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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 |