Personal opinion - Canon G7 vs Panasonic Lumix FZ18

I used both cameras in the past year. Last year, I took my G7 for a
Dragon boat race held locally. It took great photos. This year, I used
the FZ18 instead. I have to admit that the FZ18 is a better camera
than the G7. This is my personal opinion based on the quality of
pictures that came up, as well as the power of the zoom lens. I must
admit that the Leica lens perhaps is the one that made the difference.
I also did took photos of the full moon using both cameras last fall.
Again, photos which were taken using the FZ18 were superior to the
ones taken from my G7.
For consolation, I do like the color swap and color accents features
of the G7. In addition, the G7 is built more like a tank than the
FZ18. Finally, G7 is also smaller and snug better in my pocket than
the FZ18.
This is my just a personal opinion after taking approx. 2000 photos
from each cameras in the past year. I could not believe it myself, but
that's the number of photos that were fired in the past year. I recall
a week trip in the wilderness took almost 1000 photos alone. Both
cameras are doing well, in terms of the wear and tear (on and off all
the time).

 

Avoid the Lumix FZ18 at all costs.

 

eugene wrote on Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:29:20 +0100:


They don't sell the Canon G7 any more do they?

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

 

While the sensor size remained the same as the FZ7 and 8 at 1/2.5 ,
the pixel count was pushed up to 8.3 megapixels from 6 mp in the FZ7.
Which in many peoples opinion was a backward step for such a
small sensor as the pixel density went from 24 mp/cm in the FZ7 to
FZ18 32 mp/cm in the FZ18. So that image quality when shooting
in less than ideal conditions would be futher compromised.

In the same way while the 12X zoom leica lens in the FZ7 was regarded
as a triumph of lens design, pushing it to 18X is generally believed
to have reduced the overall image quality.

Of itself the camera is OK, but compared with its immediate predecessors
in the FZ line, the FZ7 and FZ8 it's regarded as a step too far in terms
of pixel density and zoom capability.


michael adams

....

 

Hmm, all the reviews I've read were tepid. I.e. "Panasonic has created a
really nice ultra zoom camera in the FZ18, though once again, image
quality needs improvement."

Also, I read that it's best to shoot in RAW mode with this camera and do
your own post processing because the noise reduction on the JPEG images
eliminates too much detail, even at low ISO settings.

Panasonic has always created feature-rich cameras that leave a lot to be
desired in terms of the image quality.

 

There biggest drawback centers around noise above ISO 100. Either there
is too much noise or the over-processed smeared look. That is one of the
reasons I bought a Canon S5 IS. I also liked the articulating LCD.

 

Yes, the S5 IS or the G9 is a much better choice than the Panasonic, if
image quality is one of the main concerns. If image quality is a
secondary concern then the FZ18 is indeed nice. 28-504 is certainly a
lot more usable than 36-432 on the S5 IS, especially at the wide end.
Not everyone cares all that much about getting the lowest-noise,
sharpest picture, and will gladly sacrifice image quality for a wider zoom.

 

I guess there are those who think the purpose of a camera is not to get
great image quality. For them they prefer the journey than the
destination.

 

There are always trade-offs. The 28mm at the wide end is a great feature
of the FZ18, and it's not like the image quality is horrible. If you
shoot in RAW mode, at ISO 100, you can get acceptable results from the FZ18.

It's not a compromise I would make, as I'd rather get a D-SLR with a
wide-angle lens, but for someone wanting a cheap way to get a really
wide zoom range, including the relatively wide angle 28mm, the FZ18
would be okay, as long as they understood what they were getting into.

I should not have said "Avoid the Lumix FZ18 at all costs;" I should
have qualified that statement.

 

I can see that but I think that the image quality from the Canon S5 IS at
36mm wide is a better compromise. I like the menu system and the
articulating lcd better. You can also Zoom in movie mode. Not a real
biggie for me but some may find it useful.