FZ30 PR, preview, and samples

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

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/

From the press release:

"Panasonic is proud to introduce the 8-Megapixel, 12x optical zoom
(equivalent to 35mm to 420mm on a 35mm film camera) LUMIX DMC-FZ30
inheriting MEGA O.I.S. (Optical Image Stabilizer) as an up-and-comer
to its creative super zoom FZ double-digit line. The DMC-FZ20,
released in 2004, has been internationally acclaimed for meeting the
needs of the market by realizing the ideals of users.

The 12x optical zoom LEICA DC VARIO-ELMARIT Lens, which has been
handed down since the first launch of the FZ series, underwent further
development to provide even more superb picture rendering. The other
key feature, the Optical Image Stabilizer, MEGA O.I.S. is deservedly
continued as Panasonic advanced the theory that it should be standard
in all digital still cameras. The newly incorporated Extra Optical
Zoom extends the zoom ratio by using the center part of the high
resolution CCD, to achieve 15.3x for 5-Megapixel and 19.1x for
3-Megapixel images with minimal deterioration.

Along with CCD size and total effective pixels, the FZ30 also has
enhanced its excellence in other features: addition of a manual zoom
ring to the manual focus ring, which was very popular in the FZ20;
easy-to-see free-angle LCD; and adjustable dials for the aperture and
shutter speed controls. Both the LCD and EVF have had their resolution
increased by about 180%, offering a sharp, clear view. All these
complete the FZ30 in the resulting picture quality and operationality.
The newly developed 8-Megapixel CCD is compatible with the 9-pixel
mixed readout method, so now moving pictures with dramatically
increased brightness can be recorded at 30 fps in VGA size, previously
only recordable in QVGA. This technology is used for the LCD
monitoring to provide a bright and clear view so subjects can be seen
easily, even in low-light situations.

Taking advantage of these outstanding features, the LX1 incorporates
the high speed, high quality image processing LSI the Venus Engine
II. It boasts quick responsiveness that realizes the best-in-class
level release time lag of 0.01 sec. Adopting a non-collapsible lens
has substantially reduced startup time from about 5 sec to 0.97
sec. AF time in 1-point high-speed AF has been dramatically reduced to
a quarter the level* of that of the previous DMC-FZ20.

Furthermore, by adopting a newly developed lithium-ion battery with a
capacity increased from 680 mAh to 730 mAh, the FZ30 realizes the
shooting of approx. 280** images for one charging. The LUMIX DMC-FZ30
has the flawless basic specifications to fuel the spark of imagination
in high-end users and is destined to join the Panasonic LUMIX high-end
model lineup."
38 answers Last reply
More about fz30 preview samples
  1. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Dave Sill wrote:
    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    > http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/

    Thanks for posting that, Dave. With the manual zoom and manual focus
    controls, VGA movies, and swivel viewfinder it looks like a true
    photographer's camera!

    Cheers,
    David
  2. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:09:39 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    wrote:

    >Dave Sill wrote:
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    >
    >Thanks for posting that, Dave. With the manual zoom and manual focus
    >controls, VGA movies, and swivel viewfinder it looks like a true
    >photographer's camera!
    >
    >Cheers,
    >David

    Any idea on noise compared to the FZ20?
  3. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Fred@fred.fred wrote:
    > On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:09:39 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    > <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Dave Sill wrote:
    >>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    >>> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    >>
    >> Thanks for posting that, Dave. With the manual zoom and manual focus
    >> controls, VGA movies, and swivel viewfinder it looks like a true
    >> photographer's camera!
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> David
    >
    > Any idea on noise compared to the FZ20?

    Good question. What is the size of the pixel (in absolute units!)? A
    bigger sensor would mean a bigger lens and a much bigger and heavier
    camera (volume being proportional to linear size cubed). I did notice
    that the weight had crept up from the FZ20 and the maximum lens aperture
    at full zoom had crept down a little.

    I looked at the sample images and there was some noise present in the
    darker areas, as you would expect from an 8MP sensor of that physical
    size. Whether it would be a problem an 8 x 10 print I don't know, you'd
    need to print the samples out for yourself. My guess is not, providing
    you stick with the lower ISO settings.

    I was impressed with the lens quality on the couple of sample images I
    downloaded at full resolution.

    Cheers,
    David
  4. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Dave Sill <dave@sill.org> wrote:
    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    > http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    >
    > From the press release:
    >

    Blimey, it looks like a stunning camera. Does seem to be a little
    noticeable noise in some of the shots, which makes me think they might've
    been better going to 6MP than 8... but 8 is what the market demands I
    guess - and at least it isn't an 8mp-in-the-space-of-5mp sensor... they
    have enlarged it somewhat. I wonder how much of a gimmick the "extra
    optical zoom" is (again, none of the sample gallery shots exploit it), but
    anything that keeps you out of the realms of digital zoom is a Good Thing.

