-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
FZ50 - anyone got one yet? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter cgilbert
- Start date
There has been a huge amount of discussion about this camera over on the forums at www.dpreview.com and they are working on a review that should be out shortly.
The camera has been very controversial on the forums. At first people thought the noise issue would get worse because of the increase in pixels. Then they were worried that the noise reduction was too strong and detail would be lost. A lot of sample images have been posted at dpreview including some birds. The consensus (if there is one) seems to be that image quality is pretty much a wash with the FZ30. There is a little more noise but a greater number of pixels captures more detail and the noise reduction is a little better and not as destructive of detail as people feared. It is pretty hard to tell the difference between FZ30 and FZ50 images. At low iso, it therefore appears that these are both pretty good cameras. At high iso they are not so great, but no one is really challenging dSLRs in the superzoom category yet for high iso performance, but Canon and Sony are probably still better here than Panasonic.
Panasonics have great lenses, excellent focus and image stabilization, but their sensors have always not quite lived up to their cameras. The Canon S3 is a much smaller camera. Its lens is not quite as good as the panasonics (especially in purple fringing), but its senor is better and it uses a light touch on noise suppression so detail is retained. I use an Olympus 765 and keep watching the market to upgrade. I have looked at a lot of sample images. If I were buying now, I would probably go with the Canon because of its size and a little better high iso performance. Both are excellent cameras, however, and the choice comes down to pretty minor things.
If you are going to photograph birds a Sony DH1758 is a great 1.7X teleconverter that can be added to either camera for greatly increased reach.
Good luck
The camera has been very controversial on the forums. At first people thought the noise issue would get worse because of the increase in pixels. Then they were worried that the noise reduction was too strong and detail would be lost. A lot of sample images have been posted at dpreview including some birds. The consensus (if there is one) seems to be that image quality is pretty much a wash with the FZ30. There is a little more noise but a greater number of pixels captures more detail and the noise reduction is a little better and not as destructive of detail as people feared. It is pretty hard to tell the difference between FZ30 and FZ50 images. At low iso, it therefore appears that these are both pretty good cameras. At high iso they are not so great, but no one is really challenging dSLRs in the superzoom category yet for high iso performance, but Canon and Sony are probably still better here than Panasonic.
Panasonics have great lenses, excellent focus and image stabilization, but their sensors have always not quite lived up to their cameras. The Canon S3 is a much smaller camera. Its lens is not quite as good as the panasonics (especially in purple fringing), but its senor is better and it uses a light touch on noise suppression so detail is retained. I use an Olympus 765 and keep watching the market to upgrade. I have looked at a lot of sample images. If I were buying now, I would probably go with the Canon because of its size and a little better high iso performance. Both are excellent cameras, however, and the choice comes down to pretty minor things.
If you are going to photograph birds a Sony DH1758 is a great 1.7X teleconverter that can be added to either camera for greatly increased reach.
Good luck
cgilbert said:
Incredibly sweet
The FZ50 has 10mp, and a 12x optical zoom. However, you can optionally drop down to 3 or 5mp, which bumps up the optical zoom to 17x and 20.4x, respectively. It's NOT software-based. Rather, the camera hones in on the central 3-or-5mp area of the picture, and crops out the excess, thus yielding the optical zoom. I have Panasonic's LT55 1.7x teleconverter, from my FZ7 days, which works perfectly with the FZ50. With the image stabilization, it's astonishing to see how "close" the snapshot appears, despite the actual distance when you snapped the photo. To do all that with a dSLR would cost, literally, thousands of dollars.
I replaced the FZ7 because, although a great camera in most respects, I was tired of not being able to take pics without a flash, at dawn and dusk. The FZ7 has truly useable ISOs only up to 200. The FZ50 thankfully includes usable ISOs thru 800. 1600 is workable if you don't crop or blow up the pic, and print 4x6 or similar small-ish pics. 3200 (buried under "High Sensitivity Scene") is for emergencies-- you know, when it's a case of shot or no shot, period. On the rare occasion when I want to crop a 1600ISO pic, I just run it thru Noise Ninja. There is a bit of loss of detail, but I can live with it.
Regarding the noise issue... Panasonic did get a bit heavy handed with its new Venus III engine. But, because of the magic of that super-zoom when using 3 or 5mp, the birds tend to fill the frame much more frequently than not. Thus, I don't have to crop -- good, because the noise deal at 800 and 1600 won't smack you on prints at my typical 4x6 size. Esp. at the lower 3-5mp resolution. Mind you-- the image remains superb at that lower resolution, so I lose only the minor noise you'd see with a magnifier.
