Limux FZ30

When taking pics using a DSLR one composes using the viewfinder. When
using an EVF I still recommend using the viewfinder. When using any
digital camera I recommend using the viewfinder. I see so many people,
the majority, holding a camera with arms outstretched composing with an
LCD that is constantly in motion. That is why most people do not get
great shots when using a digital camera.

Jan Böhme wrote:

measekite wrote:


Even if the FZ30 is better than the FZ20 and would be the choice if one
had nothing; I think that if one has an FZ20 then a DSLR would be the
path to go if you desired an upgrade.



I'm in exactly that situation. Although the FZ30 and a DSLR have
different strengths and weaknesses, one still only wants to own so many
cameras. Thus, the FZ30 will have to compete with the KM Dynax 5D for
my next camera purchase. A DSLR doesn't have a swivelable LCD, which is
a great plus for the FZ30 over both the Dynax 5D and my FZ20. OTOH,
reviewers say that the swivelable LCD in the FZ30 is rather awkward and
impractical compared to the competition.

Jan Böhme

Diamond Dave wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:26:29 -0700, Paul Allen "paul dot l dot allen at comcast
dot net" wrote:

When you get a chance, could you shoot some night shots with both the
FZ30 and your old FZ10? I bet that would help out a lot of us who have
been on pins and needles waiting for images from production FZ30's.


There's a lot of FZ30 pix in the Panasonic forum on DPreview and from what
I've seen they're pretty bad if they contain an shadow area. It may be noise,
I don't know, but shadows are grainy with the FZ30. Whatever it is, it's an
effect that I haven't seen in pictures from my FZ20. If/when I upgrade, it won't
be to the FZ30, it's more likely that I'll go DSLR.

You didn't say whether you were talking about the ISO 80 or the ISO 400
shots on the DPreview samples page. The ISO 400 images are awful, but I
don't see any noise to worry about in the ISO 80 shots. The one thing
that stood out was the dramatic CA in the macro shot of the Rolex. My
old Oly C700 doesn't do that.

That review does have a direct comparison between the FZ20 and the FZ30.
In the studio still-life shot you can see some noise in the gray-scale
and color charts in the FZ30 image. There's some noise in the FZ20
image but it looks less obvious to me. In both cases the noise almost
completely disappears if I view at less than 100%.

I'd still like to see low-light comparison shots with the FZ30 and
either the FZ10 or the FZ20. I know what my C700 does with a 4-second
exposure of a 45-minute old sunset. (It's pretty ugly!) I'd like
to see what the FZ30 and its kindred do with a similar challenge.

Isn't it nice to have choices? You look at the FZ30 images and figure
your next step is a DSLR. I look at the same images and see a radical
upgrade that is financially within my reach. You going to sell your
20? :-)

Paul Allen

measekite wrote:

When taking pics using a DSLR one composes using the viewfinder. When
using an EVF I still recommend using the viewfinder. When using any
digital camera I recommend using the viewfinder. I see so many people,
the majority, holding a camera with arms outstretched composing with an
LCD that is constantly in motion. That is why most people do not get
great shots when using a digital camera.

agree and disagree. I don't like the EVF on my present camera (oly
c-725) at all. In bright light, however, I HAVE to use it with my hand
over the camera for shade, where the rear screen becomes almost
useless.

There are occasions when I find the rear screen a boon and will use
it first, these being the time when I would have to find something to
climb on to take a picture. I find I can hoist the cam a fair bit over
my head and use the screen to get a rough idea of my subject, which
isn't ideal but better than nothing. I usually take a few shots as I
know at least some will not be good. I also find the screen better
when shooting very close to the ground and I'm not usually physically
up to getting down and dirty, so as with the high shots I can look at
the screen from slightly above and judge the shot that way. Again, hit
and miss but better than nothing.




--
Paul (And I'm, like, "yeah, whatever!")
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

measekite wrote:
Even if the FZ30 is better than the FZ20 and would be the choice if
one had nothing; I think that if one has an FZ20 then a DSLR would be
the path to go if you desired an upgrade.