    Caveat - the sample gallery also has no evening/night shots, I get rather
    variable results at night with my FZ10 and I would've liked to have seen
    what the 30 can do in poor light.

    It looks like they've been listening to the FZ buyers, putting more
    dSLR-like features into the camera - manual zoom ring, RAW mode,
    higher-resolution EVF... and even a pop-out rear LCD.

    Would *love* to get my hands on one just to see what it can do -- my '10
    is still capable of amazing me... ;)

    pete
    --
    pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB
  5. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Pete Fenelon wrote:
    > Dave Sill <dave@sill.org> wrote:
    > > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    > > http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    > >
    > > From the press release:
    > >
    >
    > Blimey, it looks like a stunning camera. Does seem to be a little
    > noticeable noise in some of the shots, which makes me think they might've
    > been better going to 6MP than 8... but 8 is what the market demands I
    > guess - and at least it isn't an 8mp-in-the-space-of-5mp sensor... they
    > have enlarged it somewhat. I wonder how much of a gimmick the "extra
    > optical zoom" is (again, none of the sample gallery shots exploit it), but
    > anything that keeps you out of the realms of digital zoom is a Good Thing.
    >
    > Caveat - the sample gallery also has no evening/night shots, I get rather
    > variable results at night with my FZ10 and I would've liked to have seen
    > what the 30 can do in poor light.
    >
    > It looks like they've been listening to the FZ buyers, putting more
    > dSLR-like features into the camera - manual zoom ring, RAW mode,
    > higher-resolution EVF... and even a pop-out rear LCD.
    >
    > Would *love* to get my hands on one just to see what it can do -- my '10
    > is still capable of amazing me... ;)
    >
    > pete
    > --
    > pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB

    Looks like a stonging camera and a step forward from the FX20 which I
    love to bits. Anyone have any idea of price?
  6. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On 20 Jul 2005 09:44:21 -0700, "Bulldog" <john.mason@mail.com> wrote:
    >Looks like a stonging camera and a step forward from the FX20 which I
    >love to bits. Anyone have any idea of price?

    The pre-order price at one site is $699, way too high IMO.
  7. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On 20 Jul 2005 09:44:21 -0700, "Bulldog" <john.mason@mail.com> wrote:

    >
    >Pete Fenelon wrote:
    >> Dave Sill <dave@sill.org> wrote:
    >> > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    >> > http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    >> >
    >> > From the press release:
    >> >
    >>
    >> Blimey, it looks like a stunning camera. Does seem to be a little
    >> noticeable noise in some of the shots, which makes me think they might've
    >> been better going to 6MP than 8... but 8 is what the market demands I
    >> guess - and at least it isn't an 8mp-in-the-space-of-5mp sensor... they
    >> have enlarged it somewhat. I wonder how much of a gimmick the "extra
    >> optical zoom" is (again, none of the sample gallery shots exploit it), but
    >> anything that keeps you out of the realms of digital zoom is a Good Thing.
    >>
    >> Caveat - the sample gallery also has no evening/night shots, I get rather
    >> variable results at night with my FZ10 and I would've liked to have seen
    >> what the 30 can do in poor light.
    >>
    >> It looks like they've been listening to the FZ buyers, putting more
    >> dSLR-like features into the camera - manual zoom ring, RAW mode,
    >> higher-resolution EVF... and even a pop-out rear LCD.
    >>
    >> Would *love* to get my hands on one just to see what it can do -- my '10
    >> is still capable of amazing me... ;)
    >>
    >> pete
    >> --
    >> pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB
    >
    >Looks like a stonging camera and a step forward from the FX20 which I
    >love to bits. Anyone have any idea of price?

    Most likely a stonging price!

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

    >From the panasonic site samples, I don't think they have made any great
    leap forward in the noise area.. However, the pixel-level sharpness is
    very impressive.. grudgingly I'll admit it looks a tiny bit sharper
    than my C8080's 8Mp sensor..

    Panasonic's photographer seems unafraid to blow the odd highlight, I
    notice..

    Looks promising, but let's wait for the real reviews..
  9. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    "David J Taylor"
    <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
    news:1HtDe.73927$G8.52142@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

    >> Any idea on noise compared to the FZ20?


