Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, sleeper?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 9:25:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?

Ok, I know, it's not a "PRO" camera, or a "DSLR", and it's only 5MP, but
sometimes 5MP is plenty! Its the other features it has, above, and beyond
that of many out there, that caught my attention!

Having a Leica lens, f/2.8 is impressive. It being a 12X optical zoom, and
maintaining it's f/2.8 throughout it's range, is something to take note of.
Add to that, it's image stabilized too!

I won't go into all the details here, as you can look them up, using Google.

Right now, Circuit City has a $30.00 Instant Rebate, and a $40.00 Mail-In
rebate, bring the price down to a reasonable $529.99. Their offer is good
until April 2'nd, 2005.

Bill Crocker
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 11:49:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:25:50 -0500, "Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net>
wrote:

>What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?

I have one and I recommend that you don't buy one.
It seems that these are selling faster than Panasonic can produces them,
I'd like to have a second one but ya'll keep buying them faster than they're
made and the price stays high and goes higher. So, buy something else,
tell your friends to buy anything except the FZ20. That's for everyone, don't
buy an FZ20, we need to have the supply surpass the demand to bring the
price back down to what I paid for mine in Oct '04.
Remember the noise level makes the FZ20 unusable in any condition except
full bright sunlight, the shutter release delay can be measured with a calendar,
the internal flash is extremely weak and it pre-flashes every time which
confuses slave strobes, the tripod mount isn't centered in the lens centerline,
and that over a pound it weights way too much for the modern foto enthusiast.
Avoid the FZ20 like the plague!
<There, that'll do it.>
March 30, 2005 12:10:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Have a look at images in the DPReview panasonic forum if you have any
doubts about the quality of images, and macro. We have the little
brother FZ15, and very pleased, especially the sharp 12x stabilized
zoom shots, remarkable.
DonB
March 30, 2005 2:06:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

No complaints with FZ20
My complaint is with Circuit City rebate
No check!!!!
No explaination!!!!

Mark
"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eN-dnYZF_LdzSNTfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
> What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?
>
> Ok, I know, it's not a "PRO" camera, or a "DSLR", and it's only 5MP, but
> sometimes 5MP is plenty! Its the other features it has, above, and beyond
> that of many out there, that caught my attention!
>
> Having a Leica lens, f/2.8 is impressive. It being a 12X optical zoom,
> and maintaining it's f/2.8 throughout it's range, is something to take
> note of. Add to that, it's image stabilized too!
>
> I won't go into all the details here, as you can look them up, using
> Google.
>
> Right now, Circuit City has a $30.00 Instant Rebate, and a $40.00 Mail-In
> rebate, bring the price down to a reasonable $529.99. Their offer is good
> until April 2'nd, 2005.
>
> Bill Crocker
>



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 2:35:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

It is really in a class by itself. I feel what it offers in relation to the
size makes it a very hard to beat combination.

"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eN-dnYZF_LdzSNTfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
> What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?
>
> Ok, I know, it's not a "PRO" camera, or a "DSLR", and it's only 5MP, but
> sometimes 5MP is plenty! Its the other features it has, above, and beyond
> that of many out there, that caught my attention!
>
> Having a Leica lens, f/2.8 is impressive. It being a 12X optical zoom,
> and maintaining it's f/2.8 throughout it's range, is something to take
> note of. Add to that, it's image stabilized too!
>
> I won't go into all the details here, as you can look them up, using
> Google.
>
> Right now, Circuit City has a $30.00 Instant Rebate, and a $40.00 Mail-In
> rebate, bring the price down to a reasonable $529.99. Their offer is good
> until April 2'nd, 2005.
>
> Bill Crocker
>
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:14:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"RHinNC" <rhinnc@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QKk2e.80298$wl4.2274924@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> It is really in a class by itself. I feel what it offers in relation to
> the size makes it a very hard to beat combination.

I was pretty high on these specs, too, but it was said the sensor is not up
to snuff: pretty noisy at ISO 400.

Check out www.dpreview.com for the samples.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:16:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bill Crocker wrote:
> What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?
>

I have a
- Canon 300D
- Canon 18-55mm
- Sigma 24-135mm (Bought recently to replace the kit lens)
- Sigma 70-300mm
- A tripod and a monopod

Carried the two sigma lenses, the tripod and the monopod to a night
trek recently.
- Left the monopod and the tripod in the car and started climbing up
and still felt that the bag was too heavy.
- Every now and then I felt the need for the kit lens because I felt it
could've focussed faster in low-light than the Sigma and the 18mm
would've been nice for certain shots.
- Sorely missed the tripod for full-moon shots of the village beneath
the hills.
- The climb was steep so couldn't leave the camera dangling from the
neck all the time so found it annoying to keep putting the camera in
and out of the holster bag all the time.
- Also with the exhaustion I missed casual snapshots for lack of
enthusiasm to pull out the gear everytime.

Would I have swapped all the gear for a Panasonic FZ20 or something
similar?? YES YES YES!!! Ok, I must admit that the photos I took of the
moonlit village at ISO 1600 were respectable if you ignore the blur for
the lack of a tripod and thats something no P&S can match because their
CCDs are simply not equipped to handle higher ISOs but still.

I think I have started missing out on some casual photography because
of the heavy and cumbersome paraphanelia surrounding a SLR camera. I am
seriously looking at acquiring either a ZLR like the FZ20 or an
ultracompact like the Panasonic FX7 or something similar.

- Siddhartha
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:18:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

How long have you been waiting? They say it can take up to 8 weeks. I've
never had any problems with rebates from Circuit City. Here is some contact
info, that may be of help:

If you have any additional questions, please contact the Circuit City Rebate
Center at (888) 213-9761 or visit us online at www.CircuitCityRebates.com

Thank you for shopping at Circuit City.

Items that have been returned are not eligible for this rebate. You will be
unable to reply to this email because it has been automatically generated,
please direct any inquiries to the Circuit City Rebate Center at (888)
213-9761.








