 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / ZLR Cameras / April 2006FZ30 battery
I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website are selling replacement batteries for the FZ30 for as low as $19.99. That price really seems suspicious to me. What do you think? Also, is it safe to buy and use batteries for this camera that are not O.E.M? Thanks for any and all replies. >I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice >website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website are [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Thanks for any and all replies. Yes, and Yes. In fact the knock-offs can be a lot better than the OEMs. >>Also, is it safe to buy and use batteries for this camera that are not >>O.E.M? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Yes, and Yes. In fact the knock-offs can be a lot better than > the OEMs. I bought three aftermarket batteries for my FZ-10 for £9.99 each - which was considerably less than *one* Panasonic battery, and I can't say I've noticed any difference in performance either way. pete  Signaturepete@fenelon.com "there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas" - HMHB. >I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice >website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website are [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Thanks for any and all replies. I have used after market batteries in my Canon camera that were equal to or better than the OEM. They cost about $8 from Sterling Tek. They do not have Panosonic batteries. I have a FZ5. Where did you see the $20 battery? what are shipping costs. Sometimes shipping exceeds the purcase price. > >I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice > >website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website are [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > battery? what are shipping costs. Sometimes shipping > exceeds the purcase price. I don't exactly remember where I saw the $20.00 battery, but one of the replies mentioned "Battery Barn.com" and I think I that was one of the websites I had visited, though I don't remember what the shipping costs were. > > >I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice > > >website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > websites I had visited, though I don't remember what the shipping costs > were. I purchased two additional batteries for my FZ10 for $20 each and shipping was minimal. It may well have been from the the Battery Barn.. It's real handy to have two additional batteries when engaged in heavy shooting. JT i bought a aftermarket battery for my fz30 here in oz genuine price $99 aus, aftermarket $30 alas it only charged once, then never charged again, i'm going to send it back and the shop says they'll send another out might be a one off Signaturehttp://photobucket.com/albums/b216/corks67/my-bikes/ >I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice > website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Thanks for any and all replies. In article <43e56218$0$30417$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>, > i bought a aftermarket battery for my fz30 here in oz > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > might be a one off I got some from Hong Kong. They had problems charging because the contacts weren't connecting with the charger properly. They were replaced without question*, although I now keep a rubberband with my charger to hold all batteries firmly in place. *NOTE: when sending LiIon batteries overseas, do not repeat DO NOT!!!! describe them on the Customs declaration as 'batteries' or NZ Post and presumably any other Post office will sh.t themselves on the spot and refuse to handle them. Apparently if the plane crashes and the battery is ripped open, it may catch on fire. Along with the batteries from all the passenger's cameras & cellphones, the many bottles of duty-free plonk and approximately 2000 tonnes of aviation fuel. They are "camera components" OK? SignatureNigel (I came into this world with nothing and still have most of it left) > In article > <43e56218$0$30417$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > refuse to handle them. Apparently if the plane crashes and the battery > is ripped open, it may catch on fire. No, it may explode spontaneously. Anybody involved with air travel is gun shy on lithium-based batteries. They were used in the first generation of emergency locator transmitters due to their long shelf life, and a few of them exploded spontaneously in the plane with enough force to do airframe damage (we're not talking about the little bulge and leak that people usually mean when they say "the battery exploded", these were real explosions with flash and bang and pieces hurled about with great force and the whole nine yards). I don't recall if there were any actual crashes or if the explosions all occurred