FZ30 PR, preview, and samples

P-P. Henneken wrote:
"Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise
(also at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially
for a camera at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good,
the sensor is obviously too small for this number of megapixels.
Don't get me wrong, not trying to start a flame here (hey, I just
ordered an H1, which can't be described as a noiseless digicam as
well...), just being objective. I also think that they should have
used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose some resolution but you
gain a lot in the image quality department. But alas, to satisfy the
market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad.
The rest of the camera I truly adore though. Very nice lens, manual
zoom and focus, big tiltable screen, great!

P-P.

The ability of noise to destroy any particular image is dependant on the
exact image viewing contidions. Whilst you can see the noise on the
sample images when viewed at 1:1 zoom on the screen (hence my describing
it as "some noise"), can you see the noise on these images when printed
out or viewed at normal size? I don't mean taking a magnifying glass to
an 10 x 8 inch print either! Vieweing at 1:1 on my screen corresponds to
a print width of 37 inches, not a size I have ever used. Personally, I
cannot agree with "extremely bad".

I do agree that there are lower noise sensors available (at least to some
manufacturers), and I do agree that for many purposes 5MP would be
adequate. 8MP is indeed market-driven. At a rough estimate, the
sensitive area per pixel is the same on the FZ20 and FZ30, so actually
having a larger total sensitive area should produce a net improvement for
images under normal viewing conditions.

Cheers,
David

Dave Sill schrieb:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05...sonic_fz30.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/

From the press release:

Hi -

thanks for the information.

The camera has all features (besides the "some noise") I would
like if the lens would have more wide angle.
The 0.7 adapter could serve the purpose but I do not know how
it works:
1) Is then the full zoom working (equivalent 24mm to 300mm) or is
the adapter only working when the lens position is wide angle?
2) Is there a remarkable reduction of the aperture?

Regards Udo

As mentioned I ordered an H1, beforehand I downloaded some DPReview sample
images to be printed as a photo. The ISO400 pictures coming out of the H1 I
also consider "very bad". So I ordered some 6x4 inch photo's with ISO400 and
ISO200 shots. The noise of the ISO400 shots was very obvious, even on the
6x4 photo's. ISO200, on the other hand, was fine, while on screen it's also
quite bad.

So what you're saying sure makes sense. A bit of noise on screen will not be
seen on the actual photo. But some pictures of the FZ30 contain that much
noise that I find it hard to believe (considering the tests I just did) that
it will not show on the actual photo. Let alone an enlargement! Okay, it's
an 8mp image so the actual "noise-pixels" will be smaller but still. That
being said, it's the result of the less-than-perfect 8mp sensor.

I really do believe that the 7mp sensor would have been a better choice. I
wonder what Fuji will release soon, the F10 images are really, really
outstanding in this respect (actually wanted that camera before the H1 but
the total lack of manual controls bothered me). If they can bring out an
image stabilized 6 (or 8, or 9...) megapixel camera with the same low-noise
as the F10 and with comparable specs/options as the S2 IS, H1, FZ5/20/30 it
will be quite some camera!

Greets,

P-P. (anxiously awaiting the iso400 noisebomb H1) ;-)

"David J Taylor"
wrote in
message . uk...
P-P. Henneken wrote:
"Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise
(also at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially
for a camera at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good,
the sensor is obviously too small for this number of megapixels.
Don't get me wrong, not trying to start a flame here (hey, I just
ordered an H1, which can't be described as a noiseless digicam as
well...), just being objective. I also think that they should have
used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose some resolution but you
gain a lot in the image quality department. But alas, to satisfy the
market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad.
The rest of the camera I truly adore though. Very nice lens, manual
zoom and focus, big tiltable screen, great!

P-P.

The ability of noise to destroy any particular image is dependant on the
exact image viewing contidions. Whilst you can see the noise on the
sample images when viewed at 1:1 zoom on the screen (hence my describing
it as "some noise"), can you see the noise on these images when printed
out or viewed at normal size? I don't mean taking a magnifying glass to
an 10 x 8 inch print either! Vieweing at 1:1 on my screen corresponds to
a print width of 37 inches, not a size I have ever used. Personally, I
cannot agree with "extremely bad".

I do agree that there are lower noise sensors available (at least to some
manufacturers), and I do agree that for many purposes 5MP would be
adequate. 8MP is indeed market-driven. At a rough estimate, the
sensitive area per pixel is the same on the FZ20 and FZ30, so actually
having a larger total sensitive area should produce a net improvement for
images under normal viewing conditions.

Cheers,
David

Udo Huebner wrote:
[]
The camera has all features (besides the "some noise") I would
like if the lens would have more wide angle.
The 0.7 adapter could serve the purpose but I do not know how
it works:
1) Is then the full zoom working (equivalent 24mm to 300mm) or is
the adapter only working when the lens position is wide angle?

