DMC-FZ35 gets (mainly) good review

"One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is
weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot
cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.

All things considered, though, the Lumix proved to be a worthy travel
companion. So good, in fact, that my Nikon D60 DSLR found its way out of the
camera bag only one day during an entire week of sightseeing."

From The New York Times
November 5, 2009

Personal Tech
A Camera Delivers The Joys of Auto Pilot
By RIK FAIRLIE

 

"David J Taylor"

According to the reviewer, the lowlight performance, generally, was good.
But, it's not exactly an indepth critique...

View the review:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/technology/personaltech/05camera.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

Take Care,
Dudley

 

always an excuse.

then you don't shoot much not to mention that it's a different camera
with different power demands. panasonic claims 470 shots for the fz35
which i consider to be 'especially brief.' real world shooting is
probably less.

 

And, that rating will be for shooting without flash or active rear display.
With heavy flash usage, half the rating. Add in the display, and you're
probably down to just over a hundred shots, if that.

Take Care,
Dudley

 

i doubt it's that low, but even if it does get its rated 400+ photos, a
typical dslr gets 1000-2000 or more. that may seem like a lot of photos
but as someone who does a lot of panoramas, one 'scene' can easily be
20-50 shots. it adds up fast.

 

That link is to a press release, so it's not likely to show any
critical evaluation. I'd also like to know what the noise level
is like. I really like my Panas but there's no denying that their
noise level is higher than average. I sure wish they'd go back to
no more than 8 MP for their small-sensor cameras.

 

They do say in the press release that those 470 shots are
according to CIPA standard. IIRC, that's with flash on every
alternate shot, 10 seconds ON period for each shot and one full
extension and retraction of the lens for each shot (I assume this
is not counting lens movements at power on/off). These are vague
recollections of the CIPA specs, so please correct me if I got
something wrong.

 

I'm not sure how the CIPA standards are determined / implemented. But, I'm
guessing that the flash output is not full discharge each time.

Just going by my own experience using cams in low-light, I have yet to use
one which achieves the stated number of shots.

I do much / most of my work in low-light, and the flash often is at or near
full output. Add in the rear display and I'm lucky to actually fire 1/4 of
the CIPA guesstimation. Granted, I tend to take longer framing each shot
than most photographers, but I still get a chuckle whenever I read the specs
on new cams...

Take Care,
Dudley

 

Sigh ... the troll who depends on what he reads online rather than relying
1s-hand experience with any equipment at all. Nothing more needs be said.

 

Nor will they compare which batteries they use. Which vary widely from OEM
to OEM. Poor testing methods results in garbage in = garbage out.

 

I'd think that the question of brand doesn't arise with
proprietary batteries. And there has to be *some* standard for
testing to be able to provide a technical specification. The
alternative would be a test result published with something like
"under normal shooting conditions" which will be so vague and so
variable as to be even more meaningless - for publication on a
specs sheet.

For real world trials, well, that's what independent reviewers
are for. But the results would hardly be precise enough to
qualify for inclusion on a specs sheet.

If we suspect or can prove that the manufacturer lied about the
test results, that's a different matter.

Even with cameras using AA batteries, a test would have to be run
with a popular brand while assuming that it has approximately the
stated capacity. Otherwise, the particular batteries used would
also have to be tested outside the camera and the shot capacity
statement would have to be accompanied by something like "This
camera was tested with battery model X, production batch Y and
serial #Z, which was tested to have xx% of the nominal mAh
capacity"

 

After keeping an FZ20 and an FZ30 together for quite some time, I
had a chance to sell either of them for a good price last year.
It was tough deciding which one to keep. I like the fast turn-on,
ring zoom, swivel LCD, etc of the FZ30, but I also preferred the
constant f/2.8 and overall out-of the-box image quality of the
FZ20. In the end, I reluctantly chose to sell the FZ20. I really
miss the constant f/2.8.