with the plane parked now, but either way that generation of ELTs was pulled from the market and from the aircraft. > Along with the batteries from all > the passenger's cameras & cellphones, the many bottles of duty-free > plonk and approximately 2000 tonnes of aviation fuel. Camera and cell phone batteries are also a concern, however they generally have protective circuits aimed at avoiding the conditions required for an explosion. The thing is though if you just say "battery" on the description that puts them in the position of having to ascertain for themselves whether the particular battery is an explosion risk and they don't have a master list or anything to refer to. > They are "camera components" OK? Signature--John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) > > *NOTE: when sending LiIon batteries overseas, do not repeat DO NOT!!!! > > describe them on the Customs declaration as 'batteries' or NZ Post and [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > > They are "camera components" OK? So the camera battery sitting in the camera is protected, but the same battery not sitting in the camera is not protected. Explain, please. Likewise, should I worry about the spare LiIon laptop battery sitting in my bag, about 3" away from the identical battery in the laptop? Were these exploding batteries under charge or violent discharge? Signature~Dibley >> > *NOTE: when sending LiIon batteries overseas, do not repeat DO NOT!!!! >> > describe them on the Customs declaration as 'batteries' or NZ Post and [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Likewise, should I worry about the spare LiIon laptop battery sitting in > my bag, about 3" away from the identical battery in the laptop? Are you being deliberately obtuse? If it is in a camera or if it is a camera battery sitting in a bag then it's clearly a reasonably recent design--cameras with lithium-based batteries have not been around that long. You ship a battery through the mail, sans camera, and the inspector doesn't have any way to know whether it's a brand new camera battery or a 20 year old ELT battery. The issue isn't that your camera is going to explode, the issue is that some generic battery in an box might do so. If he has to choose between pissing you off or losing his job he'll piss you off every time. > Were these exploding batteries under charge or violent discharge? Kind of hard to be under either sitting in an ELT in an airplane tied down on the ramp. Lithium batteries were used because they had a long shelf life. ELTs don't power up until either the plane crashes or someone turns on the switch, and in either case the actual power consumed is fairly low. Signature--John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >> [... questions about camera batteries in or out of the camera, >> laptop batteries, etc ...] > Are you being deliberately obtuse? [...] Naw, he's just asking reasonable questions. Unless one has experience with the older designs, the notion that a common battery might be a serious explosion hazard is novel. In all the endless flame wars over which battery type is best, I have never seen a good technical description of exactly how the Li-ion battery explosion thing works. So I Googled it. Apparently, Li-ion batteries with cobalt oxide electrodes (pretty-much all of them) are subject to a thermal runaway condition. It can be triggered by overcharging, charging too fast, discharging at too high a rate, or other unspecified sorts of abuse. Once the internal temperature reaches the threshold (one web site said "about 140 degrees F"), the cell self-heats uncontrollably. The result is a burst cell from which the "magic blue smoke" has escaped. Presumably, the "protection circuits" employed by modern Li-ion batteries act to limit the over-current conditions that could cause the battery to reach the threshold temperature. I'm not sure what they do about a battery sitting in a car trunk on a hot afternoon. I found numerous warnings from experts to not trust cheap knock-off batteries. The claim is that Li-ion chemistry is touchy and the makers of cheap batteries may have cut too many corners. Unfortunately, I don't see any way to distinguish "cheap" from "reasonably inexpensive". Other than buying a battery with a camera maker's name on it, I don't know how to be sure I'm getting quality. It's too bad NiMH cells can't match the size, weight, and power density characteristics of Li-ion cells, because NiMH's have a lot of other advantages. Paul Allen > > Are you being deliberately obtuse? [...] