Panasonic DMC-FZ30

Discussion in 'Panasonic Lumix' started by Al, Oct 2, 2005.

  1. Al

    Al Guest

    I'm thinking about buying.

    Any personal reviews?

    Pros?

    Cons?

    Thanks,

    Al
     
    Al, Oct 2, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Al

    Ork . Guest

    Every review I read is comlimentary..
    I like my Z20 very much..
     
    Ork ., Oct 2, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Al

    Kieran Guest

    No experience of it, but the first(?) review available slates it for the
    presence of noise in all but the lowest ISO speeds:

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz30/

    Tara,

    K
     
    Kieran, Oct 2, 2005
    #3
  4. Al

    Kieran Guest

    Kieran, Oct 2, 2005
    #4
  5. David J Taylor, Oct 2, 2005
    #5
  6. Al

    Paul Allen Guest

    People keep repeating this business about "overwhelming noise levels".
    This is only true at high ISO levels. The dpreview comparison with the
    FZ20 found nearly identical noise at ISO 80:

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz30/page11.asp

    I don't have a DSLR, so I don't expect to magically be able to shoot
    above ISO 100. I carry a tripod for my current non-stabilized Oly
    C-700, and my next camera will probably have a stabilized long zoom
    and not be usable above ISO 100. The FZ30, considered as a package,
    is tremendously appealing. I don't really want to go back to messing
    with multiple lenses and I want a long zoom range, so I'm stuck with
    the limitations of small-sensor cameras.

    I've gotten over it. You can too. :)

    Paul Allen
     
    Paul Allen, Oct 2, 2005
    #6
  7. Al

    l e o Guest


    I found myself constantly need to set my 20D to ISO 400-800 to capture
    running dogs and kids. Also, the speed of AF is very crucial. Well, it
    all comes down to the types of photography you do. If your scene is
    static, you would not have to worry about how slow your camera is.
     
    l e o, Oct 3, 2005
    #7
  8. Al

    Alturas Guest

    The handling characteristic of the Lumix long zoom models are nothing
    short of excellent. Ergonomics make them nearly effortless to use
    (FZ20 in my case). The only complaints I have are controlling red
    flare at long telephoto and a relatively minor corner blur problem,
    which isn't unique to this brand. I will stay loyal to Panasonic/Lumix
    if they keep improving it, which I'm sure they will. It makes many of
    the costlier Canons, etc. seem overrated.

    Alturas
     
    Alturas, Oct 3, 2005
    #8
  9. Al

    Alturas Guest

    See my other post(s) for some relatively minor cons. The lens also
    lacks the FZ20's constant F2.8 across the whole zoom range. It's
    unclear why they changed it but F3.7 is still pretty fast for the far
    end.

    Other than that, I don't think you'll find a more "athletic" handling
    camera if you don't mind the relative bulk. The size is helpful in
    stabilizing shots anyhow. The optical image stabilizer (OIS) has
    allowed me to take long zoom hand-helds at 1/10th of a second with
    good sharpness. Controls are placed so you can change settings with no
    fumbling and I think the EVF is fine for focusing, despite some
    criticisms.

    Alturas
     
    Alturas, Oct 3, 2005
    #9
  10. l e o wrote:
    []
    "You pays your money and takes your choice". If you want to make movies
    of those dogs and kids, you will need another camera. I used to think of
    movie mode as a gimmick, but short scenes with sound can be very effective
    in capturing atmosphere.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Oct 3, 2005
    #10
  11. Al

    l e o Guest

    Oh no, I am not talking about movie modes from a tiny camera. I am
    talking about beautiful "big" still pictures capturing their movement!
     
    l e o, Oct 3, 2005
    #11
  12. I know you weren't talking about movie modes. I was suggesting you try
    them and see how a small movie can help capture the moment in a different
    way from a big still picture. They're complementary - not mutually
    exclusive.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Oct 3, 2005
    #12
  13. Al

    l e o Guest


    Yes, I have a DV camcorder to do the job right and I make edit the
    footage and put on DVDs. I wish I have money to upgrade to HDV. I
    suggest, by that time, HD-DVD will be available.
     
    l e o, Oct 3, 2005
    #13
  14. Al

    l e o Guest


    And one more thing, a still picture can capture crisp action without
    motion blur that you get from a still camera movie mode or camcorder.
     
    l e o, Oct 3, 2005
    #14
  15. l e o wrote:
    []
    I hadn't appreciated that, Leo! The best of both worlds.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Oct 3, 2005
    #15
  16. Al

    Malcolm Guest

    I don't have a DSLR, so I don't expect to magically be able to shoot

    Why should we be stuck with the limitations of a small sensor! Sony have a
    large sensor in their R1.

    I have an Oly C750. It is still a good camera. I won't upgrade until I can
    get something like a Canon S2 or FZ20 with a large sensor. I would like to
    see negligible noise at ISO 400 and useable at ISO 800.

    Malcolm
     
    Malcolm, Oct 3, 2005
    #16
  17. Al

    Paul Allen Guest

    I currently have a 10x zoom. The R1 does have a nice large sensor, but
    it only has a 5x zoom and stops way down to F4.8 at the long end. If
    one wants the long zoom, the R1 is not a choice.
    You'll never see a lens with range equivalent to the S2 or the FZ20 on a
    camera with an APS-size sensor. It would have to be either physically
    huge or so slow as to be unusable. The only hope you have is in some
    sort of physics-defying magic in a small sensor. Or, replicate the long
    zoom range with a DSLR and a bag of heavy lenses.

    Paul Allen
     
    Paul Allen, Oct 3, 2005
    #17
  18. Absolutely! We're near a sweet spot right now for compact long-zoom
    cameras. Going to a larger sensor may reduce noise, but does nothing for
    size or weight.

    Just perhaps a slightly larger sensor (perhaps 8.8 x 6.6mm or 12.8 x
    9.6mm), keeping the megapixels down to 5 or 6 (to maximise physical pixel
    size), and some of the Fuji magic would give us some worthwhile
    improvement without compromising size too much.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Oct 3, 2005
    #18
  19. Al

    Ed Guest

    I just got a FZ30 and sold my C750. There is no comparison. The FZ30 has
    so much better resolution and lower noise at high ISO (200-400).
    Throw in the stabilizer, higher resolution viewfinder and LCD screen and the
    mechanical zoom control, and it is a huge step up in picture quality and
    ergonomics.

    I agree, the only feature you give up, is not being able to stick it in your
    coat pocket.
    Ed
     
    Ed, Oct 4, 2005
    #19
  20. Al

    Ed Guest

    One more thing. The Chromatic Aberration on the FZ is far better than the
    C750 at high zoom.
    ed
     
    Ed, Oct 4, 2005
    #20
    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.