Panasonic Noise Issues

[jthutcheson]

Panasonic has been producing image sensors for a good many years now. They are now in their 3rd incarnation of their VENUS processor. So why, oh why, do their images still end up looking like watercolors???

I understand that NR algorithms are exceptionally difficult mathematical formulae which we mere mortals can never begin to understand, but is there any reason that Panasonic is not increasing to the less-noisy 1/1.8" sensors that Canon employs? I'm sure there is an electrical engineer laughing at my naivete, but give me a break people!

The VENUS III engine is an amazing device, and its approach to NR extremely noteworthy. I think that a more balanced approach to NR between the luminance and chroma channels would yield greater results. But I guess we'll have to wait for the VENUS IV for that, eh?

One last comment, and I do apologize for the long post: I think that the sensor on the TZ3 is a large step in the right direction. I am really looking forward to seeing exactly what that item is capable of in the near future.

I sincerely believe that should Panny fix the noise SNAFU with their cameras, Canon would be sweating bullets (if they aren't already).

[genece]

Water colors ...my oh my.
I better sell my Panasonics.

[jthutcheson]

Water colors ...my oh my.
I better sell my Panasonics.

okay, so maybe that was just a little harsh........:o :o :o *blush*

I guess i'm just tired of every reviewer of every camera making noise the biggest issue, and wishing Panasonic would do something to change their image a bit (no pun intended)

I own an FZ7, so I certainly am not saying "don't buy" or "stay away from" them. I have gotten some really great shots with the camera. I just wish I had a little more flexibility in the lower-light end of the spectrum.

[Malcy]

It's not so much the noise itself that's the problem, it is the way that the Panasonics process the raw data in camera to produce jpegs. I have compared the Canon A620 (a much praised camera) against the LX2. The LX2 images were taken in raw and processed externally to avoid Panasonics processing.

The basic noise levels at iso 100-400 are essentially the same, if slightly different in nature. If the in camera processing did it's job, the number of people complaining would drop dramatically even with the same sensor. At least the LX2 and a few others output raw so Panasonics processing can be avoided. I also found that with the LX2, detail and performance in dark areas was better.

I have a bit of a love/hate affair with the LX2 as in many ways it is a superb camera but has some serious shortcomings, but no camera is perfect.

[BryanMsi]

As long as we consumers keep buying digital cameras by shopping on megapixels, then size and styling, then image stabilization, then ease of use - while completely ignoring image quality - Panasonic will continue to be strongly incentivized to keep offering tiny sensors with noise problems.

Until consumers shop on image quality as a first criteria and then those other factors as distant seconds, we will keep seeing ever smaller and noisier sensors with corresponding noise reduction.

Fuji went with a strategy of conspicuously avoiding megapixel wars and instead focusing on image quality. They blew away all other point-and-shoot manufacturers with clean, low-noise images, and their cameras should have been very successful. Instead, consumers flocked to the sexier, thinner, higher megapixel Panasonics and Canons. The market doesn't guarantee the best images...it only guarantees to provide the best of whatever is valued. In this case, megapixels above all else.

[jcon]

As long as we consumers keep buying digital cameras by shopping on megapixels, then size and styling, then image stabilization, then ease of use - while completely ignoring image quality - Panasonic will continue to be strongly incentivized to keep offering tiny sensors with noise problems.

Until consumers shop on image quality as a first criteria and then those other factors as distant seconds, we will keep seeing ever smaller and noisier sensors with corresponding noise reduction.

Fuji went with a strategy of conspicuously avoiding megapixel wars and instead focusing on image quality. They blew away all other point-and-shoot manufacturers with clean, low-noise images, and their cameras should have been very successful. Instead, consumers flocked to the sexier, thinner, higher megapixel Panasonics and Canons. The market doesn't guarantee the best images...it only guarantees to provide the best of whatever is valued. In this case, megapixels above all else.

Well said Bryan, Ive said that here myself before.

