OT? Panasonic FZ20, first shots in low light

Discussion in 'Panasonic Lumix' started by Ryadia, Jun 17, 2005.

  1. Ryadia

    Ryadia Guest

    Lets start a precedent for this group and accept a post clearly not
    about a DSLR, shall we?

    If anyone is interested, I shot some low light pics with the new
    Panasonic FZ20 I bought last week. I bought it to shoot silently inside
    churches and for those moments when the DSLRs are just too clumsy.
    http://www.technoaussie.com/gallery/FZ20-Pics

    I might point out it's performance in good light is not too shabby at
    all. And all the chatter about high noise in low light doesn't seem to
    be as bad in real life!

    Douglas
     
    Ryadia, Jun 17, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ryadia

    Juan Guest

    "Ryadia" <> wrote in message
    news:42b23e65$...
    > Lets start a precedent for this group and accept a post clearly not about a
    > DSLR, shall we?
    >
    > If anyone is interested, I shot some low light pics with the new Panasonic
    > FZ20 I bought last week. I bought it to shoot silently inside churches and
    > for those moments when the DSLRs are just too clumsy.
    > http://www.technoaussie.com/gallery/FZ20-Pics
    >
    > I might point out it's performance in good light is not too shabby at all.
    > And all the chatter about high noise in low light doesn't seem to be as bad
    > in real life!
    >
    > Douglas


    Yes, you are off-topic. Post this in rec.photo.digital, not here. Thank you.
     
    Juan, Jun 17, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ryadia

    Ryadia Guest

    Juan wrote:
    > "Ryadia" <> wrote in message
    > news:42b23e65$...
    >
    >>Lets start a precedent for this group and accept a post clearly not about a
    >>DSLR, shall we?
    >>
    >>If anyone is interested, I shot some low light pics with the new Panasonic
    >>FZ20 I bought last week. I bought it to shoot silently inside churches and
    >>for those moments when the DSLRs are just too clumsy.
    >>http://www.technoaussie.com/gallery/FZ20-Pics
    >>
    >>I might point out it's performance in good light is not too shabby at all.
    >>And all the chatter about high noise in low light doesn't seem to be as bad
    >>in real life!
    >>
    >>Douglas

    >
    >
    > Yes, you are off-topic. Post this in rec.photo.digital, not here. Thank you.
    >
    >

    Well smarty pants... the post is not off topic, it refers to DSLRs in 2
    different paragraphs. You ought to really study more before pinning on
    the star, deputy.

    Douglas
     
    Ryadia, Jun 17, 2005
    #3
  4. Ryadia

    Juan Guest

    "Ryadia" <> wrote in message
    news:42b24c8c$...
    > Juan wrote:
    >> "Ryadia" <> wrote in message
    >> news:42b23e65$...
    >>
    >>>Lets start a precedent for this group and accept a post clearly not about a
    >>>DSLR, shall we?
    >>>
    >>>If anyone is interested, I shot some low light pics with the new Panasonic
    >>>FZ20 I bought last week. I bought it to shoot silently inside churches and
    >>>for those moments when the DSLRs are just too clumsy.
    >>>http://www.technoaussie.com/gallery/FZ20-Pics
    >>>
    >>>I might point out it's performance in good light is not too shabby at all.
    >>>And all the chatter about high noise in low light doesn't seem to be as bad
    >>>in real life!
    >>>
    >>>Douglas

    >>
    >>
    >> Yes, you are off-topic. Post this in rec.photo.digital, not here. Thank
    >> you.

    > Well smarty pants... the post is not off topic, it refers to DSLRs in 2
    > different paragraphs. You ought to really study more before pinning on the
    > star, deputy.
    >
    > Douglas


    I am devastated by your rapier-like wit, Pancho. You state that it is a "post
    clearly not about a DSLR" in the first paragraph then tell me that IS by dint
    of the fact that you mention "DSLR" in your post. You add that DSLRs are
    "clumsy" in the second--is this to get "DSLR" into your post a second time in
    order to justify posting it in a DSLR group? Are two mentions of DSLRs
    sufficient to post ANY nonsense in a DSLR group? In your header you establish
    that your post may be off topic by adding a question mark after "OT". Are you
    contradicting yourself? If not, please explain how your post is NOT off
    topic, Einstein.
     
