A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital ZLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

FZ50



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 11th 06, 11:08 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
Bill Again
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default FZ50

I have just found a site publishing examples of the FZ50 output and am,
frankly, disappointed.

http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...dmc_fz50_4.php

These pictures look as though they have been through a heavy-handed cheap
"noise reducer" software! To my mind there is a massive absence of the sort
of detail that one ought to expect.

My FZ30 has far better output than I am seeing here.

What do others think?

Bill


  #2  
Old September 11th 06, 02:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
measekite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 821
Default FZ50

Without seeing an actual print, I would think it would be difficult to
draw any conclusions from looking at an online photograph. I guess we
will have to wait for some good reviews.

Bill Again wrote:

I have just found a site publishing examples of the FZ50 output and am,
frankly, disappointed.

http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...dmc_fz50_4.php

These pictures look as though they have been through a heavy-handed cheap
"noise reducer" software! To my mind there is a massive absence of the sort
of detail that one ought to expect.

My FZ30 has far better output than I am seeing here.

What do others think?

Bill




  #3  
Old September 11th 06, 03:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
Daniel Silevitch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 380
Default FZ50

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 13:52:17 GMT, measekite wrote:
Without seeing an actual print, I would think it would be difficult to
draw any conclusions from looking at an online photograph. I guess we
will have to wait for some good reviews.

Bill Again wrote:

I have just found a site publishing examples of the FZ50 output and am,
frankly, disappointed.

http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...dmc_fz50_4.php

These pictures look as though they have been through a heavy-handed cheap
"noise reducer" software! To my mind there is a massive absence of the sort
of detail that one ought to expect.

My FZ30 has far better output than I am seeing here.

What do others think?


DPReview put up a fairly comprehensive review a couple of days ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ50/

-dms
  #4  
Old September 12th 06, 11:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
Jan Böhme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 118
Default FZ50

Daniel Silevitch skrev:

DPReview put up a fairly comprehensive review a couple of days ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ50/


It was pretty positive, and ended with a Highly recommended rating,
though with a notice that this was only just so, and that the one
negative factor was image quality - not noise this time, as much as
indiscriminate noise reduction..

However, something like half of the Panasonic forum at dpreview are up
in arms against this review. It would seem as if The Camera To Worship
in this forum is the FZ30, and lots of people there took it really
personal when that one missed the Highly Recommended rating by a hair's
breadth a year ago. Thus, the more positive rating of the FZ50 now, is
widely regarded as a Grossly Unfair Injustice to The Camera To Worship.

Queer lot, photographers.

Jan Böhme
(FZ20 owner, thus neutral in the conflict)

  #5  
Old September 12th 06, 12:20 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
David J Taylor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 965
Default FZ50

Jan Böhme wrote:
Daniel Silevitch skrev:

DPReview put up a fairly comprehensive review a couple of days ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ50/


It was pretty positive, and ended with a Highly recommended rating,
though with a notice that this was only just so, and that the one
negative factor was image quality - not noise this time, as much as
indiscriminate noise reduction..

However, something like half of the Panasonic forum at dpreview are up
in arms against this review. It would seem as if The Camera To Worship
in this forum is the FZ30, and lots of people there took it really
personal when that one missed the Highly Recommended rating by a
hair's breadth a year ago. Thus, the more positive rating of the FZ50
now, is widely regarded as a Grossly Unfair Injustice to The Camera
To Worship.

Queer lot, photographers.

Jan Böhme
(FZ20 owner, thus neutral in the conflict)


Interesting - I was recently sent a photo from a Canon S3 IS and whilst it
was less noisy than the FZ5 equivalent (when viewed full-screen) it was
also less sharp. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of choices in
noise-reduction versus sharpness and that Canon, not having as good a lens
as that on the Panasonic FZ5/20 etc., have a less sharp image, and can
therefore use more noise reduction with less effect on the (already less
sharp) image quality. Perhaps Panasonic are now trying to make their
noise reduction nearer to what Canon do?

The FZ50 is much too big and heavy a camera for me as I'm so used to the
easy-to-carry FZ5!

David


  #6  
Old September 12th 06, 01:40 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
Bill Again
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default FZ50


"David J Taylor"
wrote in message news
Jan Böhme wrote:
Daniel Silevitch skrev:

DPReview put up a fairly comprehensive review a couple of days ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ50/


It was pretty positive, and ended with a Highly recommended rating,
though with a notice that this was only just so, and that the one
negative factor was image quality - not noise this time, as much as
indiscriminate noise reduction..

However, something like half of the Panasonic forum at dpreview are up
in arms against this review. It would seem as if The Camera To Worship
in this forum is the FZ30, and lots of people there took it really
personal when that one missed the Highly Recommended rating by a
hair's breadth a year ago. Thus, the more positive rating of the FZ50
now, is widely regarded as a Grossly Unfair Injustice to The Camera
To Worship.