"M" <news@mtco.com> wrote in message news:424a2677$1_1@127.0.0.1...
> No complaints with FZ20
> My complaint is with Circuit City rebate
> No check!!!!
> No explaination!!!!
>
> Mark
> "Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:eN-dnYZF_LdzSNTfRVn-1A@comcast.com...
>> What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?
>>
>> Ok, I know, it's not a "PRO" camera, or a "DSLR", and it's only 5MP, but
>> sometimes 5MP is plenty! Its the other features it has, above, and
>> beyond that of many out there, that caught my attention!
>>
>> Having a Leica lens, f/2.8 is impressive. It being a 12X optical zoom,
>> and maintaining it's f/2.8 throughout it's range, is something to take
>> note of. Add to that, it's image stabilized too!
>>
>> I won't go into all the details here, as you can look them up, using
>> Google.
>>
>> Right now, Circuit City has a $30.00 Instant Rebate, and a $40.00 Mail-In
>> rebate, bring the price down to a reasonable $529.99. Their offer is
>> good until April 2'nd, 2005.
>>
>> Bill Crocker
>>
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
> News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
> Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
> =----
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:19:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dave R knows who" <kilbyfan@spamnotAOL.com> wrote in message
news:D jl2e.12657$m31.128897@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> "RHinNC" <rhinnc@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:QKk2e.80298$wl4.2274924@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>> It is really in a class by itself. I feel what it offers in relation to
>> the size makes it a very hard to beat combination.
>
> I was pretty high on these specs, too, but it was said the sensor is not
> up to snuff: pretty noisy at ISO 400.
>
> Check out www.dpreview.com for the samples.

Thinking about this still: Just checked the price: $550 on average. As the
OP said, you're not going to get that kind of focal range and that speed of
lens for that price anywhere else. So indoors or night shooting is not it's
strong suit, but you can get another $300 camera for this and still spend
less than you would to get those lens specs on a DSLR. I'd love to try one
for a week.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:34:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in
news:eN-dnYZF_LdzSNTfRVn-1A@comcast.com:

> What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?
>
> Ok, I know, it's not a "PRO" camera, or a "DSLR", and it's only 5MP,
> but sometimes 5MP is plenty! Its the other features it has, above,
> and beyond that of many out there, that caught my attention!
>
> Having a Leica lens, f/2.8 is impressive. It being a 12X optical
> zoom, and maintaining it's f/2.8 throughout it's range, is something
> to take note of. Add to that, it's image stabilized too!
>
> I won't go into all the details here, as you can look them up, using
> Google.
>
> Right now, Circuit City has a $30.00 Instant Rebate, and a $40.00
> Mail-In rebate, bring the price down to a reasonable $529.99. Their
> offer is good until April 2'nd, 2005.
>
> Bill Crocker
>
>

www.dpreview.com:

Cons:
# Visible noise at ISOs above 100
# Very occasional exposure problems
# Focus at extreme telephoto sometimes hunts, occasionally misses
# Low resolution movie mode
# Some red fringing at 12x/wide apertures (rarely seen in prints)
# Mode dial too easy to knock in use, changing modes
# Images can look a little soft viewed at 100% - sharpen up well though

How does this compare to the FZ5 in reality? Or the Konica Minolta DiMAGE
Z5?

Does it use an LI battery, vs AA batteries?

Also, I must have missed it, how good are the FZ20's macro capabilities,
say, compared to the KM Z5?

In research mode - this one is on my shortlist. Trying to choose, still.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 4:06:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula <ebabula@care2.coom> wrote in
news:Xns9628B2B92E8A8ebabulacare2com@24.94.170.102:

> "Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in
> news:eN-dnYZF_LdzSNTfRVn-1A@comcast.com:
>
>> What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?
>>
>> Ok, I know, it's not a "PRO" camera, or a "DSLR", and it's only 5MP,
>> but sometimes 5MP is plenty! Its the other features it has, above,
>> and beyond that of many out there, that caught my attention!
>>
>> Having a Leica lens, f/2.8 is impressive. It being a 12X optical
>> zoom, and maintaining it's f/2.8 throughout it's range, is something
>> to take note of. Add to that, it's image stabilized too!
>>
>> I won't go into all the details here, as you can look them up, using
>> Google.
>>
>> Right now, Circuit City has a $30.00 Instant Rebate, and a $40.00
>> Mail-In rebate, bring the price down to a reasonable $529.99. Their
>> offer is good until April 2'nd, 2005.
>>
>> Bill Crocker
>>
>>
>
> www.dpreview.com:
>
> Cons:
> # Visible noise at ISOs above 100
> # Very occasional exposure problems
> # Focus at extreme telephoto sometimes hunts, occasionally misses
> # Low resolution movie mode
> # Some red fringing at 12x/wide apertures (rarely seen in prints)
> # Mode dial too easy to knock in use, changing modes
> # Images can look a little soft viewed at 100% - sharpen up well
> though
>
> How does this compare to the FZ5 in reality? Or the Konica Minolta
> DiMAGE Z5?
>
> Does it use an LI battery, vs AA batteries?
>
> Also, I must have missed it, how good are the FZ20's macro
> capabilities, say, compared to the KM Z5?
>
> In research mode - this one is on my shortlist. Trying to choose,
> still.
>

After re-reading www.dcresource.com's review, I've found a couple things
I don't care for on the FZ20:

* Very big, bulky and heavy (for some that's a good thing, to feel solid
and stable)
* Uses proprietary li-ion battery ($50.00 a pop!)
* LCD and EVF virtually unusable in low light situations
* No strap for lens cover (pretty minor issue)
* Macro - 5cm away (as opposed to 1cm with the KM Z5)
* Noise level above average (esp. indoors), though, probably no worse
than the KM Z5 - maybe even better.

These would be pet peeves for me. At the $500.00 range, no camera is
gonna be perfect. I just have to realize that and pick whatever seems to
do MOST everything I need. The KM Z5 doesn't have an AF assist lamp,
which bothers me, too.

Still looking......

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 5:38:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I had to hold the camera in my hand, I read the reviews as well about it
being big and bulky but it fits my hands very well.

Also the proprietary batterys I do not care for, but found them for about
half what Panasonic wants (I bought 2 spares) and they last as long if not
longer than the OEM batteries.

Be sure and check this out as well on the dpreview site:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1033

Go back a few months and read what others who own the camera say.