    Juan, Jun 17, 2005
    #4
  5. Ryadia

    Chrlz Guest

    Juan>> Yes, you are off-topic. Post this in rec.photo.digital, not
    here. Thank you.
    >

    Ryadia>Well smarty pants... the post is not off topic, it refers to
    DSLRs
    Ryadia>in 2 different paragraphs. You ought to really study more before
    Ryadia>pinning on the star, deputy.

    What sort of moron says in his original post that it is "clearly not
    about a DSLR" and then, when nicely told exactly that, complains
    sarcastically and says it's ok because he mentions the word?

    Yes, Douglas MacDonald, of course. By the way, your mediocre, tiny
    images (as usual, with blown highlights*, camera shake*, and blocked
    colours*) do not show ANYTHING useful about the performance of the FZ20
    in low-light anyway. Do you really expect an 800x600 image to show
    much noise? Do you really think they are examples of potential
    low-light problems? (And can a setup studio shot *really* be *that*
    bad??? (O: )


    * - None of these issues has anything to do with you reducing the
    images for web use. They simply show, again, you have little grasp of
    digital imaging.
     
    Chrlz, Jun 17, 2005
    #5
  6. Ryadia wrote:
    > Lets start a precedent for this group and accept a post clearly not
    > about a DSLR, shall we?
    >
    > If anyone is interested, I shot some low light pics with the new
    > Panasonic FZ20 I bought last week. I bought it to shoot silently
    > inside churches and for those moments when the DSLRs are just too
    > clumsy. http://www.technoaussie.com/gallery/FZ20-Pics
    >
    > I might point out it's performance in good light is not too shabby at
    > all. And all the chatter about high noise in low light doesn't seem to
    > be as bad in real life!
    >
    > Douglas


    The folks in the newsgroup:

    rec.photo.digital.zlr

    would probably be interested as well. I have stuck with the lowest ISO
    setting (80) when using my FZ5, and my observation is that at long
    exposures it may do an automatic dark frame subtraction. Haven't played
    enough to confirm that, though.

    Which, specifically, are the low-light shots in that gallery?

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jun 17, 2005
    #6
  7. Ryadia

    Ryadia@home Guest

    "Chrlz" <> wrote in message
    >
    > What sort of moron says in his original post that it is "clearly not
    > about a DSLR" and then, when nicely told exactly that, complains
    > sarcastically and says it's ok because he mentions the word?
    >
    > Yes, Douglas MacDonald, of course. By the way, your mediocre, tiny
    > images (as usual, with blown highlights*, camera shake*, and blocked
    > colours*) do not show ANYTHING useful about the performance of the FZ20
    > in low-light anyway. Do you really expect an 800x600 image to show
    > much noise? Do you really think they are examples of potential
    > low-light problems? (And can a setup studio shot *really* be *that*
    > bad??? (O: )
    >
    >
    > * - None of these issues has anything to do with you reducing the
    > images for web use. They simply show, again, you have little grasp of
    > digital imaging.
    >

    Ah yes...
    The dole bludger from South Australia's department of unemployment rear's
    it's ulgly head once again... Where you been charlie? The rock you hide
    under too heavy to slither out of before this?

    Douglas
     
    Ryadia@home, Jun 17, 2005
    #7
  8. Ryadia

    Ryadia@home Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
    message news:BLvse.51708$...

    >> Douglas

    >
    > The folks in the newsgroup:
    >
    > rec.photo.digital.zlr
    >
    > would probably be interested as well. I have stuck with the lowest ISO
    > setting (80) when using my FZ5, and my observation is that at long
    > exposures it may do an automatic dark frame subtraction. Haven't played
    > enough to confirm that, though.
    >
    > Which, specifically, are the low-light shots in that gallery?
    >
    > David

    Maybe your idea of low light and mine might vary.
    I thought f2.8 at 1/20th and ISO 200 was low light but on reflection, maybe
    it's just natural light indoors. anyway, to shoot the same with a 20D (hand
    held of course) would require 1/125th to avoid shutter shudder fuz so a 20D,
    DSLR would need to either be on a tripod or use considerable higher ISO
    number than the FZ. The noise thing is, I think, blown out of proportions
    too. If you can shoot a scene at 200 ISO which requires 800 ISO from a low
    noise camera, then high noise at high ISO doesn't have the same meaning as
    the numbers would seem to suggest.