Queer lot, photographers.

Jan Böhme
(FZ20 owner, thus neutral in the conflict)


Interesting - I was recently sent a photo from a Canon S3 IS and whilst it
was less noisy than the FZ5 equivalent (when viewed full-screen) it was
also less sharp. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of choices in
noise-reduction versus sharpness and that Canon, not having as good a lens
as that on the Panasonic FZ5/20 etc., have a less sharp image, and can
therefore use more noise reduction with less effect on the (already less
sharp) image quality. Perhaps Panasonic are now trying to make their
noise reduction nearer to what Canon do?

The FZ50 is much too big and heavy a camera for me as I'm so used to the
easy-to-carry FZ5!

David


I have used the FZ10 and now have the FZ30. My photo shop called me a couple
of weeks ago to tell me that they had taken delivery of several FZ50s and
wondered if I might like to take a look. I like the camera, I like the extra
"updates" that it incorporates and these are mainly an improvement or
enhancement on the FZ30. But I actually prefer the picture quality on the
FZ30.

My feeling is that I would rather have better picture definition with the
occasional noise problem, rather than have the camera take care of noise at
the cost of picture quality. In my opinion Panasonic have taken the wrong
path here. It might have been better had they made the FZ50 noise reduction
system switchable so that one could turn it off at will and retain the
option of better picture definition.

Bill


  #7  
Old September 12th 06, 04:13 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
measekite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 821
Default FZ50



Jan Böhme wrote:

Daniel Silevitch skrev:



DPReview put up a fairly comprehensive review a couple of days ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ50/



It was pretty positive, and ended with a Highly recommended rating,



I do not understand how a Highly recommended rating equates to a
statement of negative image quality. It seems that the purpose of
photography is to create images and not how great the camera is that
makes them. If you cannot get the best images than who cares how nice
the camera works.

though with a notice that this was only just so, and that the one
negative factor was image quality - not noise this time, as much as
indiscriminate noise reduction..

However, something like half of the Panasonic forum at dpreview are up
in arms against this review. It would seem as if The Camera To Worship
in this forum is the FZ30, and lots of people there took it really
personal when that one missed the Highly Recommended rating by a hair's
breadth a year ago. Thus, the more positive rating of the FZ50 now, is
widely regarded as a Grossly Unfair Injustice to The Camera To Worship.

Queer lot, photographers.

Jan Böhme
(FZ20 owner, thus neutral in the conflict)



  #8  
Old September 12th 06, 04:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
measekite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 821
Default FZ50



David J Taylor wrote:

Jan Böhme wrote:


Daniel Silevitch skrev:



DPReview put up a fairly comprehensive review a couple of days ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ50/


It was pretty positive, and ended with a Highly recommended rating,
though with a notice that this was only just so, and that the one
negative factor was image quality - not noise this time, as much as
indiscriminate noise reduction..

However, something like half of the Panasonic forum at dpreview are up
in arms against this review. It would seem as if The Camera To Worship
in this forum is the FZ30, and lots of people there took it really
personal when that one missed the Highly Recommended rating by a
hair's breadth a year ago. Thus, the more positive rating of the FZ50
now, is widely regarded as a Grossly Unfair Injustice to The Camera
To Worship.

Queer lot, photographers.

Jan Böhme
(FZ20 owner, thus neutral in the conflict)



Interesting - I was recently sent a photo from a Canon S3 IS and whilst it
was less noisy than the FZ5 equivalent (when viewed full-screen) it was
also less sharp. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of choices in
noise-reduction versus sharpness and that Canon, not having as good a lens
as that on the Panasonic FZ5/20 etc., have a less sharp image, and can
therefore use more noise reduction with less effect on the (already less
sharp) image quality. Perhaps Panasonic are now trying to make their
noise reduction nearer to what Canon do?

The FZ50 is much too big and heavy a camera for me as I'm so used to the
easy-to-carry FZ5!

David



The FZ5/7 is a nice camera as you say and small and light. While larger
(Nikon D80 or Canon XTi) and much more versatile, do you ever feel the
need or inclination to desire one of these DSLRs with a couple of nice
lenses to create enlargements like an 11x14 or a 13x19?




  #9  
Old September 12th 06, 04:26 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
measekite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 821
Default FZ50



David J Taylor wrote:

Jan Böhme wrote:


Daniel Silevitch skrev:



DPReview put up a fairly comprehensive review a couple of days ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ50/


It was pretty positive, and ended with a Highly recommended rating,
though with a notice that this was only just so, and that the one
negative factor was image quality - not noise this time, as much as
indiscriminate noise reduction..