HTH


"Eric Babula" <ebabula@care2.coom> wrote in message
news:Xns9628B839D7DE3ebabulacare2com@24.94.170.98...
> Eric Babula <ebabula@care2.coom> wrote in
> news:Xns9628B2B92E8A8ebabulacare2com@24.94.170.102:
>
>> "Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in
>> news:eN-dnYZF_LdzSNTfRVn-1A@comcast.com:
>>
>>> What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a sleeper?
>>>
>>> Ok, I know, it's not a "PRO" camera, or a "DSLR", and it's only 5MP,
>>> but sometimes 5MP is plenty! Its the other features it has, above,
>>> and beyond that of many out there, that caught my attention!
>>>
>>> Having a Leica lens, f/2.8 is impressive. It being a 12X optical
>>> zoom, and maintaining it's f/2.8 throughout it's range, is something
>>> to take note of. Add to that, it's image stabilized too!
>>>
>>> I won't go into all the details here, as you can look them up, using
>>> Google.
>>>
>>> Right now, Circuit City has a $30.00 Instant Rebate, and a $40.00
>>> Mail-In rebate, bring the price down to a reasonable $529.99. Their
>>> offer is good until April 2'nd, 2005.
>>>
>>> Bill Crocker
>>>
>>>
>>
>> www.dpreview.com:
>>
>> Cons:
>> # Visible noise at ISOs above 100
>> # Very occasional exposure problems
>> # Focus at extreme telephoto sometimes hunts, occasionally misses
>> # Low resolution movie mode
>> # Some red fringing at 12x/wide apertures (rarely seen in prints)
>> # Mode dial too easy to knock in use, changing modes
>> # Images can look a little soft viewed at 100% - sharpen up well
>> though
>>
>> How does this compare to the FZ5 in reality? Or the Konica Minolta
>> DiMAGE Z5?
>>
>> Does it use an LI battery, vs AA batteries?
>>
>> Also, I must have missed it, how good are the FZ20's macro
>> capabilities, say, compared to the KM Z5?
>>
>> In research mode - this one is on my shortlist. Trying to choose,
>> still.
>>
>
> After re-reading www.dcresource.com's review, I've found a couple things
> I don't care for on the FZ20:
>
> * Very big, bulky and heavy (for some that's a good thing, to feel solid
> and stable)
> * Uses proprietary li-ion battery ($50.00 a pop!)
> * LCD and EVF virtually unusable in low light situations
> * No strap for lens cover (pretty minor issue)
> * Macro - 5cm away (as opposed to 1cm with the KM Z5)
> * Noise level above average (esp. indoors), though, probably no worse
> than the KM Z5 - maybe even better.
>
> These would be pet peeves for me. At the $500.00 range, no camera is
> gonna be perfect. I just have to realize that and pick whatever seems to
> do MOST everything I need. The KM Z5 doesn't have an AF assist lamp,
> which bothers me, too.
>
> Still looking......
>
> --
> Eric Babula
> Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 8:50:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"RHinNC" <rhinnc@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:Nqn2e.1332$JL2.25271@twister.southeast.rr.com:

> I had to hold the camera in my hand, I read the reviews as well about
> it being big and bulky but it fits my hands very well.
>
> Also the proprietary batterys I do not care for, but found them for
> about half what Panasonic wants (I bought 2 spares) and they last as
> long if not longer than the OEM batteries.
>
> Be sure and check this out as well on the dpreview site:
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1033
>
> Go back a few months and read what others who own the camera say.
>
> HTH
>
Thanks for the link. Went back a ways. Still haven't found any real
reason to believe the FZ20 is $100.00+ better than the KM Z5. Both have
their good points and their faults. I'm not done reading that forum,
though - will continue to go back farther (or, is it further?).

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 11:41:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 29 Mar 2005 20:10:50 -0800, oink@woosh.co.nz wrote:

>Have a look at images in the DPReview panasonic forum if you have any
>doubts about the quality of images, and macro. We have the little
>brother FZ15, and very pleased, especially the sharp 12x stabilized
>zoom shots, remarkable.
>DonB

Me too, the FZ15 is all that the FZ20 is minus one or two
featurs such as no sound when recording video. Mine was only
$350 three months ago.
March 30, 2005 12:51:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

So far, the reviews of the K-M Z5 have been disappointing, IMO. Of
course, NO camera is perfect, and each of us will have our own list of
things we want, but soft images, a slow lens (F/4.5 at full tele) and
noticable noise at ISO 100 isn't on my list of "most desirable
attributes". I personally value image quality the most, and could care
less about video recording - any recent camcorder is leaps and bounds
better than even the most expensive still camera at capturing video.

The review at www.dpreview.com has the Panasonic DMC-FZ5 as the
comparison camera - and it's blowing away the K-M Z5 in image quality.
I think the parentheses from the last sentence of the DPR review is
telling - "It's not perfect (and if it weren't for the Panasonic Lumix
range it would be a real contender), ...."

ECM
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 4:25:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1112166965.539857.227230@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

> Bill Crocker wrote:
>> What do all of you think of the Panasonic DMZ-FZ20, is it a
>> sleeper?
>>
>
> I have a
> - Canon 300D
> - Canon 18-55mm
> - Sigma 24-135mm (Bought recently to replace the kit lens)
> - Sigma 70-300mm
> - A tripod and a monopod
>
> Carried the two sigma lenses, the tripod and the monopod to a night
> trek recently.
> - Left the monopod and the tripod in the car and started climbing
> up and still felt that the bag was too heavy.
> - Every now and then I felt the need for the kit lens because I
> felt it could've focussed faster in low-light than the Sigma and
> the 18mm would've been nice for certain shots.
> - Sorely missed the tripod for full-moon shots of the village
> beneath the hills.
> - The climb was steep so couldn't leave the camera dangling from
> the neck all the time so found it annoying to keep putting the
> camera in and out of the holster bag all the time.
> - Also with the exhaustion I missed casual snapshots for lack of
> enthusiasm to pull out the gear everytime.
>
> Would I have swapped all the gear for a Panasonic FZ20 or something
> similar?? YES YES YES!!! Ok, I must admit that the photos I took of
> the moonlit village at ISO 1600 were respectable if you ignore the
> blur for the lack of a tripod and thats something no P&S can match
> because their CCDs are simply not equipped to handle higher ISOs
> but still.
>
> I think I have started missing out on some casual photography
> because of the heavy and cumbersome paraphanelia surrounding a SLR
> camera. I am seriously looking at acquiring either a ZLR like the
> FZ20 or an ultracompact like the Panasonic FX7 or something
> similar.
>
> - Siddhartha
>
>

This is precicely one of the major reasons I'm NOT going with the dSLR.
I don't want to have to carry the camera PLUS 3 lenses around (not to
mention the backpack with water, munchies, ponchos, etc.) while I'm
hiking up a mountain at Glacier National Park, or wherever.

So, it looks like I'm down to just a few cameras on my shortlist. With
these cameras, I can basically get 38-432mm shots, all in one nice,
compact little camera! If I feel I need, I could get a wide angle
attachment - but that would be only one extra lens to carry around.

