Lusting after the new Panasonic cameras announced today: Lumix DMC-LX3 and -FZ28. Especially the latter... I like big zooms and i cannot lie
4 months, 1 week ago in Hervanta, Tampere, Finland.
17 comments so far
It's nice to see more non-DSLR cameras have wider-angled zoom
ranges. 35-38mm at the wide end is not enough, especially since
lots of people take party pictures or group pictures that benefit
from a wider framing.
I've gathered that the 24mm wide end is a marked improvement on
28mm in terms of actual angle of view (see wiki
Angle of view: Common lens angles of view ). Too bad the
LX3 has only a lackluster zoom of 2.5x.
Hmm, on the other hand the LX3's sensor seems to be relatively
large for a compact: 1/1.63" @ 10.1Mpix. With that it goes head to
head with Ricoh Caplio
GX100 (CCD: 1/1.75" @ 10Mpix; zoom: 24mm–72mm) and Canon
PowerShot
G9 (CCD: 1/1.7" @ 12.1Mpix; zoom: 35mm–210mm) for instance.
Hmm, it's gonna be hard to pick a companion camera for my superzoom
FZ18.
it's not just the wider angle. the LX3 has a much bigger sensor
than the FZ28 and most compact cameras => better images esp in
low-light conditions. the new Multi-aspect bracketing mode is
interesting, something that on occasions i wished my FZ20 had. and
it has an F2.0 lens, compared to F2.8 in the FZ28, which again
helps in capturing clearer, sharper pictures. other advantages:
Film mode, bigger and higher resolution LCD, more compact and
portable than the FZ28...
the FZ28 wins with the 18x zoom that starts wide enough at 27mm.
it also captures HD video at 30fps instead of 24fps on the LX3. and
once you have a taste of big zooms it is just so hard to go back to
anything less... that's why i want them both :P
Now I really want a review of this LX3 baby ... I wan't to see
how it fares on image quality against PowerShot G9. As I understand
the G9 is pretty much a gold standard for compacts < €500 (altho
not for the stricter category of shirt-pocket compacts which group
it doesn't quite qualify for).
My logic (lol, "policy") for camera acquisition for now is as
follows. First, I'm not going to lug around a DSLR, so I'm gonna
have a good superzoom/bridge camera (which I have) plus an
excellent compact camera (to be acq'd) for the same reasons you
mentioned. Second, I place hight importance on the features of
lense brightness, size of CCD, angle of view on the wide end. Video
capture is a secondary priority for me but nice to have, in which
case it better work with zoom, too. Raw capture is a must, however,
so that I can get the best of the camera after I learn to process
raw.
As for the budget, well I've got more than is good for the
humility of my learning to do photography properly. :D But I do
recognize that first I need to learn how to use Lightroom with my
FZ18, and only then continue the hunt for new tools.
I love my GX100, especially the wide angle, but it lacks zoom
and could do better at low-light performance. However, if you put
it in black and white mode and crank up the ISO, it can get some
great shots, as shown here (not my pics):
I also think that its noise can be very film-grain-like, nicer
looking than typical P&S sensor noise. And its controls are
more like an SLR than a P&S.
I think Panasonic has some great cameras, but I didn't like the
poor low-light performance of my LX1, and its noise was rather
ugly. Indoor pics were hard to take in less-than-perfect lighting
without flash (I like to use ambient lighting as much as possible).
So even though the 16:9 ratio was pretty cool, and it had manual
controls (too fiddly to set) overall I was disappointed by it.
@jkniiv you have your
policy and i have mine :) anyway i have bought a new digital camera
each year for 4 years in a row, 2002-2005. and during those years i
did take tons of pictures, averaging something like 10 a day (of
course, more on certain days especially vacations and some days
none). and i did see myself making progress in my photography in
terms of composition, lighting, making use of what the camera has
to offer, choosing the best tools and settings for the situation,
etc.
however i've been slacking off recently, not taking as many
pictures and not feeling like i've been making any improvements.
plus other things are of higher priority in my life right now,
including not squandering money on toys :P ...but i'll be back.
photography has been a long time love of mine, having received my
first film SLR on my 15th birthday (thanks dad! and thanks to my
then-boyfriend for perking my interest in the first place which led
to me requesting the birthday gift :))
and those good ol' days with film cameras... that's another
(long) story :P
@jezlyn i'm not a fan of
flash either. i think in 80% cases where flash is used, the result
would be better if it wasn't used. flash more often than not gives
a harsh and unnatural look. personal opinion of course, as most
people i know are flash-happy. i just hate it when someone sticks a
camera in my face, takes a picture with the flash going off and
blinding me. i usually warn people when i'm using the flash, and
even then i step down the flash output (if possible on the camera)
to give just enough extra light that is needed. although sometimes
i underestimate and have to up the exposure...
call me weird, but i'd rather have noise than unnatural looking
pics.
