• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Panasonic premieres Lumix DMC-FZ100 high-speed superzoom camera (2 Viewers)

I think that as Thom Hogan has written, you can wait and wait until things get better, at some point you've got to take the plunge.

Read the reviews always, but judge yourself on the capabilities of the camera, not want someone else has written, they may not be right.

Posted the Heron image, colour is good and the image sharp.
 
Its interesting that the FZ100 seems to be drawing more interest than Fuji HS10 ...perhaps the HS10 has not lived up to peoples expectations, it was interesting that Fuji did not use one of their own "super" CCDs for that model.
 
speckled wood said:
Its interesting that the FZ100 seems to be drawing more interest than Fuji HS10 ...perhaps the HS10 has not lived up to peoples expectations, it was interesting that Fuji did not use one of their own "super" CCDs for that model.
Click to expand...

Not sure I agree. I thought there was more interest in the HS10 on this forum at this stage than FZ100. HS10 was different from other superzooms in having more magnification--pretty much eliminated need for a teleconverter. But as more information came out, regarding significant shutter lag and focus issues and middling low light performance, people soured on it for bird photography.

Like ChrisKten, I don't see anything about the FZ100 to get excited about at this preliminary stage. It appears to have just a few bells and whistles previous models did not, so there is not a strong reason to upgrade from a previous model.

Best,
Jim
 
speckled wood said:
Its interesting that the FZ100 seems to be drawing more interest than Fuji HS10 ...perhaps the HS10 has not lived up to peoples expectations, it was interesting that Fuji did not use one of their own "super" CCDs for that model.
Click to expand...

I am hoping that they will update the s200exr with similar features and mag as the HS10.
On paper the Hs10 looks an awasome camera, maybe its criticisms not helped with the likes of the pana FZs setting the goal for image quality higher?

I would like to have a trial with HS10 see how it fairs in the field compared to my fz38.
 
Steven Astley said:
I am hoping that they will update the s200exr with similar features and mag as the HS10.
On paper the Hs10 looks an awasome camera, maybe its criticisms not helped with the likes of the pana FZs setting the goal for image quality higher?

I would like to have a trial with HS10 see how it fairs in the field compared to my fz38.
Click to expand...

The DPReview comparative test stated that the Fuji suffered from being a first generation product and that the FZ series benefitted from having been underway for a while. Be that as it may, I will quote an entire post I made in a different thread:
From that review: With spot focusing, the camera often had problems homing in on small subjects like birds and pets at focal lengths longer than about 30mm. In addition, focusing was sometimes inaccurate, landing on the background or foreground - but not the main subject.

and

Response times for the review camera were slow for a modern digicam. We measured an average capture lag of 0.75 seconds, which reduced to a consistent 0.1 seconds with pre-focusing. However, it took 2.6 seconds to process each Large/Fine JPEG file, 5.3 seconds for each raw file and 7.9 seconds for each RAW+JPEG pair.

My reason to highlight these two quotes is not to bash this camera and say it is no good; my reason is to say that it, like its competitors, is a camera with some quirks and flaws. It is therefore not a competition killer, but a worthy competitor; each potential buyer have to look at the drawbacks for each camera and decide which of the cameras have the flaws he or she can live with (I hope that makes some sense).
Click to expand...

Those were some of the reasons I stopped considering a Fuji. (for clarity: the review quoted in the insert from a previous post were not from DPReview).

Niels
 
We are all looking for that marvellous bargain.

A relativity cheap compact, with the sensor capacity of the D3, the FPS of Canon’s MKIV, the image quality of a Hassleblad, combined with the reach of a £7k 600mm lens from Nikon. All packed together in a titanium box that is light and robust. Which will retail for the wonderful price of under £500.

If anyone knows of such a camera do tell!

We all have to accept what we can afford from what is available, combine this with skill levels and expertise, and this will give an indication of just how good or bad these compacts are.
 
There is the issue that because of its CMOS sensor the FZ100 will be in effect a first generation product.

Of course compared with what was available back in 1998 the FZ28 is a dream product.
 
speckled wood said:
There is the issue that because of its CMOS sensor the FZ100 will be in effect a first generation product.
Click to expand...

Maybe!

With current optical sensors, it seems that both the CCD and CMOS technology will be with us for a long time.

Although CCD produce less noise than CMOS sensors, both types must rely on sophisticated noise reduction software to achieve high-end quality imaging. Other factor also take account of the final image.

It is highly unlikely anybody on this forum will use any image from a compact for high end use or reproduction. Kept well within certain parameters, they can achieve very good results and can equal DSLR.

But, these cameras at the moment are not designed for that sort of level, they're great at what they do, produce acceptable images for show at low resolution on the monitor, or print outs of 8 x 6" on a good inkjet.

