kodak dx7590 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20

[emu]

Hi I found a kodak dx7590 for sale and thought it looked awesome and was about ready to buy, I think it probably does everything I need.

However now I come across "image stabilization" and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20 and am at a loss. How much difference does this make. Am I correct in think ing that when I'm using the flash the shutter speed is going to be fast enough that the image stabilization will not be very important? Will this also be the case when I'm outside if its not night of close too? Apart from this issue I'd probably be happy with the cheaper and smaller kodak.

One last thing the reviews I've read say the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20 does not "gain up" making viewing difficult in low light. I'm likely to take many photos in lowish light. Indoor in average lighting -does anyone know how much a problem this is?

any help greatly appreciated!

[Jayde]

EMU
HI :)
As Jeff commented here on the kodak review
"if you're buying go for the new FZ15 or FZ20,"
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/kodak/dx7590-review/index.shtml

his kodak cons.. yuk !
Details in photos can look muddy, overprocessed; photos tend to be soft, as well
No manual white balance or manual focus
Image stabilization would be nice
VGA movie mode, while nice, has a sluggish frame rate

so
FZ20 features easily wins hands down.. :D
as for gain up.. read this
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1435
no EVF will work in darkness but my FZ10 works fine in near darkness.. without help..
and the 20 has night scenery, night portrait, fireworks modes
with AF Assist light..

did you look at the FZ3 ?
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz3/

[emu]

I did read the review. The kodak seemed to come up about as well as the FZ20
on image quality. I had read the other article too, I expect the no gain problem is not that big.

So its all down to the image stabilization and that the kodak is smaller... The smaller bit I can decide myself - I understand that :) the stabilization on the other hand I have no experience with...

[Jayde]

Emu
Sorry, but you have this wrong.
kodak images.. :(
"Details in photos can look muddy, overprocessed; photos tend to be soft."
this description is not good, muddy = bad coloring, soft = not sharp
never mind overprocessed.. harsh quality.
if thats what you want go ahead..

stabilization (antishake) helps keep the pics sharp especially over longer zoom range over say 200mm, because its difficult to hold an object in the frame at a distance, even the moon on a clear night will move around like a pea in bucket (hand held that is ) but with practise its still poss to shoot with OIS
it also helps over shorter distances cos any movement causes blurred pics.

plz try both in local shop then you know for sure.. :)

[emu]

ok your opinion is noted. I'm leaning that way. However just for the record the review of the fz20 said about pitcure quality:

Above average noise levels, redeye, and barrel distortion

Talk about UK! For me it is easier to digitally sharpen then soften, might just be the software I have., but it actually sounds worse then the kodak. maybe I'm biased by my 3 yr old kodak which I though was quite good for what it was.

the big mysetery to me is the image stabilization and how good it is. specially i low light situations.

[Jayde]

EMU
some of these to a degree yeh.. i concurr
"Above average noise levels, redeye, and barrel distortion"
BUT as well as
"Details in photos can look muddy, overprocessed; photos tend to be soft."
wont help kodak quality..

read some other opinions on this forum and search for info here
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1033

as specifioed by pana.. the FZ3 has 2 night modes and AF light.. :)

plz try ithem out in local shop if poss..

[Greg Anthony]

If you want to see an excellent example of what image stabilization can do, look at this photo in Simon Joinson's gallery on dpreview here (http://img.dpreview.com/gallery/engine.asp?photo=21&gallery=panasonicfz3_samples).

This shot was taken in extremely low light at 1 second, handheld.

Greg

[yonco]

Jayde, your recommendations are so biased! It's obvious you hate Kodak, and you just push your Panasonic's in every time.
Every camera has its cons, let the man decide and don't just dismiss the DX7590. I admit the Pana has a better lens, more zoom (12x vs. 10x), higher image resolution (5MP vs. 4MP), more manual features (white balance and focus) and of course image stabilization, but don't dismiss it altogether.
I bet you haven't seen even one real-world DX7590 image. I've seen lots of them and they're all great and sharp and of excellent quality.

EMU
some of these to a degree yeh.. i concurr
"Above average noise levels, redeye, and barrel distortion"
BUT as well as
"Details in photos can look muddy, overprocessed; photos tend to be soft."
wont help kodak quality..

read some other opinions on this forum and search for info here
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1033

as specifioed by pana.. the FZ3 has 2 night modes and AF light.. :)

plz try ithem out in local shop if poss..