Panasonics thinking: Just add a few extra bells and whistles and the faithful will buy.

[Malcy]

I don't think that Panasonic are any different to the majority of the players in the market, the exception being as you said Fuji. To play the same game in a slightly different way you can say that Panasonic cameras are innovative, stylish and very well built but have a sensor/image processing setup that is below par. On the other hand, Fuji cameras have a great sensor/processing setup but the actual cameras are uninspiring and could be so much better.

If they did a compact with their sensor, a 28mm lens (zoom or fixed) and aperture priority, I would buy one in a flash. I have a film equivalent, a Fuji DL Super Mini, a gorgeous little camera with a 28mm Super EBC lens. So Fuji could do it if they wanted to but they too pander to the mass market by producing compact cameras that are as dull as ditchwater apart from the sensor.

If you are waiting for the market to respond to your wishes that they should boycot Panasonic, Canon and anyone else that puts high MP sensors in their cameras, you will be waiting a long time, it just isn't going to happen. Compared to the number of these mainstream models sold, the number of enthusiasts buying them and then complaining must be tiny so it's no wonder that camera design follows a path to maximise sales rather than IQ.

[Riley]

i do hate to say this but
whatever the ills of marketing, you need to face that it works
its confounding that quality, and the ideal of profit are not adjacent pals

[jthutcheson]

Firstly, thank you all for participating in this discussion.

The biggest problem with marketing image quality is that it is a subjective issue. How do you say that your pictures look better than everyone else's; then, how do you prove it?

The problem with the digicam market in general is that for years, up to the 5MP mark being passed, increased MP actually meant better image quality. However, in the past year or so, the noise monster has reared its ugly head, much to the chagrin of seasoned digicamers the world over. We have reached the point outlined by the Law of Diminishing Returns, where more MP does NOT = better image, but in fact the opposite. The manufacturers are indeed looking for new ways to combat noise without destroying detail, but the innovation in combatting noise is far outpaced by the sensor MP counts. Like it or love it, until Joe Consumer realizes that the results are getting worse, not better, the MP wars will keep going.

As far as Fuji, I would have gotten one myself had they been SD rather than XD, but ce la vie....

[howi]

jthutcheson,

Hi, while I totally agree with you and many photographers that MP / number games are often just marketing hype, I want to point out one thing: TZ1 is among those first bunch of Panasonic cameras using the Venus III engine. So I do not understand why you say the TZ2/3 is in the "right direction". Though I am hopeful one day Panasonic may do something "less" aggressive on their approach for the Noise Reduction, it could also be another agenda... If pairing the same Venus III engine across the broad with the relatively better algorithm and quality found in the FZs, then why would people spend more for those prosumer line cameras? Granted, we all know that they actually offer more manual controls and even better optical quality when their lens. However, the TZ series is just getting closer to many enthusiasts want - except the mentioned prosumer features.

I use D-SLR myself (a Nikon D80). But for traveling, I have found my TZ1 is a very good, compact and practical companion. Just that the noise kills me!

[jcon]

......
I have found my TZ1 is a very good, compact and practical companion. Just that the noise kills me!

Thats the whole point... the noise!

The FZ50 also utilizes the Venus Engine III and look how "improved" its image quality is(sarcasm!!). People that are expecting great things from the Venus Engine III are in for a big let down.

In the end, all that matters is that you're happy with your camera.

[howi]

Thats the whole point... the noise!

The FZ50 also utilizes the Venus Engine III and look how "improved" its image quality is(sarcasm!!). People that are expecting great things from the Venus Engine III are in for a big let down.

In the end, all that matters is that you're happy with your camera.

jcon,

Yes, and I am going to wait for more reviews of the TZ3 before I decide to be my "upgrade" path. So far, I do not find the sample pictures are necessarily getting the needed improvement... because the noise is still there in the darker environments. Having a wide angle lens is also not necessarily better because the it is not as bright as the TZ1 as well.