    I though my post would interest those who use their cameras inside without
    flash. The inside shots were in my reception area which has no windows, only
    reflected light from the gallery area. I used to be able to take OK (hand
    held) shots with my 10D at 1/60th with an IS lens but I would never attempt
    that with a 20D due to the increased mirror slap.

    Over all, I think that I cannot do without my DSLRs but I also think that
    rangefinder cameras have a lot of benefit in questionable lighting. Although
    I had mixed lighting, Fluros, tungsten and daylight, the FZ read it better
    tahn the Canons do.

    Douglas
     
    Ryadia@home, Jun 17, 2005
    #8
  9. Ryadia@home wrote:
    []
    > Maybe your idea of low light and mine might vary.
    > I thought f2.8 at 1/20th and ISO 200 was low light but on reflection,
    > maybe it's just natural light indoors. anyway, to shoot the same with
    > a 20D (hand held of course) would require 1/125th to avoid shutter
    > shudder fuz so a 20D, DSLR would need to either be on a tripod or use
    > considerable higher ISO number than the FZ. The noise thing is, I
    > think, blown out of proportions too. If you can shoot a scene at 200
    > ISO which requires 800 ISO from a low noise camera, then high noise
    > at high ISO doesn't have the same meaning as the numbers would seem
    > to suggest.


    Living where I do, such light levels are not unknown outdoors in the
    Winter!, but yes, having the IS allows hand-held with the FZ20 where a
    higher ISO on a DSLR would be another way of getting a similar result.

    > I though my post would interest those who use their cameras inside
    > without flash. The inside shots were in my reception area which has
    > no windows, only reflected light from the gallery area. I used to be
    > able to take OK (hand held) shots with my 10D at 1/60th with an IS
    > lens but I would never attempt that with a 20D due to the increased
    > mirror slap.
    > Over all, I think that I cannot do without my DSLRs but I also think
    > that rangefinder cameras have a lot of benefit in questionable
    > lighting. Although I had mixed lighting, Fluros, tungsten and
    > daylight, the FZ read it better tahn the Canons do.


    Thanks for the report. I guess that low-light to me means inside churches
    where you're trying to photograph the architecture. I recently had some
    2-second shots with the FZ20 in Barcelona Cathedral with the camera firmly
    wedged (poor man's tripod) and was very pleased with the results. Laying
    the camera on its back is my favourite trick for ceiling photos, but the
    protuberances on today's cameras don't make this easy!

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jun 17, 2005
    #9
  10. Ryadia

    Alan Browne Guest

    Ryadia wrote:

    > Lets start a precedent for this group and accept a post clearly not
    > about a DSLR, shall we?


    The Charter of this group prohibits such direct discussion that has no
    link at all to DSLR's.

    Post in the .zlr newsgroup.

    OT: Those shots (link) show nothing about its ability in low light.

    A friend has the FZ20 and he does great work with it. He's a former pro
    photog, now semi-retired in a different line of business. His knees and
    back give him problems so the SLR kit is long gone. He does better
    photography from the seat of his car with the FZ20 than most people can
    do in any situation with any camera.

    Cheers,
    Alan.



    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
     
    Alan Browne, Jun 17, 2005
    #10
  11. Ryadia

    Alan Browne Guest

    Ryadia wrote:

    > Well smarty pants... the post is not off topic, it refers to DSLRs in 2
    > different paragraphs. You ought to really study more before pinning on
    > the star, deputy.


    With that logic you could have a 100% film discussion by dropping the
    odd comparison to DSLR images here and there.

    This NG, per the charter, is PRIMARILY about DSLR's. Please reread the
    charter at your earliest convenience.

    Cheers,
    Alan

    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
     
    Alan Browne, Jun 17, 2005
    #11
  12. On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:06:28 GMT, David J Taylor
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    wrote:
    >
    > Thanks for the report. I guess that low-light to me means inside churches
    > where you're trying to photograph the architecture. I recently had some
    > 2-second shots with the FZ20 in Barcelona Cathedral with the camera firmly
    > wedged (poor man's tripod) and was very pleased with the results.