They will year on year get better.
 
There's a widget at dpreview that might interest some of those that are impatient; it's based on pictures from a production camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonicdmcfz100/

Just use the widget to compare with other cameras at different ISOs, and you can move the area that is shown at 100%. If it's accurate, it's very disappointing at all ISOs compared to the FZ38.
 
Seems to me that photo is pretty darn good, especially as they didnt seem to have done too much PP work.

I did a quick run through NN, and Levels. Small amount of Focus Magic.

But i'd still wait and see what real time owner / users report back before throwing in my FZ18m + Oly TCON 14b. Its hard to imagine that AF tracking in burst would be accurate on such a camera, but stranger things have happened
 

Attachments

  • P1020127.jpg
    P1020127.jpg
    227.9 KB · Views: 185
I decided not to wait and as my FZ28 was rather battered and need of an easier life (with my sister), I have bought an FZ38, talking to the salesman in LCE it seems that there has been quite a run on FZ38s in recent weeks.
 
What is the difference between the FZ18 and FZ38 when it comes to the electronic viewfinder? I have read that it is better on the FZ18 then FZ38 but not sure in what way.
 
kristoffer said:
What is the difference between the FZ18 and FZ38 when it comes to the electronic viewfinder? I have read that it is better on the FZ18 then FZ38 but not sure in what way.
Click to expand...

From what I've heard; the FZ18 viewfinder is bigger than the one on the FZ28/FZ38, but after 90,000+ shots, I've got used to the one on my FZ28.|=)|
 
ChrisKten said:
There's a widget at dpreview that might interest some of those that are impatient; it's based on pictures from a production camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonicdmcfz100/

Just use the widget to compare with other cameras at different ISOs, and you can move the area that is shown at 100%. If it's accurate, it's very disappointing at all ISOs compared to the FZ38.
Click to expand...

Hi Chris
That's an interesting tool. It almost defies belief that the FZ100 can be so comparatively inferior. I do wonder if the point of focus was slightly different for each camera or, perhaps, the depth of field achieved, so as to show up in these differing points of comparison.

I guess the only way we'll really know is when we try it in the flesh! I'm tempted by the cheaper FZ45.
All the best
Hobbes
 
Hobbes2 said:
Hi Chris
That's an interesting tool. It almost defies belief that the FZ100 can be so comparatively inferior. I do wonder if the point of focus was slightly different for each camera or, perhaps, the depth of field achieved, so as to show up in these differing points of comparison.

I guess the only way we'll really know is when we try it in the flesh! I'm tempted by the cheaper FZ45.
All the best
Hobbes
Click to expand...

Hi Hobbes,

Yes, it's odd to say the least. The only camera that it beats is the Fuji HS10, which isn't saying much. There's talk in the forums of it being a misaligned lens or the wrong firmware version (0.4 instead of 1.0), but it sounds more like excuses than fact.

Like you, I'm thinking more about the FZ45 than the FZ100. I might even get a FZ38 while they're cheap, but ATM, I'll just wait.
 
ChrisKten said:
There's a widget at dpreview that might interest some of those that are impatient; it's based on pictures from a production camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonicdmcfz100/

Just use the widget to compare with other cameras at different ISOs, and you can move the area that is shown at 100%. If it's accurate, it's very disappointing at all ISOs compared to the FZ38.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that Chris. It really is very interesting. I used to have an FZ38 + TCON17 but got them nicked recently. (Glad I hadn't forked out on DSLR for that reason - at least I can afford to replace it!). The FZ100 sounded really promising until I checked out your link.

As you say, the FZ45 might be a good alternative, but the widget doesn't seem to have any data for that (yet)?
 
They seem to have delayed the release of FZ45 to mid september. The discussion on DPreview seems to say that the update of the firmware might have helped compared to the initial images, but some people still feel the camera they got hopefully is a lemon, as the details are lacking in one corner of the images (I have not had time to study the images in detail myself). RAW images seems a lot better then jpgs is another statement I read. It will be exiting to see where all of this ends.

Niels
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

Carpathian Ed
Lumix DMC-FZ82 (FZ80)
Replies
4
Views
5K
Carpathian Ed
Carpathian Ed
T
Should I by a bridge/superzoom camera *instead of* a scope?
Replies
11
Views
2K
PaulCountyDurham
P
Barbets48
Importance of EVF for Superzoom Point and Shoot?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Scridifer
Scridifer
Classick
Another "Camera Advice Needed Thread"
Replies
15
Views
2K
PaulCountyDurham
P
andrewins
Supercompact superzoom
Replies
14
Views
4K
JWalck
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top