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > have never seen a good technical description of exactly how > the Li-ion battery explosion thing works. So I Googled it. I checked it out at Wiki. They agree that storage in hot cars or the like is bad news. There's another warning about high temp storage: the storage capacity of the battery can also be affected. They have to be very hot for a long time to seriously damage them, but it's clear that the cooler you keep your Li-ions (at or near full charge), the longer their life expectancy. Signature~Dibley <snip> > It's too > bad NiMH cells can't match the size, weight, and power > density characteristics of Li-ion cells, because NiMH's have > a lot of other advantages. What might those be? The size, weight, and power density advantages of Li-Ion are just three of the many advantages. The major advantages of Li-Ion are: 1. Much lower self-discharge rate (except for Sanyo Eneloop NiMH batteries) 2. Higher maximum number of charge/discharge cycles 3. Higher energy density in terms of both weight and volume 4. Far, far better low-temperature performance 5. Lower cost, when you factor in the higher energy density, and the maximum number of charge/discharge cycles 6. Protection circuitry integral to the battery pack, rather than integral to the camera 7. Accurate charge level indicator due to linear voltage decline proportional to charge level 8. Lower maintenance. 9. Much better selection of higher-end cameras use Li-Ion batteries. 10. No problems with battery doors that are part of the charging circuit (battery doors are the most often replaced part of digital cameras). NiMH rechargeable batteries have the following advantages over Li-Ion rechargeable batteries: 1. Faster charging with high rate chargers 2. Ability to use disposable AA batteries if NiMH AA batteries are discharged and no charger is available 3. Longer shelf life > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > 3. Longer shelf life Sounds like biased li-ion evangelism to me. Suit yourself. Paul Allen >> <snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Sounds like biased li-ion evangelism to me. Suit yourself. I don't see any "evangelism". What do you perceive to the the advantages of NiMH? > Paul Allen Signature--John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >>> <snip> >>> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > I don't see any "evangelism". Excuse me? I should prefer proprietary batteries because the selection of high-end cameras using them is wider, or because of battery doors? Li-ion batteries have lower maintenance, how??? Li-ion batteries are really less expensive if you factor in things that don't matter? Li-ion battery technology certainly has some advantages. Some people over-state the case in their zeal to make a conversion. > What do you perceive to the the advantages of > NiMH? The ones that weren't listed, and that matter most to me: They're less expensive and come in one standard size. Until the camera makers get together on one or two standard li-ion battery sizes, I'll prefer AA batteries. (And my next camera will most likely use a proprietary battery, because battery type is not the most important factor in choosing a camera.) Paul Allen >>>> <snip> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > Excuse me? I should prefer proprietary batteries because the selection > of high-end cameras using them is wider, or because of battery doors? Do you deny that either of these is a true statement? > Li-ion batteries have lower maintenance, how??? Whether NiMH batteries benefit from the occasional deep discharge like NiCD do is debateable. But if they do then then need it. > Li-ion batteries are > really less expensive if you factor in things that don't matter? How does life-cycle cost not matter? If a lithium ion battery costs twice as much but is good for three times as many cycles then it's cheaper in the long run. > Li-ion battery technology certainly has some advantages. Some people > over-state the case in their zeal to make a conversion. "Conversion" is not possible. If you think that someone is trying to "convert" you then you need to put a few more layers on your tinfoil hat. > > What do you perceive to the the advantages of >> NiMH? > > The ones that weren't listed, and that matter most to me: They're > less expensive and come in one standard size. Less expensive is debatable unless you consider only purchase price and not life-cycle cost. The standard size was mentioned. > Until the camera > makers get together on one or two standard li-ion battery sizes, > I'll prefer AA batteries. (And my next camera will most likely > use a proprietary battery, because battery type is not the > most important factor in choosing a camera.)