    Do you have these online? Care to post a link? I am fond of
    Barcelona and I would enjoy seeing these photos.

    --
    Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
    Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
    questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
    --Josh Micah Marshall
     
    Ben Rosengart, Jun 17, 2005
    #12
  13. Ben Rosengart wrote:
    > On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:06:28 GMT, David J Taylor
    > <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    > wrote:
    >>
    >> Thanks for the report. I guess that low-light to me means inside
    >> churches where you're trying to photograph the architecture. I
    >> recently had some 2-second shots with the FZ20 in Barcelona
    >> Cathedral with the camera firmly wedged (poor man's tripod) and was
    >> very pleased with the results.

    >
    > Do you have these online? Care to post a link? I am fond of
    > Barcelona and I would enjoy seeing these photos.


    Sorry, no I don't.

    Folks, I'd suggest trimming any response to just the ZLR group.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jun 17, 2005
    #13
  14. Ryadia

    Ryadia@home Guest

    "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    news:d8ujg2$9r4$...

    >
    > This NG, per the charter, is PRIMARILY about DSLR's. Please reread the
    > charter at your earliest convenience.
    >

    Yes Sir, Sheriff, right away, Sir.
    And while we're at it sheriff, could you do the same?

    I'd really love to post all the instances you have stepped outside the
    charter of this group (and other groups) with your often irrelevant banter
    but sadly my ISP limits the size of messages I can post.

    Just the same, I'm currently running a script on the rec. group's postings
    to extract all your messages for close analysis of your non compliant
    activities. Rest assured Alan... We're on the case and will have all the
    evidence sooner than you can change your sig to comply with normal newsgroup
    netiquet.

    You may be able to change the rules to allow your own bad behaviour when you
    are host of the rules but you can't be a hypocrite and escape detection for
    long, mate. All else aside, you really cannot tell people how to behave and
    then do entirely the opposite yourself. I suppose you realize by now, the
    post was to bait you?

    Douglas
     
    Ryadia@home, Jun 17, 2005
    #14
  15. Ryadia

    Juan Guest

    "Ryadia@home" <> wrote in message
    news:42b33d0d$...
    >
    > "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    > news:d8ujg2$9r4$...
    >
    >>
    >> This NG, per the charter, is PRIMARILY about DSLR's. Please reread the
    >> charter at your earliest convenience.
    >>

    > Yes Sir, Sheriff, right away, Sir.
    > And while we're at it sheriff, could you do the same?
    >
    > I'd really love to post all the instances you have stepped outside the
    > charter of this group (and other groups) with your often irrelevant banter
    > but sadly my ISP limits the size of messages I can post.
    >
    > Just the same, I'm currently running a script on the rec. group's postings
    > to extract all your messages for close analysis of your non compliant
    > activities. Rest assured Alan... We're on the case and will have all the
    > evidence sooner than you can change your sig to comply with normal newsgroup
    > netiquet.
    >
    > You may be able to change the rules to allow your own bad behaviour when you
    > are host of the rules but you can't be a hypocrite and escape detection for
    > long, mate. All else aside, you really cannot tell people how to behave and
    > then do entirely the opposite yourself. I suppose you realize by now, the
    > post was to bait you?
    >
    > Douglas
    >


    Pendejo.
     
    Juan, Jun 17, 2005
    #15
  16. Ryadia

    Ryadia@home Guest

    "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    news:d8ujbi$9r4$...
    > Ryadia wrote:
    >
    >> Lets start a precedent for this group and accept a post clearly not about
    >> a DSLR, shall we?

    >
    > The Charter of this group prohibits such direct discussion that has no
    > link at all to DSLR's.
    >
    > Post in the .zlr newsgroup.
    >
    > OT: Those shots (link) show nothing about its ability in low light.
    >
    > A friend has the FZ20 and he does great work with it. He's a former pro
    > photog, now semi-retired in a different line of business. His knees and
    > back give him problems so the SLR kit is long gone. He does better
    > photography from the seat of his car with the FZ20 than most people can do
    > in any situation with any camera.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Alan.


    How hypocritical is that?
    On one hand tell everyone to post to a different group 'cause it's off topic
    and on the other contribute to the thread! Amazing stuff Alan.