    More samples can be seen at the Lumix global site:
    http://panasonic.co.jp/pavc/global/lumix/gallery/models/fz30.html

    Some noise is apparent on most pics there.
    Skin tones are much improved though, as seen both from dpreviews samples and
    Panasonics samples.
    /per
  10. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    I like the FZ5 better than the FZ20 because I thought the FZ20 was too
    heavy for a PS. The FZ30 is even heavier and according to the samples I
    previewed I am not sure how better the results would be than the FZ5.

    I would guess that the difference would begin to be noticeable at around
    11x14

    Bill Spanger wrote:

    >On 20 Jul 2005 09:44:21 -0700, "Bulldog" <john.mason@mail.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Looks like a stonging camera and a step forward from the FX20 which I
    >>love to bits. Anyone have any idea of price?
    >>
    >>
    >
    >The pre-order price at one site is $699, way too high IMO.
    >
    >
    >
  11. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    However FZ30 still use MPJEG (MOV) as movie format which is quite
    outdated. Prefer to have the MPEG4 features bundled just like the
    Panasonic DV.
  12. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    chrlz@go.com wrote:
    >> From the panasonic site samples, I don't think they have made any
    >> great
    > leap forward in the noise area.. However, the pixel-level sharpness
    > is very impressive.. grudgingly I'll admit it looks a tiny bit sharper
    > than my C8080's 8Mp sensor..
    >
    > Panasonic's photographer seems unafraid to blow the odd highlight, I
    > notice..
    >
    > Looks promising, but let's wait for the real reviews..

    I agree, see what the reviewers say, but the images and lens quality look
    very good so far. At the edges of those blown highlights there seems to
    be little in the way of artefacts.
    If I was interested in the camera (and it won't replace my FZ5, but my
    wife likes the swivel LCD so could replace her FZ20), I would be printing
    out those sample photos to see what the small amount of noise looks like
    when printed, rather than when viewed on the screen.

    Cheers,
    David
  13. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:11:28 GMT, Fred@fred.fred wrote:

    >On 20 Jul 2005 09:44:21 -0700, "Bulldog" <john.mason@mail.com> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>Pete Fenelon wrote:
    >>> Dave Sill <dave@sill.org> wrote:
    >>> > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    >>> > http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    >>> >
    >>> > From the press release:
    >>> >
    >>>
    >>> Blimey, it looks like a stunning camera. Does seem to be a little
    >>> noticeable noise in some of the shots, which makes me think they might've
    >>> been better going to 6MP than 8... but 8 is what the market demands I
    >>> guess - and at least it isn't an 8mp-in-the-space-of-5mp sensor... they
    >>> have enlarged it somewhat. I wonder how much of a gimmick the "extra
    >>> optical zoom" is (again, none of the sample gallery shots exploit it), but
    >>> anything that keeps you out of the realms of digital zoom is a Good Thing.
    >>>
    >>> Caveat - the sample gallery also has no evening/night shots, I get rather
    >>> variable results at night with my FZ10 and I would've liked to have seen
    >>> what the 30 can do in poor light.
    >>>
    >>> It looks like they've been listening to the FZ buyers, putting more
    >>> dSLR-like features into the camera - manual zoom ring, RAW mode,
    >>> higher-resolution EVF... and even a pop-out rear LCD.
    >>>
    >>> Would *love* to get my hands on one just to see what it can do -- my '10
    >>> is still capable of amazing me... ;)
    >>>
    >>> pete
    >>> --
    >>> pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB
    >>
    >>Looks like a stonging camera and a step forward from the FX20 which I
    >>love to bits. Anyone have any idea of price?
    >
    >Most likely a stonging price!
    >
    >Fred
    Wonder how this will compare with the new Samsung?
  14. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    "David J Taylor"
    <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    wrote in news:sMHDe.74388$G8.11401@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

    > chrlz@go.com wrote:
    >>> From the panasonic site samples, I don't think they have made
    >>> any great
    >> leap forward in the noise area.. However, the pixel-level
    >> sharpness is very impressive.. grudgingly I'll admit it looks a
    >> tiny bit sharper than my C8080's 8Mp sensor..
    >>
    >> Panasonic's photographer seems unafraid to blow the odd
    >> highlight, I notice..
    >>
    >> Looks promising, but let's wait for the real reviews..
    >
    > I agree, see what the reviewers say, but the images and lens
    > quality look very good so far. At the edges of those blown
    > highlights there seems to be little in the way of artefacts.
    > If I was interested in the camera (and it won't replace my FZ5,
    > but my wife likes the swivel LCD so could replace her FZ20), I
    > would be printing out those sample photos to see what the small
    > amount of noise looks like when printed, rather than when viewed
    > on the screen.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David

    I was almost going to buy a D50, and now this!