Anyway, I guess we could not whine too much or expect the Panasonic do something magically to turn all point-n-shooter into a L1 :silly:

[Elisha82]

as far as i know the new generation Venus III cameras that are coming out are tweaked Venus III engines and not the originals like in the TZ1 and FZ50.
thats what i gather anyway.

[howi]

Elisha82,

Cautiously optimistic would be the best to describe how I feel. :)

[jthutcheson]

howi,

It is important to note that the processor, though of course very important, is only part of the issue where noise is concerned.

The VENUS III processor is a piece of hardware, which, through the magic of the computing industry is more powerful than its predecessor, and can therefore make more complex calculations without sacrificing speed. Hence, the new NR algorithms may be employed.

I believe that the process of separating luminance and chroma noise and dealing with each separately is the correct road to take, hence the "step in the right direction" shtick.

The next processor will (hopefully) refine that process so that even less detail is lost to NR.

[Serafin 100]

I guess im in the minority Im happy with the results coming from the venus3. I find the pictures far from seeing any "watercoloring" Set on low and the proper settings and I find the results quite nice. Just think everyone is on the bashing bandwagon.

http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/421515502/549.JPG

http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/421515502/548.JPG

http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/421515502/530.JPG

http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/421515502/529.JPG

http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/421515502/418.jpg

http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/421515502/390.JPG

[howi]

Serafin 100,

Well, do not worry because majority people will not argue that FZ is not doing a good job. It is only reinforcing my "theory" that the prosumer series models will be better off with everything relatively speaking at a higher price tag than TZ.

[John_Reed]

Far from being "killed" with noise, you look very much alive. I think people tend to forget that "Venus III" is just a processor. What drives it is the firmware that each camera's development team puts together for the particular camera using it. I have Venus III in my TZ1, and I'm not killed by noise either, and I've shot plenty of high-ISO shots. My FX50, also with Venus III, allows some pretty reasonable ISO 800 shots as well.

Fight the good fight. Forum "experts" may tell you your stuff is no good, but you know what the truth really is.

[jthutcheson]

Firstly, Serafin, those are some great shots, thank you for sharing them!! However, if you read the previous comments, you will see that there is very little "bashing" going on.

Secondly, I originally posted this thread in frustration of the Reviewers' opinion of Panasonic's camera performance. Panasonic is only being held out of top marks on every review because of their noise levels. I am a huge fan of Panasonic's cams, and am looking forward to a long relationship with this company. However, I believe that their cameras are being passed over based on the noise issue.

I am not, in any way, saying that the pictures captured by Panasonic digital cameras are unsatisfactory. Those cameras could easily replace Canon as the #1 manufacturer in America if they could decrease noise to the reviewer's satisfaction. That would, in turn, increase their sales and market saturation. But until every reviewer on the web and in the magazines quits yelping on about noise, and how it will ruin those precious shots of little Suzy with cake on her nose, the general public will simply look over them.

[Serafin 100]

Firstly, Serafin, those are some great shots, thank you for sharing them!! However, if you read the previous comments, you will see that there is very little "bashing" going on.

Secondly, I originally posted this thread in frustration of the Reviewers' opinion of Panasonic's camera performance. Panasonic is only being held out of top marks on every review because of their noise levels. I am a huge fan of Panasonic's cams, and am looking forward to a long relationship with this company. However, I believe that their cameras are being passed over based on the noise issue.

I am not, in any way, saying that the pictures captured by Panasonic digital cameras are unsatisfactory. Those cameras could easily replace Canon as the #1 manufacturer in America if they could decrease noise to the reviewer's satisfaction. That would, in turn, increase their sales and market saturation. But until every reviewer on the web and in the magazines quits yelping on about noise, and how it will ruin those precious shots of little Suzy with cake on her nose, the general public will simply look over them.

