> Out of curiousity, what features that you use on your current camera are
> missing from the FZ20 or Canon S2IS? (Just wondering)
Of of the top of my head, I can think of RAW files. I know there is
more, but I cannot recall now. I knew it back when I investigated the
FZ20 and the older Canon S1IS. I thought I would "settle" on the FZ5
a few months ago, then the S2IS was announced, and I am brand partial
to Canon. However, exept for possible noise issues, I am sold on the
FZ30.
BCA
Cordovero - 23 Aug 2005 05:53 GMT
BCA,
Just be prepared for the fact that the FZ30 is a lot bigger than the S2 IS.
I held the S2 IS and the FZ20 in my hands, and they were totally different
beasts (pics on the net don't tell the story), and the FZ30 is bigger than
the FZ20.
I prefer bigger cameras, but I will say that the S2 IS (which I've had for a
week) is something I'd throw in a (big)jacket pocket on my way to something
like a family event, while the FZ30 is something I'd have to think twice
about travelling with at all, especially if by plane.
C
>> Out of curiousity, what features that you use on your current camera are
>> missing from the FZ20 or Canon S2IS? (Just wondering)
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> BCA
Brian C. Allen - 23 Aug 2005 17:29 GMT
> BCA,
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> like a family event, while the FZ30 is something I'd have to think twice
> about travelling with at all, especially if by plane.
The FZ30 is virtually identical in both size and mass to the Canon
Pro90IS, so it is what I am already used to.
BCA
Daniel Silevitch - 23 Aug 2005 12:24 GMT
>> Out of curiousity, what features that you use on your current camera are
>> missing from the FZ20 or Canon S2IS? (Just wondering)
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> to Canon. However, exept for possible noise issues, I am sold on the
> FZ30.
Yes, RAW mode would be a significant difference. I wonder why Canon
dropped it in their superzooms? It's probably coupled to the falling
list price; looking up the specs of the Pro90IS, I found it was released
with a list price of $1600, whereas the FZ5 and S2IS list at $500. The
newer cameras are aimed at a broader market, and RAW was probably seen
as a complication rather than an asset.
-dms
Brian C. Allen - 23 Aug 2005 17:35 GMT
> Yes, RAW mode would be a significant difference. I wonder why Canon
> dropped it in their superzooms? It's probably coupled to the falling
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> -dms
I know the S1 & S2 also do not have a hot-shoe for external flash as
does the Pro90IS.
One bummer is that I have some good filters (UV, circular polarizer)
and add-on conversion lenses (Canon's wide angle and Canon's macro)
and a lens hood that are for 58 mm threads.
The FZ30 has 55 mm threads, though I think it does come with a lens
hood.
I wonder if a step-up ring 55 to 58mm would be a good solution, or
would there be some image quality issues? Maybe the filters would
work the same, but I am not sure about the conversion lenses. I
think they get designed with the camera's sensor and existing lens
in mind.
Any ideas?
BCA
Daniel Silevitch - 23 Aug 2005 17:56 GMT
>> Yes, RAW mode would be a significant difference. I wonder why Canon
>> dropped it in their superzooms? It's probably coupled to the falling
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> I know the S1 & S2 also do not have a hot-shoe for external flash as
> does the Pro90IS.
The FZ20 has a hot-shoe; without doing a comprehensive check, I think
that's the only current-model superzoom with a shoe. The FZ30 will also
have one once it's released.
> One bummer is that I have some good filters (UV, circular polarizer)
> and add-on conversion lenses (Canon's wide angle and Canon's macro)
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> think they get designed with the camera's sensor and existing lens
> in mind.
My guess is that a step-up ring would work fine for the filters, but
that the lenses would be different enough to make the converters
problematic. The FZ5 and FZ20 both ship with hoods standard, and I can't
imagine that that will change for the 30.
Panasonic will sell wide and tele converters for the 30, and I imagine
that 3rd parties will eventually do the same. No macro converter that I
know of, so you'd be limited to the inherent macro capabilities of the
main lens.
-dms
Paul Murray - 23 Aug 2005 19:30 GMT
>> I wonder if a step-up ring 55 to 58mm would be a good solution, or
>> would there be some image quality issues? Maybe the filters would
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> know of, so you'd be limited to the inherent macro capabilities of the
> main lens.
There is useful information about using conversion lenses on the FZ series
of cameras here:
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/User-Guide/FZ-10/index.html
Closeup adapters can also be used for macro work.