Probably, the full range. It is teleconvertors which tend to have
vignetting problems.

2) Is there a remarkable reduction of the aperture?

I don't know, but I don't think so.

Cheers,
David

P-P. Henneken wrote:
As mentioned I ordered an H1, beforehand I downloaded some DPReview
sample images to be printed as a photo. The ISO400 pictures coming
out of the H1 I also consider "very bad". So I ordered some 6x4 inch
photo's with ISO400 and ISO200 shots. The noise of the ISO400 shots
was very obvious, even on the 6x4 photo's. ISO200, on the other hand,
was fine, while on screen it's also quite bad.

So what you're saying sure makes sense. A bit of noise on screen will
not be seen on the actual photo. But some pictures of the FZ30
contain that much noise that I find it hard to believe (considering
the tests I just did) that it will not show on the actual photo. Let
alone an enlargement! Okay, it's an 8mp image so the actual
"noise-pixels" will be smaller but still. That being said, it's the
result of the less-than-perfect 8mp sensor.

My own take with these cameras is to stick with the minimum ISO, unless
the "atmosphere" of a grainy photo would add to the image - a candid or
night shot for example.

I really do believe that the 7mp sensor would have been a better
choice. I wonder what Fuji will release soon, the F10 images are
really, really outstanding in this respect (actually wanted that
camera before the H1 but the total lack of manual controls bothered
me). If they can bring out an image stabilized 6 (or 8, or 9...)
megapixel camera with the same low-noise as the F10 and with
comparable specs/options as the S2 IS, H1, FZ5/20/30 it will be quite
some camera!

If their camera/sensor is truely as good as the reviews have reported, and
the lower noise is not simply achieved by image processing, then it would
indeed be a stunning combination. Why some manufacturers don't have image
stabilisation escapes me - it is such an advantage if you need a long
telephoto. It would be great to have ISO 400 as a usable setting rather
than a "high-grain scene" mode!

Cheers,
David

"David J Taylor"
wrote in
message . uk...
My own take with these cameras is to stick with the minimum ISO, unless
the "atmosphere" of a grainy photo would add to the image - a candid or
night shot for example.

True. Stick with the low(er) ISO settings. One additional advantage of the
image stabilization is ofcourse the fact that you can also use this to
decrease the shutter speed to have enough light hit the small sensor. Also
one of the reason why I wanted an IS camera.


If their camera/sensor is truely as good as the reviews have reported, and
the lower noise is not simply achieved by image processing, then it would
indeed be a stunning combination.

I find this
http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/fuj...s/dscf0461.jpg
an incredible achievement for such a tiny P&S camera! Okay, there is some
noise, but for an ISO400 shot it's very very good!

Why some manufacturers don't have image stabilisation escapes me - it is
such an advantage if you need a long telephoto. It would be great to have
ISO 400 as a usable setting rather than a "high-grain scene" mode!

Exactly. A reason why I wanted to wait for an IS Fuji camera but alas,
patience is not a word in my vocabulary... ;-)

P-P.

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken"
wrote:

One additional advantage of the
image stabilization is ofcourse the fact that you can also use this to
decrease the shutter speed to have enough light hit the small sensor. Also
one of the reason why I wanted an IS camera.

Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but
a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help
with moving subjects.

KS

"King Sardon" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken"
wrote:
Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but
a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help
with moving subjects.

KS

Obviously! But the first affordable image stabilized point and shoot
superzoom with f1.4 through the whole zoomrange I have yet to find! ;-)

P-P.

"P-P. Henneken" wrote in
.nl...
"Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise (also
at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially for a camera
at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good, the sensor is
obviously too small for this number of megapixels. Don't get me wrong, not
trying to start a flame here (hey, I just ordered an H1, which can't be
described as a noiseless digicam as well...), just being objective. I also
think that they should have used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose
some resolution but you gain a lot in the image quality department. But
alas, to satisfy the market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad.

The 7 Mpix cameras, like Sony DSC-P200 and Canon SD500 are now better
regarding noise than most 5 Mpix cameras.
Maybe the manufacturers will learn to handle the challenges of an 8 Mpix
sensor eventually, but evidently not yet...
The noise grain is so much larger and more noticeable than the pix
resolution even at 100 ISO.
/per

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 10:06:33 +0200, "P-P. Henneken"
wrote:

"King Sardon" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken"
wrote:
Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but
a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help
with moving subjects.

KS

Obviously! But the first affordable image stabilized point and shoot
superzoom with f1.4 through the whole zoomrange I have yet to find! ;-)

How useful would f1.4 be at the tele end? Other than to impress your
friends with the bulk of the glass, I mean. To go forward, we need
more sensitive sensors.

KS