You won't really comprehend the wonder of this unless you take a dawn/ dusk/ low-light pic, and then realize that you CAN indeed bump up the ISO without lingering grief. So, I keep "Noise Reduction" on "low".
It's ergonomically fantastic, with both zoom and focus rings. The system auto-magnifies the target area as you spin the focus ring, if you're in Manual Mode, which really encourages sharpness. There are two dial rings, which you can set to exposure comp and speed/aperture, the latter dependent on whether you're in Shutter or Aperture Priority Mode. It's a powerhouse-- hot shoe for optional external flash, 3 custom slots where you can stash your most frequent tweaks, in-camera manual crops during playback, optional release cable for the shutter, etc.
Bottom-line: I was quite close to biting the bullet and getting the Canon Rebel Xt (or XTi), but ran across the FZ50. I purchased it from Amazon, precisely because of its generous 30-day return policy. My thinking was that if the FZ50 bombed, I'd return it for the Rebel. Now, ain't no way I'm giving up this camera! It's like I get a dSLR, without the hassle and super-expense of long heavy zoom lenses, dust, and interchangeable lenses. The absolute best part: when I'm out in the field, it truly seems like this camera was made with birders in mind. Being able to handhold the camera, with 20.4x enhanced still further with the 1.7x teleconverter---- ooooo, baby!
I am beyond happy/thrilled!
Oops, I forgot to mention: there is a downer: the burst mode. Slow! But, given all the other good stuff, I'm in growl and bear it mode. Also, be sure to play with "Picture Adjustment" tweaks. Outta da box, I wasn't pleased with the picture quality. Once I tweaked it, all was good!
{edit} Sept. 18th--- Live & learn. Turns out, there's a button on top of the camera, for setting the speed of the burst mode: low, high, off. Apparently, the default is low. In any event, it's still on the slow side for 10mp pics. But, things are quite snappy for 5 pics in succession when using the lower mp (3-5). Then takes a moment to clear the buffer. All in all, works much quicker than I believed when I initially posted (thankfully!) {/edit}
Yes, the FZ50, which replaces my FZ7, arrived on my doorstep last Wednesday. I took some vacation days for the rest of the week, allowing me to thoroughly test it for my primary usage-- birding. It proved to be "third try's the charm," as I had purchased, and returned, a Minolta 5D dSLR and a Sony RC1 during the past few weeks. There's much to love about this camera. For bird photos, it's fantastic. Stick with me here....cgilbert said:
The FZ50 has 10mp, and a 12x optical zoom. However, you can optionally drop down to 3 or 5mp, which bumps up the optical zoom to 17x and 20.4x, respectively. It's NOT software-based. Rather, the camera hones in on the central 3-or-5mp area of the picture, and crops out the excess, thus yielding the optical zoom. I have Panasonic's LT55 1.7x teleconverter, from my FZ7 days, which works perfectly with the FZ50. With the image stabilization, it's astonishing to see how "close" the snapshot appears, despite the actual distance when you snapped the photo. To do all that with a dSLR would cost, literally, thousands of dollars.
I replaced the FZ7 because, although a great camera in most respects, I was tired of not being able to take pics without a flash, at dawn and dusk. The FZ7 has truly useable ISOs only up to 200. The FZ50 thankfully includes usable ISOs thru 800. 1600 is workable if you don't crop or blow up the pic, and print 4x6 or similar small-ish pics. 3200 (buried under "High Sensitivity Scene") is for emergencies-- you know, when it's a case of shot or no shot, period. On the rare occasion when I want to crop a 1600ISO pic, I just run it thru Noise Ninja. There is a bit of loss of detail, but I can live with it.
Regarding the noise issue... Panasonic did get a bit heavy handed with its new Venus III engine. But, because of the magic of that super-zoom when using 3 or 5mp, the birds tend to fill the frame much more frequently than not. Thus, I don't have to crop -- good, because the noise deal at 800 and 1600 won't smack you on prints at my typical 4x6 size. Esp. at the lower 3-5mp resolution. Mind you-- the image remains superb at that lower resolution, so I lose only the minor noise you'd see with a magnifier.