Sorry didnt mean you personally were bashing. The camera just doesnt seem to get its due for a wonderful digicam.

[John_Reed]

Firstly, Serafin, those are some great shots, thank you for sharing them!! However, if you read the previous comments, you will see that there is very little "bashing" going on.

Secondly, I originally posted this thread in frustration of the Reviewers' opinion of Panasonic's camera performance. Panasonic is only being held out of top marks on every review because of their noise levels. I am a huge fan of Panasonic's cams, and am looking forward to a long relationship with this company. However, I believe that their cameras are being passed over based on the noise issue.

I am not, in any way, saying that the pictures captured by Panasonic digital cameras are unsatisfactory. Those cameras could easily replace Canon as the #1 manufacturer in America if they could decrease noise to the reviewer's satisfaction. That would, in turn, increase their sales and market saturation. But until every reviewer on the web and in the magazines quits yelping on about noise, and how it will ruin those precious shots of little Suzy with cake on her nose, the general public will simply look over them.Much as I like Jeff Keller of this forum, it seems like in every review he's done of a Panasonic camera, the "N" word looms over the whole review. When I bought my FZ30, it was despite the "noise warnings" he posted. And yet, I've never really had a real problem with noise on that camera. I know the conditions which can bring it up, and when it happens, I pp around it, but frankly, I don't have to do much of that, and I'm very satisfied with the camera.

Likewise, I bought my FX50 after reading how terrible the images were in the mind of a reviewer; again, I've been more than happy with the camera's images, even at high ISOs up to 800.

To me, the benefit of the Web is that curious users can actually look at many different results obtained by real users of the camera they're interested in, and see if for the kind of shooting they like to do, the camera can be expected to adequately perform.

Anyway, thanks for your posts.

[Elisha82]

most people that mention the Noise issue are the reviewers and the ones that do not have a Panny but echo the reviewers.
Most Panny owners never complain about the noise issue.

[John_Reed]

most people that mention the Noise issue are the reviewers and the ones that do not have a Panny but echo the reviewers.
Most Panny owners never complain about the noise issue.
We Panny owners who thoroughly enjoy the things we can do with our cameras seem to be regarded either as blind people, or liars, by those "echoes?" :p

[jcon]

You all didnt think I could stay out of this topic any longer, did you?:p

Anyway, everything that has been said here is accurate and I, for the most part, agree with it all.

I would like to say though, the reason many Panasonic owners dont "complain about noise" is because its pride and "my camera is better than yours" comming in to play. People dont like to admit weakness of stuff they own and for the most part, that has been very prevelant here on the Panasonic forum.

I wont speak for Jeff Keller, but I think he mentions noise for the simple reason that its there and is a problem! Jeff is very unbias and has no reason to say anything negative about a camera if its not there.

Do the Panasonics take great pictures? You bet! Do they have a weakness? Ofcourse, but what doesnt? Ive owned 2 Panasonics, one of them an FZ20. I really liked it alot, but the noise problem forced me to move to the next level.

I think the OP of this thread is justified in his/her frustrations and I echo the setiments that hopefully Panasonic will make improvements in the noise area, if they do, myself among many others will come running back!

[John_Reed]

I've consistently showed results here on this forum. Except for Coldrain's carping that one of my sample images showed here in a very small, thus deceptive format "masked" the noise, what you see is what you get! If I needed to use NR to pp a photo, I've said so in my posts. I've hidden nothing, and, as is my wont, have tried to be objective, even recommending other makers' cameras when they seemed more appropriate. When I said that I couldn't hold a Fuji F11 steady at any shutter speeds less than 1/40, that was based on experience, having taken quite a few shots.

As a matter of fact, truthful testimony is how I make my living, and have for 20 years, as an expert witness. Lying experts don't last long in the courtroom. And I consistently try to apply that same level of integrity here. I believe that this forum, to be useful as a "resource," needs to honor and respect the opinions and experiences of posters, and NOT put down and try to diminish the findings of others just because of disagreement. When Elisha talks of "echoes," most of the most vehement folks lined up against the Panny cameras here are people who themselves never show any evidence, or photographic examples of their own, but, as she said, simply echo the reviewers' statements.

