No magazine has had a real showdown

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Rich, Jun 2, 2006.

  1. Rich

    Rich Guest

    Take a decent DSLR (Canon Rebel XT) and then a high end P&S (Panasonic
    FZ30) and do identical shoots under a variety of conditions. Use two
    competent photographers familiar with the equipment, equip them with
    identical equivalent focal length lenses and shoot under a variety of
    conditions. That would go a long way to proving the utility of each
    Rich, Jun 2, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Rich

    RW+/- Guest

    Nice trolling thought, but no it wouldn't.

    Take that P&S Olympus you have, learn to use it, and you too could come up
    with some great shots. Then you wouldn't feel the need to post shots made
    my other people on your photo account.
    RW+/-, Jun 2, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Rich

    Dmac Guest

    Some pictures here from 5D canon, 20D Canon, FZ20 Panasonic and Olympus
    E300. Can you pick which ones are from the Panasonic?

    Also... is a
    Panasonic FZ20 picture too. Others in the Gallery are from a 5D Canon,
    FZ20 Panasonic and an Olympus C-760 Ultra Zoom Point and shoot. Can you
    pick which is which here too?

    Dmac, Jun 2, 2006
  4. Rich

    Dmac Guest

    Dmac, Jun 2, 2006
  5. Rich

    Dmac Guest

    This is precisely my point Rich. The most common use of consumer cameras
    is making postcard size pictures and uploading pics to web sites with
    the resolution you cite me for using. Lets not forget either that Canon
    Australia call the 5D a consumer camera too.

    Last year I shot 2/3rd of a wedding with my FZ20 when the DSLR I had
    died unexpectedly. All it meant was I had to crop the DSLR images to
    match the size of the Panasonic ones. No one knew the difference. The
    8x10s looked superb.

    Moreover, the bride's portraits (16x20 enlargement) shot with the
    Panasonic, looked nicer on canvas than I get with the DSLRs I use. Low
    light performance of the FZ Panasonic is head and shoulders above the
    Canon DSLRs. Canon don't seem to be able to reliably meter or focus
    properly in low light yet the FZ does it with consummate ease.

    You are an odd one Rich. On one hand you comment that no one has done
    any comparative testing and on the other criticize the "off the cuff"
    response of pointing to some examples from someone who has. If it were
    not for the fact the 20D/5D cameras look impressive and the lack of
    functionality with external flash on the Panasonic, I'd consider using a
    Panasonic FZ30 for Wedding photography instead of a 20D. I can tell you
    that I'll be the first in the queue for a DSLR Panasonic when they are
    finally released.
    Dmac, Jun 2, 2006
  6. Rich

    Dmac Guest

    One thing about these sort of reviews I find curious is that I don't get
    the same results. Most of the time, my results of non-Canon cameras are
    better and those using Canon cameras are worse. You would think the
    results would be repeatable, wouldn't you?

    In this case my results are "much" better with non Canon camera and
    'better' than the Canon cheap lens results. Why is this? Is the author
    trying to degrade the cheap lenses and consumer cameras? With the amount
    of advertising on that site, this is a very valid question. The
    following image is a 100%, full pixel crop of a JPEG image out of my
    Panasonic FZ20. is also from the
    Panasonic and the following image is a 100%, full pixel crop too.

    As for the Canon with a so called 'crappy plastic kit lens'... with the
    following shot a 100%, full pixel clip. I shot this pic with my (then
    new) Wedding camera which I was getting familiar with. Incidentally the
    one which dies in the middle of a wedding shoot a few weeks later. Thats
    when I gave the FZ20 it's most critical work out, completing the shoot.

    I shot the pic above with low sharpening and added unsharp mask of 200%
    at 0.2 pixel radius after developing the RAW image in Photoshop. No
    other alterations.

    Clearly the FZ20 Images I have are sharper than those used in that
    article. Clearly one of them shows it has the dynamic range the article
    pic don't seem to have.

    As for the Canon shot? It clearly shows there is no 'sharpness' issue.
    No Chromatic aberrations. That crop would show any CA or purple fringing
    due to it's position. True, the 17-55 is not a brilliant lens but it's
    not the total crap people around here would have you believe it is either.

    These are not sole instances. I have literally hundreds - maybe
    thousands of examples every bit as sharp and correctly exposed under a
    wide variety of conditions. It's true someone unpacking a FZ20 or FZ30
    and taking pics with it, couldn't expect to get these images but if you
    spent some time figuring the camera out, you can get stunning images
    with it, every bit as good as from a $8000 combo. Just goes back to who
    is using the camera, doesn't it?

    The Panasonic's weak spot (noise) is for many situations, a strong
    point. Grain in photos is a welcome change from the plastic smoothness
    Digital images are producing. Images from the Panasonic sensor look more
    like "real" photographs than other smoother images do and it really
    doesn't impact the photo until you make 20"x30" enlargements and then
    there are noise reduction programs and in fact, noise reduction in the
    camera itself.

    Dmac, Jun 2, 2006
  7. Rich

    Dmac Guest

    Interestingly enough, Noise is seldom an issue until you need to make
    very big (as in 20"x30") enlargements. Up to about 8x10 enlargements,
    noise is a pleasant benefit to an otherwise "plastic looking" digital
    picture. Photos from the FZ are sometimes mistaken for film prints.
    Never in your wildest dreams will a DSLR print ever be mistaken for a
    film image. Anyway... Programs like "neat image" and "Noise Ninja" are
    always there if the need arises.

    Another interesting point about these cameras is the working ISO.
    Because they don't suffer from mirror shudder like a DSLR, it is highly
    practical to use 1/30th exposures. If you switch the image stabilizer
    on, 1/10th exposure is very practical with a steady hand.

    I agree this won't do much good with moving subjects but rarely do my
    subjects move during posing. I can't recall ever having used ISO 400
    with my Panasonic. I very often need to use ISO 800 and ISO 1600 with
    the Canon's to keep the shutter speed up. I find it amazingly difficult
    to get a sharp picture with a 70-200 lens using shutter speeds under
    1/125th yet I can get them with the Panasonic at 1/30th due to it's
    short and light lens and lack of swinging mirror slapping against it's

    There is a place for both types of cameras. You just need to understand
    the different techniques needed to get the best from each.

    Dmac, Jun 3, 2006
  8. Rich

    David Harmon Guest

    On 2 Jun 2006 15:38:37 -0700 in, "Rich"
    Printing on canvas.
    David Harmon, Jun 3, 2006
  9. Rich

    Dmac Guest

    That does obfuscate the noise. Panasonic noise patterns are similar to
    film. They don't look all that bad on pearl paper either.
    Dmac, Jun 3, 2006
  10. Rich

    RW+/- Guest

    Heh, yes I can, and fairly easily too.

    You were kind enough to add the info to the photo or screen. ;)
    RW+/-, Jun 3, 2006
  11. Rich

    RW+/- Guest

    How can I prove that you could take better pictures if you won't do it? Eh?

    Now you can prove me wrong by making the effort to learn and bombing out,
    but that might be a bit embarrassing to you.
    RW+/-, Jun 3, 2006
  12. Rich

    Dmac Guest

    I was baiting Rich. It seems he wasn't interested.
    Dmac, Jun 3, 2006
  13. Rich

    RW+/- Guest

    RW+/-, Jun 3, 2006
    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.