You won't really comprehend the wonder of this unless you take a dawn/ dusk/ low-light pic, and then realize that you CAN indeed bump up the ISO without lingering grief. So, I keep "Noise Reduction" on "low".
It's ergonomically fantastic, with both zoom and focus rings. The system auto-magnifies the target area as you spin the focus ring, if you're in Manual Mode, which really encourages sharpness. There are two dial rings, which you can set to exposure comp and speed/aperture, the latter dependent on whether you're in Shutter or Aperture Priority Mode. It's a powerhouse-- hot shoe for optional external flash, 3 custom slots where you can stash your most frequent tweaks, in-camera manual crops during playback, optional release cable for the shutter, etc.
Bottom-line: I was quite close to biting the bullet and getting the Canon Rebel Xt (or XTi), but ran across the FZ50. I purchased it from Amazon, precisely because of its generous 30-day return policy. My thinking was that if the FZ50 bombed, I'd return it for the Rebel. Now, ain't no way I'm giving up this camera! It's like I get a dSLR, without the hassle and super-expense of long heavy zoom lenses, dust, and interchangeable lenses. The absolute best part: when I'm out in the field, it truly seems like this camera was made with birders in mind. Being able to handhold the camera, with 20.4x enhanced still further with the 1.7x teleconverter---- ooooo, baby!
I am beyond happy/thrilled!
Oops, I forgot to mention: there is a downer: the burst mode. Slow! But, given all the other good stuff, I'm in growl and bear it mode. Also, be sure to play with "Picture Adjustment" tweaks. Outta da box, I wasn't pleased with the picture quality. Once I tweaked it, all was good!
{edit} Sept. 18th--- Live & learn. Turns out, there's a button on top of the camera, for setting the speed of the burst mode: low, high, off. Apparently, the default is low. In any event, it's still on the slow side for 10mp pics. But, things are quite snappy for 5 pics in succession when using the lower mp (3-5). Then takes a moment to clear the buffer. All in all, works much quicker than I believed when I initially posted (thankfully!) {/edit}
Last edited:
The FZ50 sounds like a good camera, If you were thinking about buying one it may be worth waiting a bit longer as Leica (who make the lens for the FZ50) are about to bring out their own version called V-lux.
It looks like a nice bit of kit but not sure on the price yet.
Here's a link:
http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/compact_cameras/v-lux_1/
After a bit more searching, I have seen it advertised at £502 and is due out late October/early November.
It looks like a nice bit of kit but not sure on the price yet.
Here's a link:
http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/compact_cameras/v-lux_1/
After a bit more searching, I have seen it advertised at £502 and is due out late October/early November.
Last edited:
My first FZ50 pictures
I got mine on Wednesday and had my first outing yesterday.
It's brilliant, no masterpieces but a few samples below including Ring-billed Gull
http://static.flickr.com/84/263768994_04d4fd576d.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/121/263768992_9b632b903c.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/116/263768990_f5e240d33e.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/94/263768986_713c408ce6.jpg
I got mine on Wednesday and had my first outing yesterday.
It's brilliant, no masterpieces but a few samples below including Ring-billed Gull
http://static.flickr.com/84/263768994_04d4fd576d.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/121/263768992_9b632b903c.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/116/263768990_f5e240d33e.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/94/263768986_713c408ce6.jpg
Looking Glass
Member
Does anybody know whether there is any difference in technical terms between the V-Lux 1 and the FZ50 besides the shape and the red dot? :h?:400mark said:
Regards
Andreas
Rose Fletcher
Rose from Australia - formerly Birdeye
I took delivery of an FZ50 at the end of September. Prior to that I had been using a Pentax MZ50 SLR, purchased after somebody entered my home in my absence and helped themselves to my Nikon, with tele lens attached. Despite the fact that I was never satisfied with the Pentax optics, and having only an 80mm zoom drove me crazy, I admit to a certain amount of trepidation about going from an SLR (any SLR) to a digital.
I should point out that this is my first digital camera, and I'm not completely conversant even with the jargon, so I can't feed you lots of technical details. I can say, however, that this camera is a joy to use. I haven't had any problems with it that were not self-inflicted. If you leave it on fully automatic, you will get acceptable images. I use the word 'acceptable' deliberately, however. The only automatic shots I've taken, in relatively low light, have had a fair bit of noise, and were not as sharp as I would have liked. That's to be expected, I think. If you want excellent results, you wouldn't expect to get them in automatic mode.