Thanks for the insight, Siddhartha!

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 10:50:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"ECM" <ecmcdougall@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1112201478.085487.163600@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> So far, the reviews of the K-M Z5 have been disappointing, IMO. Of
> course, NO camera is perfect, and each of us will have our own list
> of things we want, but soft images, a slow lens (F/4.5 at full
> tele) and noticable noise at ISO 100 isn't on my list of "most
> desirable attributes". I personally value image quality the most,
> and could care less about video recording - any recent camcorder is
> leaps and bounds better than even the most expensive still camera
> at capturing video.
>
> The review at www.dpreview.com has the Panasonic DMC-FZ5 as the
> comparison camera - and it's blowing away the K-M Z5 in image
> quality. I think the parentheses from the last sentence of the DPR
> review is telling - "It's not perfect (and if it weren't for the
> Panasonic Lumix range it would be a real contender), ...."
>
> ECM
>

You missed the end of that sentence:

....but the DiMAGE Z5 certainly has plenty to recommend it.

Here's a different review of the KM Z5:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/Z5/Z5A.HTM

In their Conclusion, you'll read:

"The Konica Minolta Z-series of long zoom digital cameras have
consistently led the market in features and value in the long-zoom
category. While the market has become more crowded, Konica Minolta has
maintained their place, and the DiMAGE Z5's only real competitors
currently are Panasonic's FZ5 and FZ20 models. (They being the only
long-zoom cameras equipped with anti-shake technology anywhere near the
Konica Minolta Z5's price point.) The Z5 handles well, its anti-shake
greatly extends the utility of its long zoom lens, and it's just plain
fun to use. (Surely a critical factor in any camera purchase decision.)

If you're in the market for a long-zoom digital camera with a wealth of
features, the Konica Minolta Z5 should be on your short list of
candidates."

For every negative comment about the KM Z5, you can also find multiple
positive comments about it. Same goes for the Panasonic FZ20. Mostly
good comments, but some negative comments, too. Check out the reviews at
www.dcresource.com for the KM Z5 and the Panasonic FZ20. Check out the
reviews of both on www.imaging-resource.com. Or, www.pcmagazine.com,
www.pcworld.com, or www.cnet.com. Positives and negatives to both. Noise
levels above average on both. Other things to concern you with each
camera.

Like I said before, at this price range, no camera is gonna be perfect
in all aspects. There are just as many bad things about the Pan FZ20 as
there are about the KM Z5. It's up to the individual to figure out which
bad things they can live with, and which ones they can't. I'm still
trying to figure out which ones I can/can't live with.

Time to get my shortlist written down, with all the positives and
negatives listed, and see what I just can't live with.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 10:50:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <Xns962982D087F21ebabulacare2com@66.192.254.230>,
Eric Babula <ebabula@care2.com> wrote:

> "ECM" <ecmcdougall@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:1112201478.085487.163600@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> > So far, the reviews of the K-M Z5 have been disappointing, IMO. Of
> > course, NO camera is perfect, and each of us will have our own list
> > of things we want, but soft images, a slow lens (F/4.5 at full
> > tele) and noticable noise at ISO 100 isn't on my list of "most
> > desirable attributes". I personally value image quality the most,
> > and could care less about video recording - any recent camcorder is
> > leaps and bounds better than even the most expensive still camera
> > at capturing video.
> >
> > The review at www.dpreview.com has the Panasonic DMC-FZ5 as the
> > comparison camera - and it's blowing away the K-M Z5 in image
> > quality. I think the parentheses from the last sentence of the DPR
> > review is telling - "It's not perfect (and if it weren't for the
> > Panasonic Lumix range it would be a real contender), ...."
> >
> > ECM
> >
>
> You missed the end of that sentence:
>
> ...but the DiMAGE Z5 certainly has plenty to recommend it.
>
> Here's a different review of the KM Z5:
>
> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/Z5/Z5A.HTM
>
> In their Conclusion, you'll read:
>
> "The Konica Minolta Z-series of long zoom digital cameras have
> consistently led the market in features and value in the long-zoom
> category. While the market has become more crowded, Konica Minolta has
> maintained their place, and the DiMAGE Z5's only real competitors
> currently are Panasonic's FZ5 and FZ20 models. (They being the only
> long-zoom cameras equipped with anti-shake technology anywhere near the
> Konica Minolta Z5's price point.) The Z5 handles well, its anti-shake
> greatly extends the utility of its long zoom lens, and it's just plain
> fun to use. (Surely a critical factor in any camera purchase decision.)
>
> If you're in the market for a long-zoom digital camera with a wealth of
> features, the Konica Minolta Z5 should be on your short list of
> candidates."
>
> For every negative comment about the KM Z5, you can also find multiple
> positive comments about it. Same goes for the Panasonic FZ20. Mostly
> good comments, but some negative comments, too. Check out the reviews at
> www.dcresource.com for the KM Z5 and the Panasonic FZ20. Check out the
> reviews of both on www.imaging-resource.com. Or, www.pcmagazine.com,
> www.pcworld.com, or www.cnet.com. Positives and negatives to both. Noise
> levels above average on both. Other things to concern you with each
> camera.
>
> Like I said before, at this price range, no camera is gonna be perfect
> in all aspects. There are just as many bad things about the Pan FZ20 as
> there are about the KM Z5. It's up to the individual to figure out which
> bad things they can live with, and which ones they can't. I'm still
> trying to figure out which ones I can/can't live with.
>
> Time to get my shortlist written down, with all the positives and
> negatives listed, and see what I just can't live with.

But notice that the KM Z5 did not become a "Dave's Pick" at
imaging-resource, while the FZ 5 & 20 both did. Also, dpreview rates the
KM Z5 as "Recommended", while the FZ 20 is "Highly Recommended".
DCResource also rates the FZ 20 as a "Jeff's Pick", but not the KM Z5. I
think its pretty clear that of the sites that have reviewed both the Z5
and the FZ 20, the FZ 20 is preferred. The FZ 3 also gets very good
reviews.

I am looking at these same cameras, and it seems pretty clear to me that
the Panasonics are getting better reviews than the Z5. There are things
to like about the Z5, sure, but I haven't found anyone who prefers to KM
Z5 to the FZ 5 or FZ 20.

