 |
 | 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 / May 2006CNet Reviews FZ7 vs Canon S3
I have just read reviews on Cnet where the Panasonic FZ7 was rated at 7.2 and the Canon S3 was rated much higher at 7.7. Based (I have not seen the S3) on my observation of the Canon S2 and the Panasonic FZ5, I found that the Canon focused much slower and other than the movies and the swivel screen did not provide any advantages. As a matter of fact I preferred the FZ5 and now am planning to purchase an FZ7 summer time. I am curious as to why Cnet rated the Canon much higher. Any comments? > I have just read reviews on Cnet where the Panasonic FZ7 was rated at > 7.2 and the Canon S3 was rated much higher at 7.7. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I am curious as to why Cnet rated the Canon much higher. Any > comments? Well, apart from the obvious answer (about advertising revenues), reviews have a subjective component so it's not surprising that someone else's conclusions may differ from yours. There may also be an unconscious bias that Canon is a "camera" company and Panasonic a "consumer electronics" company. When I compared the Canon S2 and the Panasonic FZ5 in my hands, I had no doubt which one I preferred (the Panasonic) and it turns out to produce better images as well. I have been delighted with the camera. Try to get the chance to compare the handling in the shop - it's an important factor - as (for some people) might be the swivel viewfinder of the Canon. Cheers, David David J Taylor skrev: > There may also be an unconscious bias > that Canon is a "camera" company and Panasonic a "consumer electronics" > company. This bias can be very strong and conscious among some photo professionals. I actually have experienced a Swedish photo dealer who rudely showed me out of his shop and told me that he didn't want customers who were aggressive when I very politely asked him why he didn't sell Panasonic cameras when thay had got every TIPA award for best superzoom that ever was awarded. Jan Böhme > David J Taylor skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Jan Böhme .. and the answer to your question "why" was? Perhaps too little profit! Cheers, David David J Taylor skrev: > I actually have experienced a Swedish photo dealer who > > rudely showed me out of his shop and told me that he didn't want > > customers who were aggressive when I very politely asked him why he > > didn't sell Panasonic cameras when thay had got every TIPA award for > > best superzoom that ever was awarded. > .. and the answer to your question "why" was? Perhaps too little profit! If he had told me so, I would have accepted it as rational. As it was, I got the clear impression that he didn't want those stinking cameras in his reputable shop, and that he much prefered to lose those customers who insisted of bringing up this unsavoury subject, Well, he had his way. Jan Böhme >David J Taylor skrev: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >This bias can be very strong and conscious among some photo >professionals. I am not a professional but did have a strong bias to overcome favoring Canon and even a stronger bias favoring Nikon. The bias favoring Nikon needs to be overcome when it comes time for a DSLR since I am interested in Canon. One of the things that I do not like about any of the DSLR cameras today is the inability to get dust off of the sensor which I understand is unavoidable. >I actually have experienced a Swedish photo dealer who >rudely showed me out of his shop and told me that he didn't want [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > [] > One of the things that I do not like about any of the DSLR cameras > today is the inability to get dust off of the sensor which I > understand is unavoidable. The Olympus E-330 and other models in the range have a dust-removal feature... http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse330/ David >[] > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >David > I have heard of that but my preferences are Canon or Nikon systems. I am not sure how effective it is. If so I would assume that both Canon and Nikon would plan models having that feature. > David J Taylor wrote on 5th May >When I compared the Canon S2 and the Panasonic FZ5 in my hands, I had no >doubt which one I preferred (the Panasonic) and it turns out to produce >better images as well. I have been delighted with the camera. Try to get >the chance to compare the handling in the shop - it's an important >factor - as (for some people) might be the swivel viewfinder of the Canon. I recently bought the Panasonic FZ5 when my Fuji 2800 developed mechanical problems. The FZ5 has taken me by surprise. It's a terrific little camera; It feels good just to hold it and has impressed me right from my first shots. I look forward to many happy hours trying out it's many features, especially the tele-macro. Regards Pete Based on images I've seen, the Canon has lower noise and produces very nice images. The Panny's images are nice, as well, but have higher noise. Also, the Canon has one very nice feature in movie mode: the ability to zoom during filming movies. Nice touch. >I have just read reviews on Cnet where the Panasonic FZ7 was rated at 7.2 >and the Canon S3 was rated much higher at 7.7. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I am curious as to why Cnet rated the Canon much higher. Any comments? Don't knopw about S3. My son has a Panasonic FZ20 and My daughter has a Canon 610. Althogh Canon 610 is my favorite digital P&S, FZ20 has clear strength in the color fidelity and the noise when compared with canon A610. I was surprised when I found out that, because Canon has a larger sensor (1/1,8 vs. 1/2.5). > Based on images I've seen, the Canon has lower noise and produces very nice > images. The Panny's images are nice, as well, but have higher noise. Also, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > > > I am curious as to why Cnet rated the Canon much higher. Any comments? Don't knopw about S3. My son has a Panasonic FZ20 and My daughter has a Canon 610. Althogh Canon 610 is my favorite digital P&S, FZ20 has clear strength in the color fidelity and the noise when compared with canon A610. I was surprised when I found out that, because Canon has a larger sensor (1/1,8 vs. 1/2.5). > Based on images I've seen, the Canon has lower noise and produces very nice > images. The Panny's images are nice, as well, but have higher noise. Also, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > > > I am curious as to why Cnet rated the Canon much higher. Any comments? Don't knopw about S3. My son has a Panasonic FZ20 and My daughter has a Canon 610. Althogh Canon 610 is my favorite digital P&S, FZ20 has clear strength in the color fidelity and the noise when compared with canon A610. I was surprised when I found out that, because Canon has a larger sensor (1/1,8 vs. 1/2.5). > Based on images I've seen, the Canon has lower noise and produces very nice > images. The Panny's images are nice, as well, but have higher noise. Also, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > > > I am curious as to why Cnet rated the Canon much higher. Any comments? I have a S2IS and my daughter has a FZ5, and the Canon has much, much better super macro mode, and produces nicer skin tones. The tilt screen is great too. Other than that, Panasonic is much more compact and nicer, and gives at least as sharp pics as the Canon. Don't know about those new models, but think they don't differ very much, they are more like upgrades than brand new models anyway. /per >I have just read reviews on Cnet where the Panasonic FZ7 was rated at 7.2 >and the Canon S3 was rated much higher at 7.7. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I am curious as to why Cnet rated the Canon much higher. Any comments? > I have a S2IS and my daughter has a FZ5, and the Canon has much, much > better super macro mode, and produces nicer skin tones. The tilt [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > are more like upgrades than brand new models anyway. > /per I was not convinced about the S2-IS and the so-called super macro mode. I mean, how may times would you wish to place something on the les surface to photograph it? To me, it seemed to be a gimmick. Having a working distance of zero complicates lighting somewhat. One thing I found useful on the FZ5 is the ability to run macro at the long end of the zoom range - you get about a 90mm wide field at a working distance of 90cm (IIRC) and that longer working distance can be very handy. Does the Canon allow that? I would agree that a swivel LCD would be a worthy improvement on the Panasonic. David >> I have a S2IS and my daughter has a FZ5, and the Canon has much, much >> better super macro mode, and produces nicer skin tones. The tilt [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > to photograph it? To me, it seemed to be a gimmick. Having a working > distance of zero complicates lighting somewhat. You don't want to put something on the lens surface, but you do want to be able to get very close for some purposes. The tele macro feature on the FZ7 is lovely, it works remarkably well, but there are shots I can get with a Coolpix 990 that I can't get with the FZ simply because the 990 can achieve a higher magnification. I was not aware before of the super macro capability on the S2-IS and S3-IS--looks like they take over from the Coolpix 9xx as the macro kings of the point and shoot world. > One thing I found useful on the FZ5 is the ability to run macro at the > long end of the zoom range - you get about a 90mm wide field at a working > distance of 90cm (IIRC) and that longer working distance can be very > handy. Does the Canon allow that? According to the data sheet it can focus to 3 feet in tele mode, which is about the same as the FZ7 does in tele-macro mode, so it does appear to be able to do the same thing there. > I would agree that a swivel LCD would be a worthy improvement on the > Panasonic. > > David  Signature--John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
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.