I have posted a few photos taken with the camera, for anybody who wants to have a look.
http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/43699
Where the results are not what they could have been, I must take most of the responsibility. Those I took of Sharp-tailed Sandpipers were taken on automatic, in relatively low light, and have been cropped to about half of the original frame. The New Holland Honeyeater was taken in full sunlight in the late afternoon and using the shutter priority mode, as an example of better lighting conditions and some control by the operator. That one has been cropped to about the same degree as the Sandpipers, so provides a good comparison of the high and low light results - although I'm certain those low light results could be improved. For one that has been very heavily cropped, look at the Caspian Tern. If the shot is well focussed and exposed, there will be plenty of detail and they will enlarge well.
After reading a few reviews, I was expecting a lot more noise. It's there on some of the low light images, but until you get to high magnification, it's definitely not a problem. I haven't yet made any effort to reduce it. Only one of my images has been photoshopped; a shot of a Pacific Black Duck. Best not to look at that, I've only just realised what a bad photoshopping job it is. My point is that what you see in every photo except that one is what the camera delivers. None of the images have been sharpened or otherwise improved - I simply haven't learned how to do those things yet.
Overall, I've been very impressed with this camera, especially since I'm a complete novice, and probably not using it to best effect. I hope this helps someone, I'm not even sure whether I'm giving the kind of information people need.
I should point out that this is my first digital camera, and I'm not completely conversant even with the jargon, so I can't feed you lots of technical details. I can say, however, that this camera is a joy to use. I haven't had any problems with it that were not self-inflicted. If you leave it on fully automatic, you will get acceptable images. I use the word 'acceptable' deliberately, however. The only automatic shots I've taken, in relatively low light, have had a fair bit of noise, and were not as sharp as I would have liked. That's to be expected, I think. If you want excellent results, you wouldn't expect to get them in automatic mode.
I have posted a few photos taken with the camera, for anybody who wants to have a look.
http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/43699
Where the results are not what they could have been, I must take most of the responsibility. Those I took of Sharp-tailed Sandpipers were taken on automatic, in relatively low light, and have been cropped to about half of the original frame. The New Holland Honeyeater was taken in full sunlight in the late afternoon and using the shutter priority mode, as an example of better lighting conditions and some control by the operator. That one has been cropped to about the same degree as the Sandpipers, so provides a good comparison of the high and low light results - although I'm certain those low light results could be improved. For one that has been very heavily cropped, look at the Caspian Tern. If the shot is well focussed and exposed, there will be plenty of detail and they will enlarge well.
After reading a few reviews, I was expecting a lot more noise. It's there on some of the low light images, but until you get to high magnification, it's definitely not a problem. I haven't yet made any effort to reduce it. Only one of my images has been photoshopped; a shot of a Pacific Black Duck. Best not to look at that, I've only just realised what a bad photoshopping job it is. My point is that what you see in every photo except that one is what the camera delivers. None of the images have been sharpened or otherwise improved - I simply haven't learned how to do those things yet.
Overall, I've been very impressed with this camera, especially since I'm a complete novice, and probably not using it to best effect. I hope this helps someone, I'm not even sure whether I'm giving the kind of information people need.
Alan G
Well-known member
400mark said:
Can't be long now before we see this Leica reviewed - something I'm eagerly awaiting as I've been holding off buying the FZ50 until I know how this compares.
For me, it needs to be markedly better than the Pana FZ50 to justify the additional price tag though, otherwise I'll be finding an FZ50 in my stocking this Xmas.........put there by myself.
:t:
Keith Reeder
Watch the birdie...
Hi Alan,
based on what's gone before with the Panasonic/Leica partnership, they'll be all but the same camera:
The review here http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz50 suggests that it needs good light, so that you can keep the ISO low, or detail will be badly hurt (the reviews on DPReview are generally taken pretty seriously).
If you think that you'll be shooting in decent light more often than not, the Panny looks like a very good bet, and there's no reason to believe (based on what's happened previously) that the Leica version will be any different.
But we don't get much good light up here, photographically speaking...
based on what's gone before with the Panasonic/Leica partnership, they'll be all but the same camera:
- The same lens, almost certainly;
- Leica won't be developing their own image stabilisation technology; and
- I doubt Leica will have sourced a different sensor - certainly not one that would be significantly better than the one in the Panny.
The review here http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz50 suggests that it needs good light, so that you can keep the ISO low, or detail will be badly hurt (the reviews on DPReview are generally taken pretty seriously).