Bob B.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 11:22:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula wrote:
[]
> Thanks for the link. Went back a ways. Still haven't found any real
> reason to believe the FZ20 is $100.00+ better than the KM Z5. Both
> have their good points and their faults. I'm not done reading that
> forum, though - will continue to go back farther (or, is it further?).

- image quality
- AF assist
- perhaps a more solid build

We have an FZ20 (well, my wife does) and I'm very tempted to get one for
myself! I'm also tempted by the newer Panasonic FZ5 (because it's smaller
and lighter), and possibly by the Nikon 8800 but only because it would
match my Nikon 8400 in menus, batteries etc.

I'd be inclined to say - don't wait, get one while you still can! (No,
I'm not on commission).


David
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 11:27:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula wrote:
[]
> Time to get my shortlist written down, with all the positives and
> negatives listed, and see what I just can't live with.

... and time to visit your local camera store and actually see how the
ergonomics of each camera suit you.

David
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 11:50:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Bob B." <bobb@sphinx.com> wrote in
news:bobb-6328FE.11151530032005@news.charter.net:


> But notice that the KM Z5 did not become a "Dave's Pick" at
> imaging-resource, while the FZ 5 & 20 both did. Also, dpreview
> rates the KM Z5 as "Recommended", while the FZ 20 is "Highly
> Recommended". DCResource also rates the FZ 20 as a "Jeff's Pick",
> but not the KM Z5. I think its pretty clear that of the sites that
> have reviewed both the Z5 and the FZ 20, the FZ 20 is preferred.
> The FZ 3 also gets very good reviews.
>
> I am looking at these same cameras, and it seems pretty clear to me
> that the Panasonics are getting better reviews than the Z5. There
> are things to like about the Z5, sure, but I haven't found anyone
> who prefers to KM Z5 to the FZ 5 or FZ 20.
>
> Bob B.

You are correct, Bob. Of these reviews, it seems that the FZ20 is more
preferred by the 'expert' reviewers. I would definitely agree. But, get
to the meat of each review, and I've found things that bug me about each
camera.

Now, go to the forums and read plenty to find out what the actual owners
of these cameras think, after taking 2,000 shots or more. I have started
this part of my research, but haven't read enough to tell you, one way
or the other, which camera is truly better for which types of
photography. Remember, we all have different photography goals/needs.
For instance, one might be really into macro photography (indoor or
outdoor), while another just wants to take landscape shots, while a
third might just want a good camera to take photos of their kids. These
three people might or might not value the same things in the camera they
choose.

Also, before making a decision, ya gotta go to a camera shop and
actually hold one in your hands, and play with it a bit. I've held the
Z5 and played with it a bit, but haven't played with the FZ20, yet
(didn't know about it when I went into the shop). I'm hoping it's not as
heavy/bulky as reported, cuz I like the fact that it has a Leica lens (=
great quality). There are a couple other things I'm leery about with the
FZ20, also, that I hope aren't as big of a deal when I actually get the
camera in hand.

I'll have to compare the two cameras side-by-side. Well, I'll probably
throw in the FZ5, too, just as another option to look at. Another one
I'll probably entertain is the Nikon Coolpix 8800, though it only has
10x zoom, and is more expensive because of the 8MP. Should I consider
the Canon PowerShot S1 IS, too? Lower MP - haven't really looked into
this one.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 11:50:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <Xns96298CD2FDF03ebabulacare2com@66.192.254.230>,
Eric Babula <ebabula@care2.com> wrote:

> "Bob B." <bobb@sphinx.com> wrote in
> news:bobb-6328FE.11151530032005@news.charter.net:
>
>
> > But notice that the KM Z5 did not become a "Dave's Pick" at
> > imaging-resource, while the FZ 5 & 20 both did. Also, dpreview
> > rates the KM Z5 as "Recommended", while the FZ 20 is "Highly
> > Recommended". DCResource also rates the FZ 20 as a "Jeff's Pick",
> > but not the KM Z5. I think its pretty clear that of the sites that
> > have reviewed both the Z5 and the FZ 20, the FZ 20 is preferred.
> > The FZ 3 also gets very good reviews.
> >
> > I am looking at these same cameras, and it seems pretty clear to me
> > that the Panasonics are getting better reviews than the Z5. There
> > are things to like about the Z5, sure, but I haven't found anyone
> > who prefers to KM Z5 to the FZ 5 or FZ 20.
> >
> > Bob B.
>
> You are correct, Bob. Of these reviews, it seems that the FZ20 is more
> preferred by the 'expert' reviewers. I would definitely agree. But, get
> to the meat of each review, and I've found things that bug me about each
> camera.
>
> Now, go to the forums and read plenty to find out what the actual owners
> of these cameras think, after taking 2,000 shots or more. I have started
> this part of my research, but haven't read enough to tell you, one way
> or the other, which camera is truly better for which types of
> photography. Remember, we all have different photography goals/needs.
> For instance, one might be really into macro photography (indoor or
> outdoor), while another just wants to take landscape shots, while a
> third might just want a good camera to take photos of their kids. These
> three people might or might not value the same things in the camera they
> choose.
>
> Also, before making a decision, ya gotta go to a camera shop and
> actually hold one in your hands, and play with it a bit. I've held the
> Z5 and played with it a bit, but haven't played with the FZ20, yet
> (didn't know about it when I went into the shop). I'm hoping it's not as
> heavy/bulky as reported, cuz I like the fact that it has a Leica lens (=
> great quality). There are a couple other things I'm leery about with the
> FZ20, also, that I hope aren't as big of a deal when I actually get the
> camera in hand.
>
> I'll have to compare the two cameras side-by-side. Well, I'll probably
> throw in the FZ5, too, just as another option to look at. Another one
> I'll probably entertain is the Nikon Coolpix 8800, though it only has
> 10x zoom, and is more expensive because of the 8MP. Should I consider
> the Canon PowerShot S1 IS, too? Lower MP - haven't really looked into
> this one.

I would consider the Canon also. It takes AA batteries, has a nice form
factor, and if you care, is supposed to have an excellent movie mode.
But, like the Pana FZ3, its 3MP. But also like the FZ 3, its gotten very
good reviews, and from what I have read, has lots of satisfied owners.

I personally am leaning towards the FZ 4 or 5. The FZ 20 feels pretty
big to me, and I like the FZ 3/4/5 form factor. In fact I would buy the
FZ 3 if I could convince myself that "only" 3MP is enough. I have also
played with the Canon S1, and it is still in the running for me, but
again, the 3MP thing. I am leery of the DiMAGE because of the reviews,
which often mention the FZ series as a better choice.