    BTW...David, I see that the group is moving again. :-)

    --

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

    Woodchuck Bill wrote:
    []
    > I was almost going to buy a D50, and now this!
    >
    > BTW...David, I see that the group is moving again. :-)

    Yes, I'm pleased that the new camera has sparked some discussions!

    An interesting dilemma - D50 or FZ30? FZ30 wide-angle limited to 24mm
    with an adaptor - but that might be enough. No dust ingress problems.
    Lower image noise at high ISO with the D50 - useful if you're taking
    pictures in nightclubs etc., but you need to buy a good wide-aperture
    lens. Image stabilisation will cost you more with the D50, and it doesn't
    do movies or have live image preview on a swivel LCD.

    Get the FZ30, Bill, and tell us all the inside story!

    Get both, and recover the costs by writing a magazine article?

    Cheers,
    David
  16. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On 20 Jul 2005 20:43:37 -0700, chrlz@go.com wrote:

    >>From the panasonic site samples, I don't think they have made any great
    >leap forward in the noise area.. However, the pixel-level sharpness is
    >very impressive.. grudgingly I'll admit it looks a tiny bit sharper
    >than my C8080's 8Mp sensor..
    >
    >Panasonic's photographer seems unafraid to blow the odd highlight, I
    >notice..

    This might actually be related to the camera. I tend to blow
    considerably more highlights with my FZ20 than with my Nikon CP 995,
    despite setting Contrast=low and an exposure compensation of -1/3 or
    -2/3.

    My FZ20 is a great camera in many respects, but I have a feeling that
    the sensor has more narrow dynamic range than the four year old sensor
    of my CP 995.

    Jan Böhme
    Korrekta personuppgifter är att betrakta som journalistik.
    Felaktigheter utgör naturligtvis skönlitteratur.
  17. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    irwell wrote:
    []
    > Wonder how this will compare with the new Samsung?

    The new Samsung lacks image stabilisation, reducing the usefulness of its
    420mm zoom lens. I'd also be interested to see how much distortion the
    lens has at 28mm. To me, there's no comparison.

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

    <tony723@gmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1121938666.061694.309480@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    > However FZ30 still use MPJEG (MOV) as movie format which is quite
    > outdated. Prefer to have the MPEG4 features bundled just like the
    > Panasonic DV.
    >

    Personally I would never bother using a camera to take movies. I have a
    dedicated movie camera for taking movies. I assume the manufacturers add it
    to the system simply because they can.

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

    On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:31:28 +0200, "Bill Again" <Bill@addcom.de>
    wrote:

    >
    ><tony723@gmail.com> wrote in message
    >news:1121938666.061694.309480@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
    >> However FZ30 still use MPJEG (MOV) as movie format which is quite
    >> outdated. Prefer to have the MPEG4 features bundled just like the
    >> Panasonic DV.
    >>
    >
    >Personally I would never bother using a camera to take movies. I have a
    >dedicated movie camera for taking movies. I assume the manufacturers add it
    >to the system simply because they can.
    >
    >Robert
    >
    The feature can come in handy, I have used it on occasion
    with my little pocket Sony W1. On my FZ15 it is Video only, no sound
    which seems a bit limiting.
  20. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    "Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise (also
    at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially for a camera
    at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good, the sensor is
    obviously too small for this number of megapixels. Don't get me wrong, not
    trying to start a flame here (hey, I just ordered an H1, which can't be
    described as a noiseless digicam as well...), just being objective. I also
    think that they should have used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose some
    resolution but you gain a lot in the image quality department. But alas, to
    satisfy the market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad.

    The rest of the camera I truly adore though. Very nice lens, manual zoom and
    focus, big tiltable screen, great!

    P-P.


    "David J Taylor"
    <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
    message news:1HtDe.73927$G8.52142@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    > Fred@fred.fred wrote:
    >> On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:09:39 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    >> <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Dave Sill wrote:
    >>>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    >>>> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    >>>
    >>> Thanks for posting that, Dave. With the manual zoom and manual focus
    >>> controls, VGA movies, and swivel viewfinder it looks like a true
    >>> photographer's camera!
    >>>
    >>> Cheers,
    >>> David
    >>
    >> Any idea on noise compared to the FZ20?
    >
    > Good question. What is the size of the pixel (in absolute units!)? A
    > bigger sensor would mean a bigger lens and a much bigger and heavier
    > camera (volume being proportional to linear size cubed). I did notice
    > that the weight had crept up from the FZ20 and the maximum lens aperture
    > at full zoom had crept down a little.
    >
    > I looked at the sample images and there was some noise present in the
    > darker areas, as you would expect from an 8MP sensor of that physical
    > size. Whether it would be a problem an 8 x 10 print I don't know, you'd
    > need to print the samples out for yourself. My guess is not, providing
    > you stick with the lower ISO settings.
    >
    > I was impressed with the lens quality on the couple of sample images I
    > downloaded at full resolution.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David
    >
  21. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    P-P. Henneken wrote:
    > "Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise
    > (also at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially
    > for a camera at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good,
    > the sensor is obviously too small for this number of megapixels.
    > Don't get me wrong, not trying to start a flame here (hey, I just
    > ordered an H1, which can't be described as a noiseless digicam as
    > well...), just being objective. I also think that they should have
    > used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose some resolution but you
    > gain a lot in the image quality department. But alas, to satisfy the
    > market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad.
    > The rest of the camera I truly adore though. Very nice lens, manual
    > zoom and focus, big tiltable screen, great!
    >
    > P-P.