\ Precisely. You don't give a damn what kind of battery is in it if the other features are right. > Paul Allen Signature--John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >> Li-ion batteries have lower maintenance, how??? > > Whether NiMH batteries benefit from the occasional deep discharge like NiCD > do is debateable. But if they do then then need it. It isn't just that, though it is true that doing a refresh charge on an NiMH will help maintain full capacity. I was also referring to the fact that you can't just charge up a few sets of NiMH batteries and leave them in your camera bag for when they are needed. The self-discharge makes this impractical (it is true that the new Sanyo eneloop batteries will not have this problem). >> Li-ion batteries are >> really less expensive if you factor in things that don't matter? > > How does life-cycle cost not matter? If a lithium ion battery costs twice > as much but is good for three times as many cycles then it's cheaper in the > long run. Many people make the mistake of not looking at the big picture when it comes to figuring out cost. Now to be fair, the Li-Ion battery has about a three year life-span, regardless of the number of cycles, so you really can't base your calculations on the maximum number of cycles unless you are a very heavy user, taking thousands of pictures per week. Still, even with a more reasonable number of cycles, the Li-Ion cost is very comparable to NiMH cost. >> Li-ion battery technology certainly has some advantages. Some people >> over-state the case in their zeal to make a conversion. > > "Conversion" is not possible. If you think that someone is trying to > "convert" you then you need to put a few more layers on your tinfoil hat. Conversion is sometimes possible. Some cameras can take an RCR-V3 Li-Ion in place of two AA cells. for digital SLRs, sometimes the vertical grip can use either two Li-Ion packs, or six AA cells. > Less expensive is debatable unless you consider only purchase price and not > life-cycle cost. The standard size was mentioned. Also, don't forget that the Li-Ion powered camera comes with a battery and a charger, two things that most AA powered cameras lack. Add about $20 for a charger and batteries. Steve http://batterydata.com >>>>> <snip> >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > Do you deny that either of these is a true statement? I'm not going to play word games with you. The first is irrelevant. The fact that many high-end cameras will stick my with proprietary batteries does not magically translate into an advantage for proprietary batteries. The second is silly. Bad battery door design on some particular camers does not translate into a disadvantage for AA's. >> Li-ion batteries have lower maintenance, how??? > > Whether NiMH batteries benefit from the occasional deep discharge like NiCD > do is debateable. But if they do then then need it. Like you say, it's debatable. In my experience, NiMH cells do fine with just normal use in a camera. Li-ion batteries don't have particularly less maintenance than NiMH batteries. >> Li-ion batteries are >> really less expensive if you factor in things that don't matter? > > How does life-cycle cost not matter? If a lithium ion battery costs twice > as much but is good for three times as many cycles then it's cheaper in the > long run. Who said life-cycle cost doesn't matter? Most of us aren't going to go through batteries so fast that we'll bump up against cycle limits. Li-ion batteries die no matter how much they're used three years (or so) after manufacture. A guy like me that goes through a set of batteries about once a week and has three sets will put 200 cycles on each set in twelve years. I'd expect to be buying new batteries a bit more frequently than that, but not more frequently than I'd have to replace li-ion batteries. Outside of extreme use-cases, li-ion batteries generally cost more over the life of a camera than NiMH. >> Li-ion battery technology certainly has some advantages. Some people >> over-state the case in their zeal to make a conversion. > > "Conversion" is not possible. If you think that someone is trying to > "convert" you then you need to put a few more layers on your tinfoil hat. Ummm, whatever. >> > What do you perceive to the the advantages of >>> NiMH? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Less expensive is debatable unless you consider only purchase price and not > life-cycle cost. Well, no, it's only debatable under extremely heavy use conditions. For most of us, the cheapest of the cheap "probably won't explode before we cash your check" li-ion batteries are more expensive to use in a camera than a set of NiMH's. > The standard size was mentioned. Half a point. The convenience of picking up spares at Wal-Mart was mentioned. The standard size was not. >> Until the camera >> makers get together on one or two standard li-ion battery sizes, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Precisely. You don't give a damn what kind of battery is in it if the other > features are right. Not what I said. All things being equal, I'd always choose a camera that took convenient AA batteries. All things aren't equal, so I'll likely be stuck with a proprietary battery. Paul Allen > The ones that weren't listed, and that matter most to me: They're > less expensive and come in one standard size. Until the camera > makers get together on one or two standard li-ion battery sizes, > I'll prefer