Bob B.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 11:59:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula wrote:
[]
> Should I consider
> the Canon PowerShot S1 IS, too? Lower MP - haven't really looked into
> this one.

I hear it does nice videos, takes AA batteries and CF cards - if those are
key features for you. Some people find it too small to hold comfortably.

David
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 12:37:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Bob B." <bobb@sphinx.com> wrote in
news:bobb-770E2F.12191830032005@news.charter.net:

> I would consider the Canon also. It takes AA batteries, has a nice
> form factor, and if you care, is supposed to have an excellent
> movie mode. But, like the Pana FZ3, its 3MP. But also like the FZ
> 3, its gotten very good reviews, and from what I have read, has
> lots of satisfied owners.
>
> I personally am leaning towards the FZ 4 or 5. The FZ 20 feels
> pretty big to me, and I like the FZ 3/4/5 form factor. In fact I
> would buy the FZ 3 if I could convince myself that "only" 3MP is
> enough. I have also played with the Canon S1, and it is still in
> the running for me, but again, the 3MP thing. I am leery of the
> DiMAGE because of the reviews, which often mention the FZ series as
> a better choice.
>
> Bob B.
>

Yeah, I'm not sure if I want to drop to "only" 3MP, either. I'll look
into the Canon, though, just for peace of mind, to know that I did my
due diligence.

I don't really care much about the video aspects. I have a decent enough
video camera, if I want that.

I do care much about the macro capabilities. I want to take great shots
of my coin collection, along with other things. I've been seeing some
wonderful macro shots of different things, and think that might be a fun
hobby to pursue.

I also have decided I want at least 10x optical zoom. I like the 12x
zoom of the FZ20 and Z5.

So, right now, I think I'm down to looking at:

* Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z5
* Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ5
* Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20
* Nikon Coolpix 8800
* Canon PowerShot S1 IS

Honestly, I'm betting I'd be relatively happy with any of the above.
Like I said, it's a matter of figuring out the Cons of each camera, and
deciding which list of Cons I can live with.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 12:38:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote in
news:D yD2e.306$G8.210@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

> Eric Babula wrote:
> []
>> Should I consider
>> the Canon PowerShot S1 IS, too? Lower MP - haven't really looked
>> into this one.
>
> I hear it does nice videos, takes AA batteries and CF cards - if
> those are key features for you. Some people find it too small to
> hold comfortably.
>
> David
>
>

Gonna have to see it in person, then. Not sure if I want to drop to 3MP,
though. I was kinda being sold on the 5MP.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention
of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body.
But rather, it’s to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up,
totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming, 'Wow! What a ride!!!'
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 12:49:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula wrote:
[]
> Gonna have to see it in person, then. Not sure if I want to drop to
> 3MP, though. I was kinda being sold on the 5MP.

For some people (or applications) 3MP is enough, but leaves you no margin
if you want 10 x 8 inch prints. 4 - 5 MP is, I feel, a better general
compromise.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 1:32:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote in
news:ShE2e.351$G8.52@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

> Eric Babula wrote:
> []
>> Gonna have to see it in person, then. Not sure if I want to drop
>> to 3MP, though. I was kinda being sold on the 5MP.
>
> For some people (or applications) 3MP is enough, but leaves you no
> margin if you want 10 x 8 inch prints. 4 - 5 MP is, I feel, a
> better general compromise.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>
>

That's my impression/understanding, also. I may want to do 8x10 prints
occasionally, so I'm probably sticking to the 5MP minimum. Not ruling
out the Canon completely, yet - it's just at the bottom of my shortlist,
right now.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 3:30:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <Xns9628B2B92E8A8ebabulacare2com@24.94.170.102>,
Eric Babula <ebabula@care2.coom> wrote:

> Cons:
> # Visible noise at ISOs above 100
> # Very occasional exposure problems
> # Focus at extreme telephoto sometimes hunts, occasionally misses

Manual focus option available.

> # Low resolution movie mode

Yes, not as good as the Canon S1 IS, but I never used it there either.

> # Some red fringing at 12x/wide apertures (rarely seen in prints)

I can see it if I go looking for it. So I don't.

> # Mode dial too easy to knock in use, changing modes

You can see what setting you are on in the EVF

> # Images can look a little soft viewed at 100% - sharpen up well though
>
> How does this compare to the FZ5 in reality? Or the Konica Minolta DiMAGE
> Z5?
>
> Does it use an LI battery, vs AA batteries?
>
I calculated that by the time you bought enough NiMH cells, plus fast
and slow chargers (you need both) you were near enough to the cost of
extra Li-Ion cells. esp if you get alternative brands.
Plus the Li-Ion cells seem to hold their charge better. And have more
charge per battery (or set of 4 NiMH's)

> Also, I must have missed it, how good are the FZ20's macro capabilities,
> say, compared to the KM Z5?
>
I find the FZ-20's macro works best with 2x-3x zoom, the range from the
subject is better and the lens is still in focus. At 4x the focus drops
right off . At full wide angle the image may be larger but you are so
close to the subject you can't see it. Even bumble-bees get spooked at
that range and they are normally pretty relaxed about being photographed.

and

> * Very big, bulky and heavy (for some that's a good thing, to feel solid
> and stable)

True.


> * Uses proprietary li-ion battery ($50.00 a pop!)

See above.

> * LCD and EVF virtually unusable in low light situations

Just tried it. Unusable. But I went ahead and aimed the lens at what I
thought looked about right to the naked eye and the (flash) shots came
out just fine.

> * No strap for lens cover (pretty minor issue)

Buy one of those little stick-on lanyards.

> * Macro - 5cm away (as opposed to 1cm with the KM Z5)

See above. At 3x zoom the subject is 13cm/5in from the front of the
lens. A business card pretty well fills the frame. Approx 7 x 5.5cm

At 2x zoom you can get in to an image 5cm wide but the lens is starting
to get in the way.

At 1x (WA) it's 4cm wide but the lens is a real problem, casting shadows
etc and you're only 4cm from the subject.


> * Noise level above average (esp. indoors), though, probably no worse
> than the KM Z5 - maybe even better.
>
> These would be pet peeves for me. At the $500.00 range, no camera is
> gonna be perfect. I just have to realize that and pick whatever seems to
> do MOST everything I need. The KM Z5 doesn't have an AF assist lamp,
> which bothers me, too.