    The ability of noise to destroy any particular image is dependant on the
    exact image viewing contidions. Whilst you can see the noise on the
    sample images when viewed at 1:1 zoom on the screen (hence my describing
    it as "some noise"), can you see the noise on these images when printed
    out or viewed at normal size? I don't mean taking a magnifying glass to
    an 10 x 8 inch print either! Vieweing at 1:1 on my screen corresponds to
    a print width of 37 inches, not a size I have ever used. Personally, I
    cannot agree with "extremely bad".

    I do agree that there are lower noise sensors available (at least to some
    manufacturers), and I do agree that for many purposes 5MP would be
    adequate. 8MP is indeed market-driven. At a rough estimate, the
    sensitive area per pixel is the same on the FZ20 and FZ30, so actually
    having a larger total sensitive area should produce a net improvement for
    images under normal viewing conditions.

    Cheers,
    David
  22. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Dave Sill schrieb:

    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    > http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    >
    > From the press release:

    Hi -

    thanks for the information.

    The camera has all features (besides the "some noise") I would
    like if the lens would have more wide angle.
    The 0.7 adapter could serve the purpose but I do not know how
    it works:
    1) Is then the full zoom working (equivalent 24mm to 300mm) or is
    the adapter only working when the lens position is wide angle?
    2) Is there a remarkable reduction of the aperture?

    Regards Udo
  23. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Udo Huebner wrote:
    []
    > The camera has all features (besides the "some noise") I would
    > like if the lens would have more wide angle.
    > The 0.7 adapter could serve the purpose but I do not know how
    > it works:
    > 1) Is then the full zoom working (equivalent 24mm to 300mm) or is
    > the adapter only working when the lens position is wide angle?

    Probably, the full range. It is teleconvertors which tend to have
    vignetting problems.

    > 2) Is there a remarkable reduction of the aperture?

    I don't know, but I don't think so.

    Cheers,
    David
  24. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    As mentioned I ordered an H1, beforehand I downloaded some DPReview sample
    images to be printed as a photo. The ISO400 pictures coming out of the H1 I
    also consider "very bad". So I ordered some 6x4 inch photo's with ISO400 and
    ISO200 shots. The noise of the ISO400 shots was very obvious, even on the
    6x4 photo's. ISO200, on the other hand, was fine, while on screen it's also
    quite bad.

    So what you're saying sure makes sense. A bit of noise on screen will not be
    seen on the actual photo. But some pictures of the FZ30 contain that much
    noise that I find it hard to believe (considering the tests I just did) that
    it will not show on the actual photo. Let alone an enlargement! Okay, it's
    an 8mp image so the actual "noise-pixels" will be smaller but still. That
    being said, it's the result of the less-than-perfect 8mp sensor.

    I really do believe that the 7mp sensor would have been a better choice. I
    wonder what Fuji will release soon, the F10 images are really, really
    outstanding in this respect (actually wanted that camera before the H1 but
    the total lack of manual controls bothered me). If they can bring out an
    image stabilized 6 (or 8, or 9...) megapixel camera with the same low-noise
    as the F10 and with comparable specs/options as the S2 IS, H1, FZ5/20/30 it
    will be quite some camera!

    Greets,

    P-P. (anxiously awaiting the iso400 noisebomb H1) ;-)