AA batteries. Actually, while it certainly isn't down to one or two, there are many cameras, from different manufacturers, that do use the same Li-Ion battery pack. And of course many manufacturers use the same battery in many different models. As far as cost goes, if you look at the cost of an after-market Li-Ion pack, from a reputable company, the cost is very comparable to that of NiMH AA cells. I.e. at $10 for four Sanyo 2500 mAH NiMH cells, and $11.50 for a Canon BP511 (after-market), the cost per cycle for 300 cycles over three years, is 5/10 of a cent different. If you do the maximum rated cycles (500 for NiMH, 1000 for Li-Ion) then the Li-Ion is much cheaper (with the low self-discharge rate of Li-Ion, you're unlikely to reach 1000 cycles before the battery reaches its end-of-life based on time (3 years). If you compare using battery packs from the manufacturer, rather than after-market, then the Li-Ion batteries do cost a lot more. Steve http://batterydata.com/ [] > If you compare using battery packs from the manufacturer, rather than > after-market, then the Li-Ion batteries do cost a lot more. > > Steve I'm sure you could buy Camera Brand NiMH cells at a vastly inflated price as well, if you try hard enough! <G> David > [] >> If you compare using battery packs from the manufacturer, rather than [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I'm sure you could buy Camera Brand NiMH cells at a vastly inflated price > as well, if you try hard enough! For some reason it's much harder for stores to gouge on the NiMH batteries, because I think they're trying to sell them as an alternative to alkalines, rather than trying to position them against a proprietary battery. Fry's is no discount store, yet their AA prices are comparable to Thomas -Distributing, while their proprietary Li-Ion batteries are very expensive. Their proprietary NiMH packs are also expensive, I have an old camcorder and my son wanted to use it, and Fry's wanted about 2x what I bought the NiMH battery pack for on Amazon. >> The ones that weren't listed, and that matter most to me: They're >> less expensive and come in one standard size. Until the camera [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > battery pack. And of course many manufacturers use the same battery in > many different models. You're reaching. I'm not going to go out and buy multiple cameras just so I can have several devices that use the same proprietary battery. > As far as cost goes, if you look at the cost of an after-market Li-Ion > pack, from a reputable company, the cost is very comparable to that of > NiMH AA cells. You're still reaching. I'll give you that in the best possible case with a well-selected battery, the price of li-ion can come close to NiMH. Will you give me that li-ion batteries are more like 2-3 times as expensive in the typical case? > I.e. at $10 for four Sanyo 2500 mAH NiMH cells, and $11.50 for a Canon > BP511 (after-market), the cost per cycle for 300 cycles over three > years, is 5/10 of a cent different. But that battery isn't compatible with the FZ-30 I'm pining for. Somebody found a CGR-S006A (of unknown provenance or quality) for that camera on E-Bay for $20. Assuming that I risk the $20 no- name battery, it costs me twice as much for the hypothetical 300 cycles. And that doesn't even take into account that the CGR-S006A has less than half the capacity of the set of NiMH's. > If you do the maximum rated cycles > (500 for NiMH, 1000 for Li-Ion) then the Li-Ion is much cheaper (with > the low self-discharge rate of Li-Ion, you're unlikely to reach 1000 > cycles before the battery reaches its end-of-life based on time (3 years). Yup. You can construct a worst-case scenario in which it costs less to use Li-ion. Li-ion batteries have other advantages, but cost is not one of them for most of us. > If you compare using battery packs from the manufacturer, rather than > after-market, then the Li-Ion batteries do cost a lot more. Yup. When I was looking up the exploding li-ion battery issue a couple days ago, I found several apparent experts recommending against after-market batteries. The reasoning was that it doesn't make sense to save $40 on a cheap battery that might have an "accident" and destroy a $1000 camera. Hmmm... Paul Allen > You're still reaching. I'll give you that in the best possible case > with a well-selected battery, the price of li-ion can come close to > NiMH. Will you give me that li-ion batteries are more like 2-3 times > as expensive in the typical case? On the web site I looked at nine different after-market lithium-ion battery packs. Every one is available for less than 2x the cost of 4 NiMH AA cells. So no, not in the typical case. What I do say on the web site, and will concede, is that it's necessary to purchase Li-Ion packs from an on-line retailer, or from a store like Ritz or Wolf, in order to get them at a reasonable price. > But that battery isn't compatible with the FZ-30 I'm pining for. > Somebody found a CGR-S006A (of unknown provenance or quality) for > that camera on E-Bay for $20. I'd get the Lenmar DLP006 ("http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000CP4ML6/ref=sr_11_1/103-9076213-8557463?