Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / Digital Photo / March 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Lumix FZ-30 questions

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Bolshoy Huy - 19 Mar 2006 02:31 GMT
I hear noise is bad on it.

How could such a small lens go up to 420mm? does it really?
What does the following mean:
· Non-extending / internal zoom?
· Mechanical linked zoom ring?
· Focus-by-wire focus ring?

What the hell is an "extended optical zoom"? 15x in 5mp?!
Does that mean, 35mm x 15 = 525mm?

Their DMW-LT55 - 1.7x teleconverter goes for $200, it takes you from
420mm to 714mm.  Considering how much a 714mm lens would cost, is a
gain of 294mm worth $200? What about picture quality?
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography
says: "The moral here is that if you have an inexpensive consumer zoom
and you want a longer lens, buy a longer lens!"
Daniel Silevitch - 19 Mar 2006 02:42 GMT
> I hear noise is bad on it.

Depends on what you want to do. Daylight photography, fine, no problem.
At night, however, you're much much better off with an SLR.

> How could such a small lens go up to 420mm? does it really?

It goes up to "420mm (35mm equivalent)", which means that the field of
view is equivalent to a 420mm lens on a 35mm film camera. The actual
max focal length is, I think, 72mm. The larger equivalent length is
because the imaging sensor is considerably smaller than a 35mm frame.

> What does the following mean:
> · Non-extending / internal zoom?

When you turn the camera on, the lens doesn't extend out of the camera
Internal zoom means that when you change zooms, the length of the lens
stays fixed.

> · Mechanical linked zoom ring?
There's a ring encircling the lens. It's connected via cams to the lens
elements; turning the ring directly moves lens elements to change the
zoom, without using any motors.

> · Focus-by-wire focus ring?

A second ring encircling the lens. This one is connected to sensors,
which are then connected to motors that move the focusing elements.

> What the hell is an "extended optical zoom"? 15x in 5mp?!
> Does that mean, 35mm x 15 = 525mm?

To first approximation, it's a marketing gimmick.

> Their DMW-LT55 - 1.7x teleconverter goes for $200, it takes you from
> 420mm to 714mm.  Considering how much a 714mm lens would cost, is a
> gain of 294mm worth $200? What about picture quality?

Can't comment on this; I've never used it. Personally, I'd buy a
wide-angle converter before a teleconverter; these cameras have plenty
of tele reach, but don't go very wide.

-dms
Raven - 19 Mar 2006 04:33 GMT
>What about picture quality?

I had the camera for three months. Rather than pitching it off a ledge, I
sold it and bought a Panasonic FZ20.  I'm a far happier person for having
done so.  This camera is not for the faint of heart and not for a novice
digital camera user.  I'm not saying you are, but fair warning to others.
It's "auto" mode is worthless.  Photos are soft and it's often unclear what
the camera is metering on. This camera seems to require good outdoor
lighting to perform well in any mode.  Know I'll be shot at sunrise by the
die-hard fans, but I would run, not walk away from this one. The Panasonic
FZ10 and 20 are excellent with sharp lenses.  In spite of all the "features"
of the FZ30, I consider it a huge disappoinment from Panasonic.
Paul Allen - 19 Mar 2006 06:38 GMT
>> What about picture quality?
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> FZ10 and 20 are excellent with sharp lenses.  In spite of all the "features"
> of the FZ30, I consider it a huge disappoinment from Panasonic.

One of the review sites noted that the FZ30 didn't produce significantly
more detail than the FZ20.  Possible explanations included more
aggressive noise reduction and the IS being less effective due to the
greater sensor resolution, as I recall.  They found that downsampling
to 5mp produced images with similar sharpness and noise characteristics
to what an FZ20 would produce.

So, you can think of the two cameras as producing similar 5mp images,
with one of them having a bunch of nice new features and costing about
$100 more.  If you expect sharp 8mp images from the FZ30, you'll be
disappointed.  If you expect easier manual focus using the higher-
resolution EVF, you'll be pleased with the FZ30.  If saving $100 is
the most important factor, the FZ20 is a sweet camera.

Paul Allen
ASAAR - 19 Mar 2006 05:21 GMT
> I hear noise is bad on it.

 You heard wrong, probably due to too much noise.

> How could such a small lens go up to 420mm? does it really?

 No, O'Reilly.  But that was yesterday.  Today it goes up to 42cm.

> What does the following mean:
> · Non-extending / internal zoom?

 You can zoom without knocking off the lens cap.

> · Mechanical linked zoom ring?

 Doesn't use buttons, levers or voice control.

> · Focus-by-wire focus ring?

 Doesn't use a mechanically linked ring.

> What the hell is an "extended optical zoom"? 15x in 5mp?!
> Does that mean, 35mm x 15 = 525mm?

 Probably not, but what the hell do I know?

> Their DMW-LT55 - 1.7x teleconverter goes for $200, it takes you from
> 420mm to 714mm.  Considering how much a 714mm lens would cost,
> is a gain of 294mm worth $200? What about picture quality?

 It isn't worth the cost.  But if you stack two of them, the second
one adds another 500mm.  Then it becomes really cost effective.

> http://www.bobatkins.com/photography
> says: "The moral here is that if you have an inexpensive consumer
> zoom and you want a longer lens, buy a longer lens!"

