Lumix DMC-FZ50

Discussion in 'Panasonic Lumix' started by luk, Sep 6, 2006.

  1. luk

    luk Guest

    This new camera seems to have some rather
    remarkable features. 10 megapixel, 12X zoom.

    Has anyone here used it? Or is it too new?

    Comments?

    Luk
     
    luk, Sep 6, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. luk

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    Well, I have both the 50 and the 30. My shots have shown that the 50 isn't
    that great in picture quality. I blame in on the horrible noise reduction in
    the new Venus 3 engine. Images compared to my 30 just aren't very good.

    R
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Sep 6, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. luk

    luk Guest


    As you said, the features are quite impressive.
    A week or two ago there was a thread here on the FZ30.
    One person said noise was noticeable on the FZ30.
    at a 200 ISO setting. I wondered about improvements
    made on the FZ50. I'll look for more feedback.

    A non-SLR camera with tilt LCD and good zoom is
    what I'm looking for. And I prefer not to go below
    a 2.0 size LCD.

    Luk
     
    luk, Sep 6, 2006
    #3
  4. luk

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    It helps a little, but still isn't as detailed as what I am getting from the
    30. That is a 30 with everything except spot meter and spot focus set to
    factory defaults. This is also how I used the 50 only those two things
    changed. I think it is a clear problem with the Venus 3 engine and one that
    has been reported for the other Panasonic cameras that use this engine. They
    call it a painted look.

    R
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Sep 7, 2006
    #4
  5. luk

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    The thing with the 30 is that yes there is noise in ISO 200 shots, but there
    is also more detail than almost any other 12X 8MP camera. The 50 on the
    other hand has noise (the Venus 3 engine doesn't do that great of job) still
    but it also smears out a great deal of image detail. It makes me wonder what
    Panasonic was thinking. Now I have seen good 50 shots but they have been
    resized down compressing out a lot or all of the problem. Full 10MP shots at
    100% on screen look really poor even in bright day light with no clouds.

    Printed they are not a clear as the 30 shots printed either. I think the
    rest of the 50 is great, but that V3 engine is a really problem.

    R
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Sep 7, 2006
    #5
  6. luk

    sally Guest

    sally, Sep 7, 2006
    #6
  7. Wouldn't shooting RAW do an end-run around any post-processing by the
    camera's CPU? Since the FZ30 (and, I assume, the FZ50) already support
    RAW, that's probably an easier route to follow than trying to convince
    Panasonic to change their firmware.

    -dms
     
    Daniel Silevitch, Sep 7, 2006
    #7
  8. You'd have to find a third party raw converter, since most mfr raw
    converters simply emulate the in-camera processing.

    And then you'd have to shoot raw, which can be seriously painful on some
    small-sensor cameras, since they often have slower media write times than
    dSLRs.

    And then you'd notice the problem that the FZ50 pixels are well under 1/16
    the size of 5D pixels, making ISO 100 FZ50 images rather similar to 5D ISO
    1600 images. (Of course, that's not all that bad; 5D ISO 1600 images are
    quite clean. For ISO 1600, that is.)

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 7, 2006
    #8
  9. luk

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    The RAW files are better but still not as clean as the 30. I will see about
    putting up some 100% crops. I don't have a lot server space and even less
    bandwidth quota, but I will see what I can do. I went out yesterday (9-5)
    and shot pictures in bright sunlight with no clouds with both my 30 and the
    50 I have on loan from Panasonic.

    R
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Sep 7, 2006
    #9
  10. luk

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    I am not going to be able to post any samples, sorry. I don't have the disk
    space to post anything of value. I suggest that you go to
    http://www.dpreview.com and look at the posted images there. While many are
    resized telling you nothing about image quality there are some than haven't
    been.

    Besides what I say doesn't really matter. Digital cameras are like perfum
    and colonge, it is a very person thing. What I consider bad someone else
    maybe fine with. I don't like the FZ50, I think the 30 is better but that is
    me.

    If you should decided to give one a try I highly recommend that you buy from
    a place with a good return policy so you have time to check it out and
    decide for yourself without getting stuck with it if you don't like it.

    R
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Sep 7, 2006
    #10
  11. I am so glad I kept my FZ20!
     
    Dennis Pogson, Sep 7, 2006
    #11
  12. luk

    Paul Allen Guest

    Ummm... It is irrelevant what most manufacturer RAW converters do,
    since a particular one is being discussed, right? Do you know what
    the converter Panasonic ships does? I don't, since I don't use
    Windoze.
    Why the generalizations when a particular camera is being discussed?
    I took my FZ30 out for a hike in the North Cascades on Monday, and
    set it to RAW mode just for grins. The only pain I noticed was that
    I had to pop in my second Sandisk Ultra II 1GB card in the middle of
    the afternoon. I didn't notice the media write time at all. There
    has to be a measurable difference, since the RAW files are huge, but
    I didn't notice it.
    Geez, rub it in, will you? :)

    Paul Allen
     
    Paul Allen, Sep 7, 2006
    #12
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.