The AF lamp _is_ useful. Ditto the hot shoe on the couple of occasions
I've needed the Metz big boomer flash.

The only grumble I have about my FZ-20 is that it's somehow not as
elegant as the Canon 300D, the model I would have bought if I had a bit
more dosh. Beauty in the eye of the beholder and all that. But for the
same focal range, the 300D would need a much larger and heavier case,
more storage cards, no stabilization, yada yada yada.

--
YAnewsWatcher.
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 3:30:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

YAnewswatcher <umustbjoking@ihug.co.nz> wrote in
news:umustbjoking-C0DC0E.23305330032005@lust.ihug.co.nz:


> The only grumble I have about my FZ-20 is that it's somehow not as
> elegant as the Canon 300D, the model I would have bought if I had a
> bit more dosh. Beauty in the eye of the beholder and all that. But
> for the same focal range, the 300D would need a much larger and
> heavier case, more storage cards, no stabilization, yada yada yada.
>

Thanks for your comments! I'm gonna keep reading the reviews and forums,
too.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention
of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body.
But rather, it’s to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up,
totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming, 'Wow! What a ride!!!'
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 3:42:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula wrote:
> Oops. Back at home, now, and had a chance to look at my research. I
> forgot to mention a few other cameras with similar characteristics,
that
> might deserve mention:
>
> * Kodak EasyShare DX 6490 (4MP, 10x zoom)
> Consumer Reports liked this one.
> * Kodak EasyShare DX 7590 (5MP, 10x zoom)
> * Olympus Camedia C765, C750 or C770 (4MP, 10x zoom for all three)
> Consumer Reports liked all three of these, too.
>

And none of these have image stabilisation. I used to own the Oly C-750
with 10x zoom and found the zoom above 5x useless without
stabilisation. But thats with my hands. If you can get sharp shots at
10x without IS then you can save yourself some money :) 

- Siddhartha
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 3:44:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula <ebabula@care2.com> wrote in
news:Xns962994D408E9Bebabulacare2com@66.192.254.230:


> So, right now, I think I'm down to looking at:
>
> * Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z5
> * Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ5
> * Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20
> * Nikon Coolpix 8800
> * Canon PowerShot S1 IS
>

Oops. Back at home, now, and had a chance to look at my research. I
forgot to mention a few other cameras with similar characteristics, that
might deserve mention:

* Kodak EasyShare DX 6490 (4MP, 10x zoom)
Consumer Reports liked this one.
* Kodak EasyShare DX 7590 (5MP, 10x zoom)
* Olympus Camedia C765, C750 or C770 (4MP, 10x zoom for all three)
Consumer Reports liked all three of these, too.

Those are still out there, too. Olympus is pretty well-known for having
about the best lenses, right? Can't count them out without a serious
look-see.

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
March 31, 2005 7:15:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Siddhartha Jain wrote:
>
> And none of these have image stabilisation. I used to own the Oly
C-750
> with 10x zoom and found the zoom above 5x useless without
> stabilisation. But thats with my hands. If you can get sharp shots at
> 10x without IS then you can save yourself some money :) 

If you are using a long lens, you should ideally try to use a tripod or
a beanbag as much as possible anyway. Dont get me wrong, I think IS is
great and all 3 of my lenses longer than 200mm have IS. But there *is*
more to a camera than just IS.

To the OP: the fact that you are finding it so hard to decide is b/c
these cameras are indeed very close to each other in performance. I
think you'll find that any of the cameras on your list will give you
the quality that you want.

For your stated needs, I'd avoid the trap of "paralysis by analysis",
and just get the Panasonic.

Cheers,
VK
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 7:18:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote in
> news:ShE2e.351$G8.52@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:
>
>
>>Eric Babula wrote:
>>[]
>>
>>>Gonna have to see it in person, then. Not sure if I want to drop
>>>to 3MP, though. I was kinda being sold on the 5MP.
>>
>>For some people (or applications) 3MP is enough, but leaves you no
>>margin if you want 10 x 8 inch prints. 4 - 5 MP is, I feel, a
>>better general compromise.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>David
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> That's my impression/understanding, also. I may want to do 8x10 prints
> occasionally, so I'm probably sticking to the 5MP minimum. Not ruling
> out the Canon completely, yet - it's just at the bottom of my shortlist,
> right now.
>

Unless you plan to spend in the neighborhood of $1000 on the camera in
order to get a larger sensor, you might do well to stay at 5mp or below
because of the noise.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 7:25:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Siddhartha Jain wrote:
> Eric Babula wrote:
>
>>Oops. Back at home, now, and had a chance to look at my research. I
>>forgot to mention a few other cameras with similar characteristics,
>
> that
>
>>might deserve mention:
>>
>>* Kodak EasyShare DX 6490 (4MP, 10x zoom)
>> Consumer Reports liked this one.
>>* Kodak EasyShare DX 7590 (5MP, 10x zoom)
>>* Olympus Camedia C765, C750 or C770 (4MP, 10x zoom for all three)
>> Consumer Reports liked all three of these, too.
>>
>
>
> And none of these have image stabilisation. I used to own the Oly C-750
> with 10x zoom and found the zoom above 5x useless without
> stabilisation. But thats with my hands. If you can get sharp shots at
> 10x without IS then you can save yourself some money :) 
>
> - Siddhartha
>
Tripods are cheaper than IS....


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 8:11:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

VK wrote:
> If you are using a long lens, you should ideally try to use a tripod
or
> a beanbag as much as possible anyway. Dont get me wrong, I think IS
is
> great and all 3 of my lenses longer than 200mm have IS. But there
*is*
> more to a camera than just IS.

I don't think its fair to say use a tripod instead of IS or vice versa.
There are times when all the IS in the world cannot replace a tripod
and there are times when a tripod (or bean bag) simply cannot be
carried around.

- Siddhartha
March 31, 2005 9:31:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <gmP2e.1974$HF5.1399@fe07.lga>, rphunter@charter.net says...
> Tripods are cheaper than IS....
>

Steady hands are cheaper yet.. But not everybody has 'em.

The longest lens Im currently using is 38 - 380mm equivalent and I dont need
IS or a tripod for anything lit well enough for it to focus on, but Im sure
if I went beyond that I'de need some kind of stabilization.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 10:40:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter wrote:
> Less a problem of carrying, than finding a suitable place to deploy
them.

Carrying is also a problem like when you are hiking or trekking. You
already have things like water, food, and some other basic stuff. An
extra 1.5-2kgs of tripod can simply become too much to carry around.