    Almost as bad as posting a load of asci art pleading with people not to feed
    the trolls and at the same time join in and expand a thread from the very
    person you tried to get rid of. You expect fairness for yourself yet deny it
    to others. Just can't help being a hypocrite, can you?

    Douglas
     
    Ryadia@home, Jun 17, 2005
    #16
  17. Ryadia

    Bill Spanger Guest

    On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:31:44 -0400, Alan Browne
    <> wrote:

    >Ryadia wrote:
    >
    >> Lets start a precedent for this group and accept a post clearly not
    >> about a DSLR, shall we?

    >
    >The Charter of this group prohibits such direct discussion that has no
    >link at all to DSLR's.


    Clarification please:
    My Konica-Minolta Z10 has a single lens , a flip up mirror and is a DC.
    Is it a DSLR?

    Just kidding......
     
    Bill Spanger, Jun 17, 2005
    #17
  18. Ryadia

    Alan Browne Guest

    Ryadia@home wrote:

    > Just the same, I'm currently running a script on the rec. group's postings
    > to extract all your messages for close analysis of your non compliant
    > activities. Rest assured Alan... We're on the case and will have all the
    > evidence sooner than you can change your sig to comply with normal newsgroup
    > netiquet.


    I tremble in my stockings. I gladly confess to occasional off topic
    replies and postings, but unlike you I don't go out of my way to disrupt
    the group with a challenge to the chartered purpose of the group. That
    was the sole purpose of your post. Others have called you out on it as
    well.

    > You may be able to change the rules to allow your own bad behaviour when you
    > are host of the rules but you can't be a hypocrite and escape detection for


    Please indicate where I've changed the rules. And by the way, I am not
    "the host of the rules". There is no host of the rules.

    I co-auhored them with Thad. The "rules" were posted in news.groups
    when voted upon and were posted by Thad, here, when the NG first opened.

    As a courtesy to all, I have posted them on my website (link below) in a
    format that is easier to read than the plain text of the charter.

    So, you can read Thad's post of the exact wording and you can read the
    version I post and please indicate where I've "changed the rules"
    (Hint: I haven't, 'cause I can't).

    > long, mate. All else aside, you really cannot tell people how to behave and
    > then do entirely the opposite yourself. I suppose you realize by now, the
    > post was to bait you?


    I recognized it for the delicious apetizer it was and replied with that
    in mind. This NG is specifically about DSLR's, and that is what I
    discuss here in the main. I confess to occasionally joining silly
    sidebars like ABS brakes and x-posted silliness on "photography as art"
    with clueless Mikey. Most people 'drift' off topic here and there, and
    that is not, in itself, so bad.

    OTOH, if your "real" purpose was to 'bait' me for some pointless
    rattling over 'rules' of the NG then have it. I'll play on my terms
    while you make a fool of yourself.

    Cheers,
    Alan.

    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
     
    Alan Browne, Jun 17, 2005
    #18
  19. Ryadia

    Gizmo Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
    message news:U8yse.51757$...
    > Ryadia@home wrote:
    > []

    I recently had some
    > 2-second shots with the FZ20 in Barcelona Cathedral with the camera firmly
    > wedged (poor man's tripod) and was very pleased with the results.


    Shame the Cathedral was covered in scaffold and netting, as the outside
    absolutely stunning.
    It's about time they knuckled down and got to work on it .... they don't
    seem to have made hardly any progress with it since I was there in May 2003
    !
     
    Gizmo, Jun 17, 2005
    #19
  20. Ryadia

    Alan Browne Guest

    Alan Browne, Jun 17, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. David Geesaman

    300d vs 350d for action shots and low light

    David Geesaman, May 11, 2005, in forum: Digital SLR
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    308
    Steve Cutchen
    May 13, 2005
  2. dean
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    413
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    May 27, 2006
  3. Ryadia

    FZ20 Panasonic first pics

    Ryadia, Jun 17, 2005, in forum: Panasonic Lumix
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    298
    Dave Gillingham
    Jun 18, 2005
  4. Ryadia

    First shots with Panasonic FZ20

    Ryadia, Jun 17, 2005, in forum: Panasonic Lumix
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    370
    Alain
    Jul 9, 2005
  5. Brian
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    363
    Bob Larter
    Jun 14, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page