However, something like half of the Panasonic forum at dpreview are up
in arms against this review. It would seem as if The Camera To Worship
in this forum is the FZ30, and lots of people there took it really
personal when that one missed the Highly Recommended rating by a
hair's breadth a year ago. Thus, the more positive rating of the FZ50
now, is widely regarded as a Grossly Unfair Injustice to The Camera
To Worship.

Queer lot, photographers.

Jan Böhme
(FZ20 owner, thus neutral in the conflict)



Interesting - I was recently sent a photo from a Canon S3 IS and whilst it
was less noisy than the FZ5 equivalent (when viewed full-screen) it was
also less sharp. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of choices in
noise-reduction versus sharpness and that Canon, not having as good a lens
as that on the Panasonic FZ5/20 etc., have a less sharp image, and can
therefore use more noise reduction with less effect on the (already less
sharp) image quality. Perhaps Panasonic are now trying to make their
noise reduction nearer to what Canon do?



The FZ7 has about the same image quality as the FZ5. But after reading
that the FZ30 has better image quality then the FZ50 do you think that
the (unannounced) FZ8 would have lower image quality than the FZ5/7?

If Panasonic increases the MPixels and keeps the sensor size the same
then the quality of the pixels and therefore the quality of the image
would be less. Maybe the answer is to look at the new Canon A series
with an 8 and 10 MP camera and check the sensor size and evaluate the
images.

I think that Camera makers are going to hit a wall with MP and sensor
size just like Intel hit a wall with Speed and Heat in their Pentium chips.

I still have not bought a digital camera yet. My Nikon is still being
used when I need to take photos. I have decided to either buy an FZ7 by
Thanksgiving or wait an additional 3 months for the next (FZ8?) but it
seems that the next evolution of the current models sacrafice on image
quality to provide more features and MPixels. I do not like the trend I
see.

The FZ50 is much too big and heavy a camera for me as I'm so used to the
easy-to-carry FZ5!

David




  #10  
Old September 12th 06, 04:29 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.zlr
measekite
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 821
Default FZ50



Bill Again wrote:

"David J Taylor"
wrote in message news

Jan Böhme wrote:


Daniel Silevitch skrev:



DPReview put up a fairly comprehensive review a couple of days ago:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicFZ50/


It was pretty positive, and ended with a Highly recommended rating,
though with a notice that this was only just so, and that the one
negative factor was image quality - not noise this time, as much as
indiscriminate noise reduction..

However, something like half of the Panasonic forum at dpreview are up
in arms against this review. It would seem as if The Camera To Worship
in this forum is the FZ30, and lots of people there took it really
personal when that one missed the Highly Recommended rating by a
hair's breadth a year ago. Thus, the more positive rating of the FZ50
now, is widely regarded as a Grossly Unfair Injustice to The Camera
To Worship.

Queer lot, photographers.

Jan Böhme
(FZ20 owner, thus neutral in the conflict)


Interesting - I was recently sent a photo from a Canon S3 IS and whilst it
was less noisy than the FZ5 equivalent (when viewed full-screen) it was
also less sharp. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of choices in
noise-reduction versus sharpness and that Canon, not having as good a lens
as that on the Panasonic FZ5/20 etc., have a less sharp image, and can
therefore use more noise reduction with less effect on the (already less
sharp) image quality. Perhaps Panasonic are now trying to make their
noise reduction nearer to what Canon do?

The FZ50 is much too big and heavy a camera for me as I'm so used to the
easy-to-carry FZ5!

David




I have used the FZ10 and now have the FZ30. My photo shop called me a couple
of weeks ago to tell me that they had taken delivery of several FZ50s and
wondered if I might like to take a look. I like the camera, I like the extra
"updates" that it incorporates and these are mainly an improvement or
enhancement on the FZ30. But I actually prefer the picture quality on the
FZ30.

My feeling is that I would rather have better picture definition with the
occasional noise problem, rather than have the camera take care of noise at
the cost of picture quality. In my opinion Panasonic have taken the wrong
path here. It might have been better had they made the FZ50 noise reduction
system switchable so that one could turn it off at will and retain the
option of better picture definition.



That should be incorporated in all future models but better yet would be
to increase the size of the sensor a little before increasing MP to
create a better image that can be enlarged more.

But somehow Canon and Nikon came out with 10MP cameras without
increasing the size of the sensor without sacraficing image quality.

Bill




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lumix DMC-FZ50 luk Digital Photography 15 September 7th 06 04:00 PM
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ50 image samples from DPNow Digital Photography Now Digital Photography 17 July 25th 06 10:12 AM
FZ50 annoucement David J Taylor Digital ZLR Cameras 7 July 20th 06 08:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.