrippled many of the features....

Cheers,
David

Ken wrote:

"Pete Fenelon" wrote in message ...
Rob wrote:
Fuji has little things like a lanyard on the lens cap

My main quibble with the FZs, apart from the terrible neck strap!

I hope you didn't buy it just for the neck strap. You forgot to snipe about
the off center tripod hole and the lack of a swivel LCD. I personally bought
it for the quality of the optics, the IS and the beautiful f2.8 12x zoom lens.
I can forgive them the mediocre neck strap and the lack of lens cap tether.

Indeed. A few quid on a decent Tamrac strap and I was using the camera
in comfort. The lens is astonishingly good (it's still surprising me
after nine months with an FZ10), and the combination of f2.8 and IS means
that you rarely need a tripod!

pete
--
"Send lawyers, guns and money...."