[wmussatto]

The Kodak and the FZ-3 don't have manual focus. FZ-15/20 do.
The Kodak has a better movie mode, I believe, but you are not going to be taking long movies.
Do you prefer bonce or direct flash?

As Jeff says look at the pictures in the galleries (full size images), particularly those which are like the type of picture you intend to take.

I was looking at the FZ-20 and KM-2/3 and found the image sharper and with less purple fringing with the FZ-20.

If you don't plan on taking long telephoto shots in less than very bright light or if you don't mind taking and setting up a tripod then Image Stabilization is not an issue (Panasonics has it and Kodak doesn't).

Kodak colors are supposed to be more pleasing to 'non-professional' photographers. That is definitly something your will have to decide for yourself. One option might be to buy a SD card and try to let the stores let you take picutures with both cameras and you can decide. But by all means handle the camera's. I come from a Minolta Film SLR and the FZ-3 and to a lesser degree the Kodak felt tiny, but them my hands are not yours.

Bill

[D70FAN]

Jayde, your recommendations are so biased! It's obvious you hate Kodak, and you just push your Panasonic's in every time.
Every camera has its cons, let the man decide and don't just dismiss the DX7590. I admit the Pana has a better lens, more zoom (12x vs. 10x), higher image resolution (5MP vs. 4MP), more manual features (white balance and focus) and of course image stabilization, but don't dismiss it altogether.
I bet you haven't seen even one real-world DX7590 image. I've seen lots of them and they're all great and sharp and of excellent quality.

You are correct. Jayde is definately biased. And for very good reasons which you, so eloquently, went on to describe above. In the "real world" the DX7590 could not have taken that picture.

So be honest, if a very good freind asked you which Ultra-Zoom camera you would recommend they spend their $400-$500. What would you tell them?

Is your responsibility to be "fair" to the camera company or to your friend?

[John_Reed]

You are correct. Jayde is definately biased. And for very good reasons which you, so eloquently, went on to describe above. In the "real world" the DX7590 could not have taken that picture.

So be honest, if a very good freind asked you which Ultra-Zoom camera you would recommend they spend their $400-$500. What would you tell them?

Is your responsibility to be "fair" to the camera company or to your friend?George, I love that shot too, and have used it as an example more than once. It's downright amazing that a) Simon could hold the camera steady for an entire second, and that b) his subject(s) could freeze themselves for the same period. Here's the photo:
http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/panasonicfz3_samples/p1010550.jpg
Though I do see movement (the girl's left hand), notably, I don't see movement elsewhere. Maybe Simon prepared the bunch by shouting out "FREEZE, I'm taking a long exposure here!" But I just found it amazing that the guy holding the glass to his lips over in the left background, and the guy sitting on the right in the background, neither one of them moved at all during this shot. But maybe I'm just a born skeptic. I certainly do believe in the benefits of O.I.S., and I have a few "quarter-seconders" myself. In this particular case, though... I just wonder, that's all.

[D70FAN]

George, I love that shot too, and have used it as an example more than once. It's downright amazing that a) Simon could hold the camera steady for an entire second, and that b) his subject(s) could freeze themselves for the same period. Here's the photo:

Though I do see movement (the girl's left hand), notably, I don't see movement elsewhere. Maybe Simon prepared the bunch by shouting out "FREEZE, I'm taking a long exposure here!" But I just found it amazing that the guy holding the glass to his lips over in the left background, and the guy sitting on the right in the background, neither one of them moved at all during this shot. But maybe I'm just a born skeptic. I certainly do believe in the benefits of O.I.S., and I have a few "quarter-seconders" myself. In this particular case, though... I just wonder, that's all.

Although... There is some noise... :rolleyes:

[yonco]

You are correct. Jayde is definately biased. And for very good reasons which you, so eloquently, went on to describe above. In the "real world" the DX7590 could not have taken that picture.

So be honest, if a very good freind asked you which Ultra-Zoom camera you would recommend they spend their $400-$500. What would you tell them?

Is your responsibility to be "fair" to the camera company or to your friend?
Thanks, George, and to be fair I would choose the FZ20 and would recommend it to a friend. I just don't know what that person who started the thread wants or thinks, and so I think that the Kodak DX7590 shouldn't be dismissed because maybe it is what that person wants. In my opinion, and for all the reasons I have mentioned above, the FZ20 is a better camera and is worth the extra bucks.