    "David J Taylor"
    <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
    message news:XX2Ee.75035$G8.57086@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    > P-P. Henneken wrote:
    >> "Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise
    >> (also at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially
    >> for a camera at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good,
    >> the sensor is obviously too small for this number of megapixels.
    >> Don't get me wrong, not trying to start a flame here (hey, I just
    >> ordered an H1, which can't be described as a noiseless digicam as
    >> well...), just being objective. I also think that they should have
    >> used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose some resolution but you
    >> gain a lot in the image quality department. But alas, to satisfy the
    >> market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad.
    >> The rest of the camera I truly adore though. Very nice lens, manual
    >> zoom and focus, big tiltable screen, great!
    >>
    >> P-P.
    >
    > The ability of noise to destroy any particular image is dependant on the
    > exact image viewing contidions. Whilst you can see the noise on the
    > sample images when viewed at 1:1 zoom on the screen (hence my describing
    > it as "some noise"), can you see the noise on these images when printed
    > out or viewed at normal size? I don't mean taking a magnifying glass to
    > an 10 x 8 inch print either! Vieweing at 1:1 on my screen corresponds to
    > a print width of 37 inches, not a size I have ever used. Personally, I
    > cannot agree with "extremely bad".
    >
    > I do agree that there are lower noise sensors available (at least to some
    > manufacturers), and I do agree that for many purposes 5MP would be
    > adequate. 8MP is indeed market-driven. At a rough estimate, the
    > sensitive area per pixel is the same on the FZ20 and FZ30, so actually
    > having a larger total sensitive area should produce a net improvement for
    > images under normal viewing conditions.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David
    >
  25. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    P-P. Henneken wrote:
    > As mentioned I ordered an H1, beforehand I downloaded some DPReview
    > sample images to be printed as a photo. The ISO400 pictures coming
    > out of the H1 I also consider "very bad". So I ordered some 6x4 inch
    > photo's with ISO400 and ISO200 shots. The noise of the ISO400 shots
    > was very obvious, even on the 6x4 photo's. ISO200, on the other hand,
    > was fine, while on screen it's also quite bad.
    >
    > So what you're saying sure makes sense. A bit of noise on screen will
    > not be seen on the actual photo. But some pictures of the FZ30
    > contain that much noise that I find it hard to believe (considering
    > the tests I just did) that it will not show on the actual photo. Let
    > alone an enlargement! Okay, it's an 8mp image so the actual
    > "noise-pixels" will be smaller but still. That being said, it's the
    > result of the less-than-perfect 8mp sensor.

    My own take with these cameras is to stick with the minimum ISO, unless
    the "atmosphere" of a grainy photo would add to the image - a candid or
    night shot for example.

    > I really do believe that the 7mp sensor would have been a better
    > choice. I wonder what Fuji will release soon, the F10 images are
    > really, really outstanding in this respect (actually wanted that
    > camera before the H1 but the total lack of manual controls bothered
    > me). If they can bring out an image stabilized 6 (or 8, or 9...)
    > megapixel camera with the same low-noise as the F10 and with
    > comparable specs/options as the S2 IS, H1, FZ5/20/30 it will be quite
    > some camera!

    If their camera/sensor is truely as good as the reviews have reported, and
    the lower noise is not simply achieved by image processing, then it would
    indeed be a stunning combination. Why some manufacturers don't have image
    stabilisation escapes me - it is such an advantage if you need a long
    telephoto. It would be great to have ISO 400 as a usable setting rather
    than a "high-grain scene" mode!

    Cheers,
    David
  26. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    "David J Taylor"
    <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
    message news:EX3Ee.75073$G8.60001@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
    > My own take with these cameras is to stick with the minimum ISO, unless
    > the "atmosphere" of a grainy photo would add to the image - a candid or
    > night shot for example.

    True. Stick with the low(er) ISO settings. One additional advantage of the
    image stabilization is ofcourse the fact that you can also use this to
    decrease the shutter speed to have enough light hit the small sensor. Also
    one of the reason why I wanted an IS camera.


    > If their camera/sensor is truely as good as the reviews have reported, and
    > the lower noise is not simply achieved by image processing, then it would
    > indeed be a stunning combination.

    I find this
    http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/fujifilmf10_samples/originals/dscf0461.jpg
    an incredible achievement for such a tiny P&S camera! Okay, there is some
    noise, but for an ISO400 shot it's very very good!

    > Why some manufacturers don't have image stabilisation escapes me - it is
    > such an advantage if you need a long telephoto. It would be great to have
    > ISO 400 as a usable setting rather than a "high-grain scene" mode!

    Exactly. A reason why I wanted to wait for an IS Fuji camera but alas,
    patience is not a word in my vocabulary... ;-)

    P-P.
  27. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken" <pep@wanadoo.nl>
    wrote:

    > One additional advantage of the
    >image stabilization is ofcourse the fact that you can also use this to
    >decrease the shutter speed to have enough light hit the small sensor. Also
    >one of the reason why I wanted an IS camera.

    Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but
    a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help
    with moving subjects.