 He also once said that if you have an expensive Maserati and you
want a longer lens, buy a longer lens.  A truism, truly.
Dibley Fanshaw - 19 Mar 2006 12:00 GMT
> I hear noise is bad on it.

I've had only a couple of occasions when noise reared it's ugly head,
both when I was messing about trying to provoke it. Otherwise it doesn't
worry me any more than grain might have back in 35mm film days.

> How could such a small lens go up to 420mm? does it really?

The zoom range on this lens is amazing. If you take a shot at maximum
zoom (88mm*), then go to maximum wide angle (7.5mm*), you're struggling
to find the first shot within the second.

(* these two figures are guestimates from images in iPhoto. I don't have
the camera with me to check.)

> What does the following mean:
> · Non-extending / internal zoom?
> · Mechanical linked zoom ring?
> · Focus-by-wire focus ring?

Answered in earlier postings

> What the hell is an "extended optical zoom"? 15x in 5mp?!
> Does that mean, 35mm x 15 = 525mm?

It's a round-about way of describing Digital zoom.

> Their DMW-LT55 - 1.7x teleconverter goes for $200, it takes you from
> 420mm to 714mm.  Considering how much a 714mm lens would cost, is a
> gain of 294mm worth $200? What about picture quality?
> http://www.bobatkins.com/photography
> says: "The moral here is that if you have an inexpensive consumer zoom
> and you want a longer lens, buy a longer lens!"

?????

Signature

~Dibley

Paul Murray - 19 Mar 2006 12:14 GMT
> What the hell is an "extended optical zoom"? 15x in 5mp?!
> Does that mean, 35mm x 15 = 525mm?
It crops a portion of the centre of the sensor, to produce an smaller FOV.
You could do the same by cropping in post-processing.
Dennis Pogson - 19 Mar 2006 18:24 GMT
> I hear noise is bad on it.
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> says: "The moral here is that if you have an inexpensive consumer zoom
> and you want a longer lens, buy a longer lens!"

I wouldn't buy one if I was you, it leaves the rest of us able to take
fantastic photos.
Isaiah Beard - 22 Mar 2006 05:41 GMT
> I hear noise is bad on it.

In most cases, no, the noise isn't an issue, at least int eh particular
specimen of FZ-30 I'm using.  In low light noise is present, but working
with the RAW can take care of that.

> How could such a small lens go up to 420mm? does it really?
> What does the following mean:
> · Non-extending / internal zoom?
> · Mechanical linked zoom ring?
> · Focus-by-wire focus ring?

All answered by other posters.

> What the hell is an "extended optical zoom"? 15x in 5mp?!

Basically, nothing you should mess with.  It's digital zoom.

> Their DMW-LT55 - 1.7x teleconverter goes for $200, it takes you from
> 420mm to 714mm.  Considering how much a 714mm lens would cost, is a
> gain of 294mm worth $200?

Depends on how badly you think you would need it.  I personally don't
see a need to buy it at that price, for my use so far.

Signature

E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

D-Mac - 22 Mar 2006 08:59 GMT
> I hear noise is bad on it.
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> says: "The moral here is that if you have an inexpensive consumer zoom
> and you want a longer lens, buy a longer lens!"
---------------------

I'm not exactly sure where you are going with this question but the earlier
FZ20 certainly does a nice job of making images from some rather expensive
DSLRs look decidely poor quality in low light.
http://www.weprint2canvas.com/gallery/tangalooma/money_making Hand held at
1/6th of a second. Try doing that with *ANY* SLR, much less a DSLR. The lens
extention was very close to the 12x maximum although there is no information
available at the time of shooting as to the Zoom amount. I can attest to the
quality of the Leica optics too.
--- EXIF Data ---
Make = Panasonic
Model = DMC-FZ20
Orientation = Normal
XResolution = 72.00
YResolution = 72.00
Resolution Unit = Inch
Software = Ver1.0
Date Time = 2006:03:16 19:38:07
YCb Cr Positioning = Co-sited
Exif Offset = 418
Exposure Time = 10/60 sec
FNumber = F2.8
Exposure Program = Normal
ISOSpeed Ratings = 200
Exif Version = "0220"-- www.photosbydouglas.comwww.weprint2canvas.comIf you
really must write,use myname at an above domain.
Bill Funk - 22 Mar 2006 15:48 GMT
>I'm not exactly sure where you are going with this question but the earlier
>FZ20 certainly does a nice job of making images from some rather expensive
>DSLRs look decidely poor quality in low light.
>http://www.weprint2canvas.com/gallery/tangalooma/money_making Hand held at
>1/6th of a second. Try doing that with *ANY* SLR, much less a DSLR.

That's an interesting statement.
How does the FZ20 do that?

Signature

Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

Isaiah Beard - 31 Mar 2006 22:29 GMT
>> I'm not exactly sure where you are going with this question but the earlier
>> FZ20 certainly does a nice job of making images from some rather expensive
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> That's an interesting statement.
> How does the FZ20 do that?

I guess he's touting the Optical Image Stablization, and he's right in
that for their price range, the LUMIX line (particualr the 20 and 30) do
a spectacular job of OIS.

The said, there are at least a few dSLRs with OIS lenses too.

Signature

E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

 
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.