If you think that you'll be shooting in decent light more often than not, the Panny looks like a very good bet, and there's no reason to believe (based on what's happened previously) that the Leica version will be any different.
But we don't get much good light up here, photographically speaking...
Last edited:
Rose Fletcher
Rose from Australia - formerly Birdeye
Keith Reeder said:
My post was a bit short on this sort of detail, but if it helps anybody come to a decision - all of the FZ50 photos I've posted have been taken with the ISO set at 100. Most were in pretty good light. Australian outdoor light may be a good deal brighter than some other places.
Keith Reeder
Watch the birdie...
And very nice they are too, Birdeye!
Thanks for that update.
Thanks for that update.
Alan G
Well-known member
I must admit the gripes I've seen over the issue of noise at anything more than ISO100 is my main concern, especially in good old NE England where the lights not always that good.
Might hang onto my pennies a little while longer and perhaps start considering a DSLR.......wonder if the boss will give me some overtime!
Alan
Might hang onto my pennies a little while longer and perhaps start considering a DSLR.......wonder if the boss will give me some overtime!
Alan
John Gibson2
Well-known member
Fz-50
Can the FZ50 take a teleconverter and if so which is the best and who gives the best deal for both the camera and the telecon? It seems that for a light, portable, long reach, simple camera this is the best one - comments please (until the next model comes along). I'm looking for something a bit easier to lug around in the heat of Africa than my 20D/100-400 L zoom. I know the finer detail will not be as good, but from what I've read it should be good enough - I'm not a professional and they are taken only for me to enjoy.
Cheers,
John
Can the FZ50 take a teleconverter and if so which is the best and who gives the best deal for both the camera and the telecon? It seems that for a light, portable, long reach, simple camera this is the best one - comments please (until the next model comes along). I'm looking for something a bit easier to lug around in the heat of Africa than my 20D/100-400 L zoom. I know the finer detail will not be as good, but from what I've read it should be good enough - I'm not a professional and they are taken only for me to enjoy.
Cheers,
John
Rose Fletcher
Rose from Australia - formerly Birdeye
I'm a little over five feet tall, lightly built, and over sixty. Carrying the FZ50 for miles is no problem, including when it's hot. It weighs about the same as the Pentax MZ50 SLR I was using before I bought it - and no need for extra lenses. As for detail, it walks all over the Pentax optics.john Gibson2 said:
I haven't tried it with the ISO turned up, but in Africa, as in Australia, you may not need it. It's reportedly not so good in low light, as Keith pointed out.
Teleconverter
Hi John,
After doing a bit of reading, I bought the Olympus TCN 17 teleconverter for my FZ50. It is exactly or better than similar one made by Pana. Costs about $100 US. It is screwed directly on to the 55mm front of the FZ50 lens. It's light and finally enable me to take little birds from about 20' away to fill up the screen. The Oly TCN 17 is actually a 1.7 times converter. For it's price and the FZ50, they are the best value money can buy. I am really enjoying the setup. I am so overjoyed with the birds photo that I could take, I just bought the dell 24" monitor. The picture is even better. I see the beautiful little birds with their glorious colours...noise? What noise....
John Gibson2 said:
Hi John,
After doing a bit of reading, I bought the Olympus TCN 17 teleconverter for my FZ50. It is exactly or better than similar one made by Pana. Costs about $100 US. It is screwed directly on to the 55mm front of the FZ50 lens. It's light and finally enable me to take little birds from about 20' away to fill up the screen. The Oly TCN 17 is actually a 1.7 times converter. For it's price and the FZ50, they are the best value money can buy. I am really enjoying the setup. I am so overjoyed with the birds photo that I could take, I just bought the dell 24" monitor. The picture is even better. I see the beautiful little birds with their glorious colours...noise? What noise....
tony davies
Active member
Fz50
Thanks for very useful comments, which led me to purchase this model.
I am now considering the LT55 Teleconverter or the Sony version.
I cannot find a spec for the LT55 on the Pana website, do you know if it has ED or equivalent type glass?
Much obliged
Tony
PGinns said:
Thanks for very useful comments, which led me to purchase this model.
I am now considering the LT55 Teleconverter or the Sony version.
I cannot find a spec for the LT55 on the Pana website, do you know if it has ED or equivalent type glass?
Much obliged
Tony
tony davies
Active member
TrevorC said:
Thanks Trevor