- Siddhartha
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 10:56:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Kevin K wrote:
> Here is just one mans opinion
>
http://www.bargainfindsonebay.com/Panasonic/Panasonic-L...

Funny, no mention of IS in this *review* and it says "Digital SLR" at
the botton of the list of *Key Points". Some review this is.

- Siddhartha
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 11:56:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Larry wrote:
> In article <gmP2e.1974$HF5.1399@fe07.lga>, rphunter@charter.net says...
>
>>Tripods are cheaper than IS....
>>
>
>
> Steady hands are cheaper yet.. But not everybody has 'em.
>
> The longest lens Im currently using is 38 - 380mm equivalent and I dont need
> IS or a tripod for anything lit well enough for it to focus on, but Im sure
> if I went beyond that I'de need some kind of stabilization.
>
>
Just wait, as you get older, you might find your hands aren't as steady.
I did.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 11:57:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Siddhartha Jain wrote:
> VK wrote:
>
>>If you are using a long lens, you should ideally try to use a tripod
>
> or
>
>>a beanbag as much as possible anyway. Dont get me wrong, I think IS
>
> is
>
>>great and all 3 of my lenses longer than 200mm have IS. But there
>
> *is*
>
>>more to a camera than just IS.
>
>
> I don't think its fair to say use a tripod instead of IS or vice versa.
> There are times when all the IS in the world cannot replace a tripod
> and there are times when a tripod (or bean bag) simply cannot be
> carried around.
>
> - Siddhartha
>
Less a problem of carrying, than finding a suitable place to deploy them.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 1:51:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

It is a digital slr

Its a Single Lens Reflex camera with interchangeable lens.
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 2:43:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter wrote:
[]
> Tripods are cheaper than IS....

But many times as inconvenient to carry around as a Panasonic FZ5/FZ20!

Actually, how much does a decent tripod cost, and how much extra does the
IS in a small camera cost? The costs might be closer than we imagine...

David
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 2:56:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

It has both at electronic viewfinder and LCD display so its kind of
like the best of both worlds. however you will have to upgrade the
standard memory its not enough :( .
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 2:56:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

It has both a electronic viewfinder and LCD display so its kind of like
the best of both worlds. however you will have to upgrade the standard
memory its not enough :( .
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 4:31:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Kevin K wrote:
>
> Here is just one mans opinion
> http://www.bargainfindsonebay.com/Panasonic/Panasonic-L...

Why not to take than some of the more comprehensive
reports, such as http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz20/


This camera was the only non-Canon and non-Nikon to be
for months in the top-ten hit count on dpreview. Seemingly
this is an attractive package. This Elmarit lens is indeed
extraordinary. It provides excellent result throughout its
entire focal length. Many people do not realize what was
the tradeoff they made at Leica: Its the aperture. If this
lens is identical to the lens used with FZ-10, than the
max. aperture is f/5.6. Very unusual.

Thomas
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 5:06:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1112254923.560457.19080@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> Eric Babula wrote:
>> Oops. Back at home, now, and had a chance to look at my research.
>> I forgot to mention a few other cameras with similar
>> characteristics, that might deserve mention:
>>
>> * Kodak EasyShare DX 6490 (4MP, 10x zoom)
>> Consumer Reports liked this one.
>> * Kodak EasyShare DX 7590 (5MP, 10x zoom)
>> * Olympus Camedia C765, C750 or C770 (4MP, 10x zoom for all three)
>> Consumer Reports liked all three of these, too.
>>
>
> And none of these have image stabilisation. I used to own the Oly
> C-750 with 10x zoom and found the zoom above 5x useless without
> stabilisation. But thats with my hands. If you can get sharp shots
> at 10x without IS then you can save yourself some money :) 
>
> - Siddhartha
>
>

You're right. That might just be a deal-breaker for me. I do want the
IS, if I'm gonna have 10x or more zoom.

I'm making a chart of the cameras that I'm interested in, and their
reported Cons. Time to make a decision, already.

Thanks for the input, again!

--
Eric Babula
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
March 31, 2005 5:21:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote in
> news:zGW2e.915$G8.904@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:
>
> > Eric Babula wrote:
SNIP
> Maybe I am demanding too much by wanting good macro AND good
telephoto.
> But, for $600.00 US (once you factor in another $80.00 for a decent
SD
> card), I deserve to get something fairly good at both ends of the
zoom!
> And, I won't be able to buy two cameras, so I have to find the best
> single camera to do all I want, within my budget. I'm close, with
these
> three.
>
> I'll check out those links you gave me, too. I feel that I'm slowly
> leaning toward the Panasonic FZ5, myself, just because of this
thread. I
> think the FZ20 is probably too big and heavy for my wife's taste (She

> was originally hoping for a little pocket camera! Ha! Not gonna
> happen!), so that's probably out. I have to see them all in person,
> though.
>
> Ok, I'm going to call a few camera stores right now!
>

I'd strongly encourage you to handle the two cameras - even if you
can't find the Pana FZ-5, the FZ1, 2 or 3 is almost identical (the
shutter button is better placed in the FZ5). The K-M Z5 has a very
unusual feel, especially if you're used to a more traditional "brick
with a lens" camera; I personally didn't care for it. OTOH, the FZ3
(haven't seen an FZ5 so far) is very lightweight, almost distressingly
so, and a bit small in my hand. The proprietary batteries shouldn't
discourage you; I've had great luck with LiIon batteries in my other
cameras and I've seen generic spares for the Panasonic Lumix cameras at
Circuit City for less than $30.

Another thought - you might wait a bit, if price is that important to
you. The $499 the Pana FZ5 is going for now will surely drop over the
next few months. I'd expect it to settle at the $350-400 range - the
camera isn't really even in the stores yet. It's market is the same as
the K-M Z5, so it's likely the prices will eventually be almost the
same. Look at the Olympus C-7070 - MSRP $700 but now it's selling for
$560-610, less than 4 weeks after it hit the shelves.

Good Luck!
ECM
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 5:48:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Eric Babula wrote:
[]
> You're right. That might just be a deal-breaker for me. I do want the
> IS, if I'm gonna have 10x or more zoom.
>
> I'm making a chart of the cameras that I'm interested in, and their
> reported Cons. Time to make a decision, already.

I made my (second) decision this morning - I bought a Pansonic FZ5 to
complement my wife's FZ20.

Cheers,
David
!