@cybette You're not
weird, one of my best friends has an ole SLR and she's pretty much
the same about flash. And it's true, a lot of people even use flash
for far away objects.....yeah....If you don't want people using
flash in and around your home, I saw an article on Wired about a
man who made some sort of gizmo that superimposes a message into
the photo when people use flash....
hehe, yeah, speaking of flash on far away objects... i always
have a good laugh at people at concerts taking pics with their
P&S and not turning the auto-flash off, and they wonder why
they can't see what's happening on stage in their pics but instead
the bright shiny heads of people right in front of them ;)
@chelx: Hey, can non-Carol
people take advantage of this deal??? :)
@cybette: If I use flash,
I tend to use the slow-sync flash so that it looks a bit more
natural, mixed with the ambient light. Of course, this can bite me
in the butt sometimes, with slower shutter speeds causing motion
blur. I'd much rather go higher ISO than use flash, but I'm
learning to use fill flash and still have it look natural.
@cybette: You know, I
hadn't actually read up on the LX3 until today, and I can see why
you are quite interested in it; I am kind of interested in it now,
too! :) I look forward to seeing how the reviews turn out.
17 comments so far
It's nice to see more non-DSLR cameras have wider-angled zoom ranges. 35-38mm at the wide end is not enough, especially since lots of people take party pictures or group pictures that benefit from a wider framing.
4 months, 1 week ago by jezlyn.
i know! the 24mm on the LX3 just sounds so sweet.
4 months, 1 week ago by cybette.
I've gathered that the 24mm wide end is a marked improvement on 28mm in terms of actual angle of view (see wiki Angle of view: Common lens angles of view ). Too bad the LX3 has only a lackluster zoom of 2.5x.
4 months, 1 week ago by jkniiv.
Hmm, on the other hand the LX3's sensor seems to be relatively large for a compact: 1/1.63" @ 10.1Mpix. With that it goes head to head with Ricoh Caplio GX100 (CCD: 1/1.75" @ 10Mpix; zoom: 24mm–72mm) and Canon PowerShot G9 (CCD: 1/1.7" @ 12.1Mpix; zoom: 35mm–210mm) for instance. Hmm, it's gonna be hard to pick a companion camera for my superzoom FZ18.
4 months, 1 week ago by jkniiv.
it's not just the wider angle. the LX3 has a much bigger sensor than the FZ28 and most compact cameras => better images esp in low-light conditions. the new Multi-aspect bracketing mode is interesting, something that on occasions i wished my FZ20 had. and it has an F2.0 lens, compared to F2.8 in the FZ28, which again helps in capturing clearer, sharper pictures. other advantages: Film mode, bigger and higher resolution LCD, more compact and portable than the FZ28...
the FZ28 wins with the 18x zoom that starts wide enough at 27mm. it also captures HD video at 30fps instead of 24fps on the LX3. and once you have a taste of big zooms it is just so hard to go back to anything less... that's why i want them both :P
4 months, 1 week ago by cybette.
heh, spent too long typing my comment. you had the same points. but anyway, i can't justify the expense until i improve on my photography skills...
4 months, 1 week ago by cybette.
Now I really want a review of this LX3 baby ... I wan't to see how it fares on image quality against PowerShot G9. As I understand the G9 is pretty much a gold standard for compacts < €500 (altho not for the stricter category of shirt-pocket compacts which group it doesn't quite qualify for).
4 months, 1 week ago by jkniiv.
My logic (lol, "policy") for camera acquisition for now is as follows. First, I'm not going to lug around a DSLR, so I'm gonna have a good superzoom/bridge camera (which I have) plus an excellent compact camera (to be acq'd) for the same reasons you mentioned. Second, I place hight importance on the features of lense brightness, size of CCD, angle of view on the wide end. Video capture is a secondary priority for me but nice to have, in which case it better work with zoom, too. Raw capture is a must, however, so that I can get the best of the camera after I learn to process raw.