I don't see it that way, the P&S and DSLR are two different camera types
each with their own advantages and disadvantages. For example, a camera
like the Panasonic FZ5 is much lighter, easier to carry, and costs less
than any DLSR with an equivalent image-stabilised 432mm zoom would be, but
the DSLR will do better in high-ISO situations or if an interchangeable
lens facility is required.

For the higher-ISO capability in a fixed lens camera, the new Sony is the
first example of a different, third path to take:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/sonydscr1/

David

Diamond Dave wrote:

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 16:40:26 GMT, measekite wrote:


Even if the FZ30 is better than the FZ20 and would be the choice if one
had nothing; I think that if one has an FZ20 then a DSLR would be the
path to go if you desired an upgrade.



There sure are a pile of FZ20 owners changing over to the FZ30 among
the DPreview posters. I just don't see it as sensible.



These are the people who think they will get better pictures by
upgrading. They may find getting some photos a little easier and again
they may not. While a real pro photographer can get great photos with
most cameras; a good camera will make it easier for him/her to do better
but the differences between the FZ20/30 will not change a sows ear to a
silk purse.

That said if the person is really excited about the new camera and
really believes the results will due better then many times that will
occur. Much like an athlete who does a lot better because he believes
in himself. On the flip side of the coin there are bound to be many who
are disappointed when they do not achieve the imagined gains.

I bought the FZ30 to upgrade from my c750. I shoot some theatre and the
results are much better (lower noise) with the FZ. Also, I didn't need to
bring a tripod due to the stabilizer.
You can see some comparison shots between the two cameras that I shot in my
house.

http://www.catskill.net/ekirstein/test_photo_page.htm

I just sold my C750 and put my Promaster 5750DX automatic flash on eBay.

Ed


"Paul Allen" "paul dot l dot allen at comcast dot net" wrote in message
...
Diamond Dave wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:26:29 -0700, Paul Allen "paul dot l dot allen at
comcast
dot net" wrote:

When you get a chance, could you shoot some night shots with both the
FZ30 and your old FZ10? I bet that would help out a lot of us who have
been on pins and needles waiting for images from production FZ30's.


There's a lot of FZ30 pix in the Panasonic forum on DPreview and from
what
I've seen they're pretty bad if they contain an shadow area. It may be
noise,
I don't know, but shadows are grainy with the FZ30. Whatever it is, it's
an
effect that I haven't seen in pictures from my FZ20. If/when I upgrade,
it won't
be to the FZ30, it's more likely that I'll go DSLR.

You didn't say whether you were talking about the ISO 80 or the ISO 400
shots on the DPreview samples page. The ISO 400 images are awful, but I
don't see any noise to worry about in the ISO 80 shots. The one thing
that stood out was the dramatic CA in the macro shot of the Rolex. My
old Oly C700 doesn't do that.

That review does have a direct comparison between the FZ20 and the FZ30.
In the studio still-life shot you can see some noise in the gray-scale
and color charts in the FZ30 image. There's some noise in the FZ20
image but it looks less obvious to me. In both cases the noise almost
completely disappears if I view at less than 100%.

I'd still like to see low-light comparison shots with the FZ30 and
either the FZ10 or the FZ20. I know what my C700 does with a 4-second
exposure of a 45-minute old sunset. (It's pretty ugly!) I'd like
to see what the FZ30 and its kindred do with a similar challenge.

Isn't it nice to have choices? You look at the FZ30 images and figure
your next step is a DSLR. I look at the same images and see a radical
upgrade that is financially within my reach. You going to sell your
20? :-)

Paul Allen

Ed wrote:
I bought the FZ30 to upgrade from my c750. I shoot some theatre and
the results are much better (lower noise) with the FZ. Also, I
didn't need to bring a tripod due to the stabilizer.
You can see some comparison shots between the two cameras that I shot
in my house.

http://www.catskill.net/ekirstein/test_photo_page.htm

I just sold my C750 and put my Promaster 5750DX automatic flash on
eBay.