%5Fe ncoding=UTF8") for $16. Lenmar and Amazon are quite reputable, and you have recourse if there is a problem. But I wouldn't purchase the FZ-30 due to the noise issues. It's a prime example of a company getting all the features of a camera right, but basing it around a sensor that doesn't give optimal results. > Yup. When I was looking up the exploding li-ion battery issue a > couple days ago, I found several apparent experts recommending > against after-market batteries. The reasoning was that it doesn't > make sense to save $40 on a cheap battery that might have an > "accident" and destroy a $1000 camera. Hmmm... Except that using the manufacturer's battery is no guarantee against an exploding battery, as evidenced by various recalls of batteries from companies like Nikon, Apple, Dell, HP etc. In reality, a battery is going to have problems when charging, not discharging, so it's not going to damage a camera. Amusingly, the only battery problem I've had, is with Panasonic, and it was NiMH, not Li-Ion. There was one bad NiMH cell that I was charging, and the charger over-heated and melted. The charger was later recalled. "http://www.costco.com/Images/Content/Misc/PDF/PanasonicRecall.pdf" Too bad, as this charger was great in terms of the specifications, you could run it off AC, 12VDC, or a USB port, it had an LCD display that indicated charge level, it charged each cell individually, and it was sold at a good price bundled with Panasonic batteries. Another Panasonic product that got the features right, but that failed on the execution. Steve "http://batterydata.com" >> You're still reaching. I'll give you that in the best possible case >> with a well-selected battery, the price of li-ion can come close to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > battery packs. Every one is available for less than 2x the cost of 4 > NiMH AA cells. So no, not in the typical case. Whatever. So, for the nine you picked, all were more expensive than NiMH . And, keeping things in perspective, the difference is a small fraction of the camera price. > What I do say on the web site, and will concede, is that it's necessary > to purchase Li-Ion packs from an on-line retailer, or from a store like [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > camera right, but basing it around a sensor that doesn't give optimal > results. Thanks for the pointer to the Lenmar battery. I only found no-name stuff when I googled for CGR-S006A. But again with the noise on the FZ30. Dpreview comments about noise on many of Panasonic's recent cameras, and yet everybody picks on the FZ30. Interesting. >> Yup. When I was looking up the exploding li-ion battery issue a >> couple days ago, I found several apparent experts recommending [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > exploding battery, as evidenced by various recalls of batteries from > companies like Nikon, Apple, Dell, HP etc. You're making this bitter pill even harder to swallow, Steve! Now I can't even trust the high-priced batteries? :-) > In reality, a battery is > going to have problems when charging, not discharging, so it's not going > to damage a camera. Well, maybe. The original problem that forced the addition of protection circuits was with batteries installed in products. If the protection circuit is not up to snuff, li-ion batteries can go into thermal runaway when they're just sitting there if they get too hot. I don't expect that to happen with current batteries, but I'm not going to go buy the cheapest battery I can find, either. > Amusingly, the only battery problem I've had, is with Panasonic, and it > was NiMH, not Li-Ion. There was one bad NiMH cell that I was charging, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > sold at a good price bundled with Panasonic batteries. Another Panasonic > product that got the features right, but that failed on the execution. Yup, amusing. Paul Allen [] > But again with the noise on the > FZ30. Dpreview comments about noise on many of Panasonic's recent > cameras, and yet everybody picks on the FZ30. Interesting. Fully noise-free images are in fashion right now - whereas a little grain can add character to an image. Perhaps the FZ30 is a little worse than some others, though. There are times (with the FZ5) when I would like more sensitivity, and very occasionally a little less noise, but I would not be prepared to carry the weight and bulk of the DSLR required to achieve this. Others may make a different choice. David > [] >> But again with the noise on the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > carry the weight and bulk of the DSLR required to achieve this. Others > may make a different choice. Really depends on the circumstance. If I was going out deliberately to shoot a specific subject in a specific location then I'd carry whatever is needed to get the shot. But if I'm just out taking a walk around the neighborhood or going on a day hike or going to the beach or whatever then I'm not so concerned about getting the perfect photo as I am about shooting targets of opportunity with as little impact on my primary activity as possible--that means something small and light. The FZ7 is a good compromise for that sort of thing. This is what many of the participants in this discussion forget--for some of us photography isn't something we do 9-5 to put food on the table. > David Signature--John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) > [] >> But again with the noise on the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > can add character to an image. Perhaps the FZ30 is a little worse than > some others, though. I think that's about right. It's a little worse than some. Judging from sample pics, it's not quite as noisy at ISO 400 as my old Olympus C700. The C700 can't take pictures of the night sky, but the FZ30 has a "starry sky" mode. I wonder if anybody's tried that out. > There are times (with the FZ5) when I would like more sensitivity, and > very occasionally a little less noise, but I would not be prepared to > carry the weight and bulk of the DSLR required to achieve this. Others > may make a different choice. I'm with you. I'd be willing to carry an FZ30, since it's just a couple ounces lighter than my old Oly OM-2n with its 50mm lens. It is just a smidgen bulkier, though. The C700 is about the size of your FZ5 and is real easy to carry around. I was at Fry's the other day checking out what they had. They had the whole range, from little things not much bulkier than a credit card all the way up to a KM Maxxum 7D. The 7D is about the size of a football, feels like it weighs five pounds, and is plain encrusted with buttons, knobs, and controls of all sorts. I understand the 5D is not quite so large, but they didn't have one on display. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to lug the 7D around all day. Choices. If we didn't have so many choices! :-) Paul Allen [] > Choices. If we didn't have so many choices! :-) ... where would we be without them <G> Thanks for sharing your experiences. David >> [] >>> But again with the noise on the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > C700. The C700 can't take pictures of the night sky, but the FZ30 > has a "starry sky" mode. I wonder if anybody's tried that out. Dunno about the FZ30 but it works pretty well on the FZ7. On full zoom it even shows star trails. >> There are times (with the FZ5) when I would like more sensitivity, and >> very occasionally a little less noise, but I would not be prepared to [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Paul Allen Signature--John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >> The C700 can't take pictures of the night sky, but the FZ30 >> has a "starry sky" mode. I wonder if anybody's tried that out. > > Dunno about the FZ30 but it works pretty well on the FZ7. On full zoom it > even shows star trails. Cool! Do you have any examples to share? With my C700, a short exposure doesn't register stars and a longer one gets swamped by noise. I've taken a lot more pictures with this camera than I ever did in 25 years with my old OM-2n, but it does have rather severe limits. Paul Allen >>> The C700 can't take pictures of the night sky, but the FZ30 >>> has a "starry sky" mode. I wonder if anybody's tried that out. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ever did in 25 years with my old OM-2n, but it does have rather > severe limits. One of these days I've got to set up a Web site so I can share some of the stuff I do. > Paul Allen Signature--John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) >>>> The C700 can't take pictures of the night sky, but the FZ30 >>>> has a "starry sky" mode. I wonder if anybody's tried that out. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > One of these days I've got to set up a Web site so I can share some of the > stuff I do. Many ISP's give customers a bit of space on a web server. It's trivial to ftp a file up to the server and mail somebody a link. (Well, it's a lot easier than setting up a whole web site.) But, aren't there a bunch of free image sharing sites? Can anyone who has used one point John at a good one? Paul Allen >>>>> The C700 can't take pictures of the night sky, but the FZ30 >>>>> has a "starry sky" mode. I wonder if anybody's tried that out. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > But, aren't there a bunch of free image sharing sites? Can > anyone who has used one point John at a good one? photobucket.com and imageshack.us are both easy to use if you just want to stick something up on the web. Photobucket is more organized; you register for an account, and can upload stuff to different albums and the like. Both are free. -dms >> But, aren't there a bunch of free image sharing sites? Can >> anyone who has used one point John at a good one? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Both are free. Another thought: Some of the online printing services allow you to put up photos for sharing on the web. I've been using shutterfly.com to do my printing recently, and they have this feature. Just for giggles, I gave it a shot: http://dmsilev.shutterfly.com/ There's one photo in the album right now, which was in part an experiment to see if I could get a reasonable 16x20 print out of an FZ5 (answer: yes, barely, and only after some post-processing). -dms > Thanks for the pointer to the Lenmar battery. I only found no-name > stuff when I googled for CGR-S006A. But again with the noise on the > FZ30. Dpreview comments about noise on many of Panasonic's recent > cameras, and yet everybody picks on the FZ30. Interesting. I think that this is because on paper the FZ30 is an awesome camera. It's held to a higher standard than the lower-end point and shoot cameras. >> <snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > Sounds like biased li-ion evangelism to me. Suit yourself. I see, so you can't point out any inaccuracies in those statements, and you can't point out the "a lot of other advantages" that you stated existed. A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep. Saul Bellow Steve http://stores.ebay.com/Snap-it-Digital Lists 1000 mah batteries for the FZ30 for 19.99 + S&H. Dave >>> <snip> >>> [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > you can't point out the "a lot of other advantages" that you stated > existed. Actually, you don't see. I noted your bias, but couldn't see any point in actually rebutting the worst of your claims. You're so passionate about defending li-ion batteries that you have a whole web page devoted to proving their superiority. To do more than just acknowledge your bias would just stir the pot to no useful result. > A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need > for illusion is deep. Saul Bellow Too true. Paul Allen Check BatteryBarn.com I bought mine for about $20. Works fine, no difference that I can see from Panasonic battery. > I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice > website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website are [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks for any and all replies. >I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice > website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Thanks for any and all replies. I have an FZ20 and I bought a spare battery off ebay. Works great! I don't remember who I bought it off, but if you put in search "battery fz-" with the "-" being your number camera, then you will get a lot of listings. Just look at the sellers' feedbacks - they are usually good. Steve >>I need to get a spare battery for my Panasonic FZ30. On the Panasonice >> website they have one for sale for approx. $70.00 U.S. But other website [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Steve I just ordered one from Amazon.com for $12.95, rated at 1300mAh, ordered last Sunday, came on Saturday, charged it up and seems to work OK in the camera, FZ-15. Check eBay for batteries priced about $5 from Hong Kong. One has to beware where you get cheap batteries from because it is very difficult to tell the good from the bad. You can even look to the Nikon battery recall for defective OEM batteries. Bad batteries not only can ruin your camera but can cause fire and/or physical damage to your body. The one good thing (and you do have to pay for it) in favor of OEM batteries is you have a reputable camera company behind them who does not want to risk their good will. But no name who knows what from who knows where does not care as they just want profit. If their name (if they have one) becomes tarnished they will just market under a different name. Something like after market printer ink but in the case of batteries they can damage your body. >Check eBay for batteries priced about $5 from Hong Kong. > > Thanks for all of the information. I was extremely reluctant to puchase "cheap" batteries for the very reasons reasons you stated below. Consequently, I went for the OEM from Panasonic. While it did cost a lot more than some of the incredible prices I have seen listed, I just did not want to take a chance on a purchase that I might regret later. In any event, I have appreciated every one of the comments. > One has to beware where you get cheap batteries from because it is very > difficult to tell the good from the bad. You can even look to the Nikon [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > >Check eBay for batteries priced about $5 from Hong Kong. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.