As for the budget, well I've got more than is good for the humility of my learning to do photography properly. :D But I do recognize that first I need to learn how to use Lightroom with my FZ18, and only then continue the hunt for new tools.
4 months, 1 week ago by jkniiv.
I love my GX100, especially the wide angle, but it lacks zoom and could do better at low-light performance. However, if you put it in black and white mode and crank up the ISO, it can get some great shots, as shown here (not my pics):
http://flickr.com/photos/andretakeda/2432814740/
http://flickr.com/photos/andretakeda/243...
I also think that its noise can be very film-grain-like, nicer looking than typical P&S sensor noise. And its controls are more like an SLR than a P&S.
I think Panasonic has some great cameras, but I didn't like the poor low-light performance of my LX1, and its noise was rather ugly. Indoor pics were hard to take in less-than-perfect lighting without flash (I like to use ambient lighting as much as possible). So even though the 16:9 ratio was pretty cool, and it had manual controls (too fiddly to set) overall I was disappointed by it.
4 months, 1 week ago by jezlyn.
@jkniiv you have your policy and i have mine :) anyway i have bought a new digital camera each year for 4 years in a row, 2002-2005. and during those years i did take tons of pictures, averaging something like 10 a day (of course, more on certain days especially vacations and some days none). and i did see myself making progress in my photography in terms of composition, lighting, making use of what the camera has to offer, choosing the best tools and settings for the situation, etc.
however i've been slacking off recently, not taking as many pictures and not feeling like i've been making any improvements. plus other things are of higher priority in my life right now, including not squandering money on toys :P ...but i'll be back. photography has been a long time love of mine, having received my first film SLR on my 15th birthday (thanks dad! and thanks to my then-boyfriend for perking my interest in the first place which led to me requesting the birthday gift :))
and those good ol' days with film cameras... that's another (long) story :P
4 months, 1 week ago by cybette.
@jezlyn i'm not a fan of flash either. i think in 80% cases where flash is used, the result would be better if it wasn't used. flash more often than not gives a harsh and unnatural look. personal opinion of course, as most people i know are flash-happy. i just hate it when someone sticks a camera in my face, takes a picture with the flash going off and blinding me. i usually warn people when i'm using the flash, and even then i step down the flash output (if possible on the camera) to give just enough extra light that is needed. although sometimes i underestimate and have to up the exposure...
call me weird, but i'd rather have noise than unnatural looking pics.
4 months, 1 week ago by cybette.
@cybette You're not weird, one of my best friends has an ole SLR and she's pretty much the same about flash. And it's true, a lot of people even use flash for far away objects.....yeah....If you don't want people using flash in and around your home, I saw an article on Wired about a man who made some sort of gizmo that superimposes a message into the photo when people use flash....
4 months, 1 week ago by edythemighty.
hehe, yeah, speaking of flash on far away objects... i always have a good laugh at people at concerts taking pics with their P&S and not turning the auto-flash off, and they wonder why they can't see what's happening on stage in their pics but instead the bright shiny heads of people right in front of them ;)
4 months, 1 week ago by cybette.
Carol. if you need to get cameras, let me know :) I might able to get very good deal for you :)
4 months, 1 week ago by chelx.
@chelx: Hey, can non-Carol people take advantage of this deal??? :)
@cybette: If I use flash, I tend to use the slow-sync flash so that it looks a bit more natural, mixed with the ambient light. Of course, this can bite me in the butt sometimes, with slower shutter speeds causing motion blur. I'd much rather go higher ISO than use flash, but I'm learning to use fill flash and still have it look natural.
4 months, 1 week ago by jezlyn.
lol, i'm sure @chelx is more than happy to help any "non-Carol people" :)
@chelx thanks i'd definitely keep that in mind
@jezlyn i got a lot to learn from you and others!
4 months, 1 week ago by cybette.
@cybette: You know, I hadn't actually read up on the LX3 until today, and I can see why you are quite interested in it; I am kind of interested in it now, too! :) I look forward to seeing how the reviews turn out.
4 months, 1 week ago by jezlyn.