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

    "King Sardon" <kingsardon@Hatespam.com> wrote in message
    news:s842e1dsdvn913l43bkea1te6ks100s2mf@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken" <pep@wanadoo.nl>
    > wrote:
    > Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but
    > a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help
    > with moving subjects.
    >
    > KS

    Obviously! But the first affordable image stabilized point and shoot
    superzoom with f1.4 through the whole zoomrange I have yet to find! ;-)

    P-P.
  29. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    "P-P. Henneken" <pep@wanadoo.nl> wrote in
    news:99088$42e0b0ef$546b0e31$29283@news.multikabel.nl...
    > "Some" noise... I think my eyes are deceiving me. The level of noise (also
    > at low(er) ISO's!) is in my opinion extremely bad. Especially for a camera
    > at this pricepoint. The lens itself might be very good, the sensor is
    > obviously too small for this number of megapixels. Don't get me wrong, not
    > trying to start a flame here (hey, I just ordered an H1, which can't be
    > described as a noiseless digicam as well...), just being objective. I also
    > think that they should have used the 7 megapixel sensor. Okay, you lose
    > some resolution but you gain a lot in the image quality department. But
    > alas, to satisfy the market they opted for the worse. Logical, but sad.

    The 7 Mpix cameras, like Sony DSC-P200 and Canon SD500 are now better
    regarding noise than most 5 Mpix cameras.
    Maybe the manufacturers will learn to handle the challenges of an 8 Mpix
    sensor eventually, but evidently not yet...
    The noise grain is so much larger and more noticeable than the pix
    resolution even at 100 ISO.
    /per
  30. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 10:06:33 +0200, "P-P. Henneken" <pep@wanadoo.nl>
    wrote:

    >"King Sardon" <kingsardon@Hatespam.com> wrote in message
    >news:s842e1dsdvn913l43bkea1te6ks100s2mf@4ax.com...
    >> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken" <pep@wanadoo.nl>
    >> wrote:
    >> Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but
    >> a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help
    >> with moving subjects.
    >>
    >> KS
    >
    >Obviously! But the first affordable image stabilized point and shoot
    >superzoom with f1.4 through the whole zoomrange I have yet to find! ;-)

    How useful would f1.4 be at the tele end? Other than to impress your
    friends with the bulk of the glass, I mean. To go forward, we need
    more sensitive sensors.

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

    "P-P. Henneken" <pep@wanadoo.nl> writes:

    > "King Sardon" <kingsardon@Hatespam.com> wrote in message
    > news:s842e1dsdvn913l43bkea1te6ks100s2mf@4ax.com...
    > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:20:59 +0200, "P-P. Henneken" <pep@wanadoo.nl>
    > > wrote:
    > > Only if the subject is not moving very fast. IS is a big advantage but
    > > a limited one. You get to leave the tripod at home but it won't help
    > > with moving subjects.
    > >
    > > KS
    >
    > Obviously! But the first affordable image stabilized point and shoot
    > superzoom with f1.4 through the whole zoomrange I have yet to find! ;-)

    I am just trying to imagine how big such a lens would be..... After all,
    Panasonic seems to have given up the constant f/2.8 zoom in the FZ30. I
    suspect it is because they increased the size of the sensor (so the 8MP would
    have roughly the same pixel pitch and noise characteristics as the previous
    5MP), and reused the Leica lens they had with the FZ20.

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
    http://www.the-meissners.org
  32. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Michael Meissner <mrmnews@the-meissners.org> writes:

    > I am just trying to imagine how big such a lens would be..... After all,
    > Panasonic seems to have given up the constant f/2.8 zoom in the FZ30. I
    > suspect it is because they increased the size of the sensor (so the 8MP would
    > have roughly the same pixel pitch and noise characteristics as the previous
    > 5MP), and reused the Leica lens they had with the FZ20.

    According to http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/ the FZ20
    and FZ30 have different lenses:

    FZ30 FZ20

    35 - 420 mm equiv. 36 - 432 mm equiv.
    12x optical zoom 12x optical zoom
    F2.8 - F3.7 F2.8 (throughout range)
    14 elements in 10 groups 13 elements in 8 groups
    MEGA OIS Image Stabilization MEGA OIS Image Stabilization
    Non-extending Extending type
    Internal zoom & focus
    55 mm lens thread

    The different numbers of elements/groups and extending vs. non-extending
    is pretty conclusive.

    -Dave
  33. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Dave Sill <dave@sill.org> wrote:
    > Michael Meissner <mrmnews@the-meissners.org> writes:
    >
    >> I am just trying to imagine how big such a lens would be..... After all,
    >> Panasonic seems to have given up the constant f/2.8 zoom in the FZ30. I
    >> suspect it is because they increased the size of the sensor (so the 8MP would
    >> have roughly the same pixel pitch and noise characteristics as the previous
    >> 5MP), and reused the Leica lens they had with the FZ20.
    >
    > According to http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/ the FZ20
    > and FZ30 have different lenses:
    >
    > FZ30 FZ20
    >
    > 35 - 420 mm equiv. 36 - 432 mm equiv.