Ed

Thanks for posting that, Ed. The noise results are a lot better than the
doom merchants predicted! I would do the same as I do on my FZ5, and
stick with ISO 50/80/100 for normal use, and only use 200 or 400 where it
was essential. The lower ISO pictures, particularly the lowest are really
good, with much improved detail and less "over-sharpening" in the FZ30. I
do see some effects at ISO 200, and I wouldn't like to shoot a face (with
smooth skin tones) at ISO 400.

How do you like the camera otherwise?

Cheers,
David

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:24:28 -0400, "Ed" ekirstein_atcatskill.net
wrote:

I bought the FZ30 to upgrade from my c750. I shoot some theatre and the
results are much better (lower noise) with the FZ. Also, I didn't need to
bring a tripod due to the stabilizer.
You can see some comparison shots between the two cameras that I shot in my
house.

http://www.catskill.net/ekirstein/test_photo_page.htm

I just sold my C750 and put my Promaster 5750DX automatic flash on eBay.

Ed

What is the shutter lag with autofocus working? IOW, how would the
FZ30 be for shooting kids scampering around in the back yard?

After having two Olympus Digitals, I finally feel like I have a worthy
camera. Has the feel of my old Nikkormat SLR from decades ago. The size
and weight are fine with me. Easier to hold steady than a mini digital.

So many great features that I appreciate after two previous digitals. The
zoom ring and focus ring on the lens. I like that I can switch between auto
focus and manual and macro without going through any menus (switch on side
of lens).

Fast turn on makes a huge difference. The batteries will last all day,
cause I can shut off the camera between shots and never worry about the
startup time. It is less than the time it takes me to lift it to my face
and get ready to shoot.

Love the swiveling screen so I can protect it against my face oils. I
almost always use the EVF to shoot and the screen to playback. They are
both clear and bright.

Of course, the stabilizer is invaluable for me, since I get some shakes.

It just has a great feel.
Just bought a Sunpak 383 flash for it and love the extra capabilities that
gives it.
Ed

"King Sardon" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:24:28 -0400, "Ed" ekirstein_atcatskill.net
wrote:

I bought the FZ30 to upgrade from my c750. I shoot some theatre and the
results are much better (lower noise) with the FZ. Also, I didn't need
to
bring a tripod due to the stabilizer.
You can see some comparison shots between the two cameras that I shot in
my
house.

http://www.catskill.net/ekirstein/test_photo_page.htm

I just sold my C750 and put my Promaster 5750DX automatic flash on eBay.

Ed

What is the shutter lag with autofocus working? IOW, how would the
FZ30 be for shooting kids scampering around in the back yard?

wrote in message
...
Hi Bill: And thanx for the reply.
I've been trying to make up my mind about which one of the 12x-zoom zlrs
to
buy for several weeks. And the FZ30 sounded like it was a perfect fit -
except for the noise problem that the reviewers keep harping on. If it's
something that only shows up in technical reports - and doesn't actually
look bad - I could probably live with it. When Costco gets them in stock,
I'll buy one. So if it's something I just can't tolerate, I know I won't
have a problem returning it. I guess we have to make some compromises when
we buy almost anything. And the FZ30 seems to have ALL of the bases
covered - even with the reviewers, except for the noise.
Have a good trip!

FWIW, I have the FZ20 and depending on shooting conditions there is
sometimes visible noise in my pictures when viewed on the computer. If I
intend to regularly viewed a picture on the computer, for instance if I turn
it into a wallpaper, I may process it with NeatImage to remove the noise.
However, if I'm going to print the picture it doesn't appear to make much
difference - the noise is not apparent in my prints and I go up to 8x10. I
don't know if there's a digital camera of any make or model that produces
prints that are completely free of noise if examined closely on a computer
screen. That said, it's still a good idea to buy the camera from a dealer
you can return it to if it doesn't work out g.