    If you peer at the pics of the FZ30 it's also 7.4-88.8mm rather than
    6-72 on the 10 and 20. A very different piece of glass.

    pete
    --
    pete@fenelon.com "There's no room for enigmas in built-up areas"
  34. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    In article <wx0wtndtz69.fsf@sws5.ornl.gov>, Dave Sill <dave@sill.org>
    wrote:

    > The different numbers of elements/groups and extending vs. non-extending
    > is pretty conclusive.

    You got it. The non-extending aspect also speeds the startup time. One
    of the major reasons I'm lusting after the FZ30. When you see a good
    shot coming up, the delay until the camera has readied itself can drive
    you NUTS!!

    --

    Chas Right
  35. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Dave Sill <dave@sill.org> writes:

    > Michael Meissner <mrmnews@the-meissners.org> writes:
    >
    > > I am just trying to imagine how big such a lens would be..... After all,
    > > Panasonic seems to have given up the constant f/2.8 zoom in the FZ30. I
    > > suspect it is because they increased the size of the sensor (so the 8MP would
    > > have roughly the same pixel pitch and noise characteristics as the previous
    > > 5MP), and reused the Leica lens they had with the FZ20.
    >
    > According to http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/ the FZ20
    > and FZ30 have different lenses:
    >
    > FZ30 FZ20
    >
    > 35 - 420 mm equiv. 36 - 432 mm equiv.
    > 12x optical zoom 12x optical zoom
    > F2.8 - F3.7 F2.8 (throughout range)
    > 14 elements in 10 groups 13 elements in 8 groups
    > MEGA OIS Image Stabilization MEGA OIS Image Stabilization
    > Non-extending Extending type
    > Internal zoom & focus
    > 55 mm lens thread
    >
    > The different numbers of elements/groups and extending vs. non-extending
    > is pretty conclusive.

    Ok, I thought I had read in the panasonic group at dpreview, that they had
    reused the lens.

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
    http://www.the-meissners.org
  36. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:09:39 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote:

    >Dave Sill wrote:
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    >
    >Thanks for posting that, Dave. With the manual zoom and manual focus
    >controls, VGA movies, and swivel viewfinder it looks like a true
    >photographer's camera!

    Except for the plain hot shoe. No "TTL." You have to set things. No
    spontaneity. So one would have to keep their Nikon with external flash for
    those outdoor flash pictures, like Halloween parades.

    Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).
  37. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    Don Wiss <donwiss@no_spam.com> writes:

    > On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:09:39 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    > <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote:
    >
    > >Dave Sill wrote:
    > >> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072004panasonic_fz30.asp
    > >> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/panasonicfz30/
    > >
    > >Thanks for posting that, Dave. With the manual zoom and manual focus
    > >controls, VGA movies, and swivel viewfinder it looks like a true
    > >photographer's camera!
    >
    > Except for the plain hot shoe. No "TTL." You have to set things. No
    > spontaneity. So one would have to keep their Nikon with external flash for
    > those outdoor flash pictures, like Halloween parades.

    While admitily my pictures became more spot on when I switched from auto flash
    to TTL, it isn't that hard to shoot with a generic auto flash once you get the
    hang of it. On my Olympus C-2100UZ, it was a matter of connect the flash, turn
    it on, and go into manual mode since the camera would remember the f/stop and
    shutter speed previously used, and if you only use manual mode for flash, the
    settings are the same as the last time. Of all of the steps, the one that took
    the longest was turning on the flash, and letting it cycle up.

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
    http://www.the-meissners.org
  38. Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.zlr (More info?)

    On 03 Aug 2005, Michael Meissner <mrmnews@the-meissners.org> wrote:

    >While admitily my pictures became more spot on when I switched from auto flash
    >to TTL, it isn't that hard to shoot with a generic auto flash once you get the
    >hang of it. On my Olympus C-2100UZ, it was a matter of connect the flash, turn
    >it on, and go into manual mode since the camera would remember the f/stop and
    >shutter speed previously used, and if you only use manual mode for flash, the
    >settings are the same as the last time. Of all of the steps, the one that took
    >the longest was turning on the flash, and letting it cycle up.

    The only external flash I've used is "TTL." Just has does auto work? You
    leave the camera set at one f-stop, tell the flash that, and then the flash
    shuts itself off? At my Halloween parades people are all distances from me.
    Barely enough time for the camera to auto-focus.

    Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).
Ask a new question

Read More

ZLR Cameras Product