So I don't get a commish from Panny or anyone else; I don't really care what camera someone chooses, as long as it pleases them. But it does seem to me that questioners are entitled to hear of, and see, examples from the experiences of people who have used the types of cameras they may be considering, so that they then may make informed decisions about what they want/need to buy.

Thanks for your comments, I appreciate your own contributions.

[jcon]

John, I hope you didnt take what I said personally, it deffinatly wasnt directed at you. You and Gene are the 2 mainstays here and have earned all of my respect. I wasnt referring to you when I said that there is a bias here on this forum, but there have been people that refuse to admit fault in there Panasonic.

I have seen your images and have given you compliments on them, especially the family portrait you said was hanging in a living room.

I strongly agree that this forum is a great resource and opinions need to be respected, aslong as they have reason and logical thinking behind them, again, not referring to you.

Along with you and Gene, I have tried to help point out BOTH sides of the Panasonics and in all honesty, I think I have done a good job at that.

Again, I hope what I said wasnt taken in the wrong way, John!

[John_Reed]

John, I hope you didnt take what I said personally, it deffinatly wasnt directed at you. You and Gene are the 2 mainstays here and have earned all of my respect. I wasnt referring to you when I said that there is a bias here on this forum, but there have been people that refuse to admit fault in there Panasonic.

I have seen your images and have given you compliments on them, especially the family portrait you said was hanging in a living room.

I strongly agree that this forum is a great resource and opinions need to be respected, aslong as they have reason and logical thinking behind them, again, not referring to you.

Along with you and Gene, I have tried to help point out BOTH sides of the Panasonics and in all honesty, I think I have done a good job at that.

Again, I hope what I said wasnt taken in the wrong way, John!No, I wasn't offended, I think I understood your point of view, and it's a decent point to discuss. In fact, I even notice you've taken to recommending the FZ50 - I want to warn you, that spells "Panapologist" in these parts. Beware! ;)

[Elisha82]

i do not have any complaints about noise because i rarely go over ISO100.
i have a tripod for the rest.
plus if i need indoor shots i set the flash intensity to low and use ISO100 sometimes ISO200 and pics turn out decent enough for me.

[jcon]

In fact, I even notice you've taken to recommending the FZ50 - I want to warn you, that spells "Panapologist" in these parts. Beware! ;)


:o LOL! :p

[reisende54]

A "Panapologist". Hmmmm.... I like it. :D LOL

[Jonathan Gingerich]

Some points:

I believe all the super zooms (including the s3) have smaller CCD's. It's just the nature of the beast.

Fuji is a darling at dcresource, but the F30 has its picture quality critics, if you look at, say, Amazon.

Canon seems to do a pretty good job with a wide range of middle of the road cameras (5x0, 6x0, 700) - bigger sensors, small zooms, moderate sensitivity.

No perfect camera...

JG

[jthutcheson]

:o I never thought my little tirade would evoke such a long and intersting discussion! Thank You to all who have posted and made this such a great thread!

I believe a summary is in order at this point:

Let us all agree that (for good or ill), Panasonic digital cameras do have higher than average noise in the jpegs produced by the camera.

Let us also agree that owners of said digicams, especially "Panapologists" (thank you John Reed!:D ), have found creative work-arounds that maximize the potential of these excellent cameras (thank you for your input, Elisha:) ). I believe that such adversity forces us all to be more creative and think more when we shoot, and putting thought into photography is rarely a bad idea.

In the end, as Jeff states, at the same time that he harps upon the noise issue, people should look at and print his photos so that they can judge the quality for themselves. I wish all reviewers were as honest.

As a Panny owner, I hope that Panasonic continues to increase its sales, that it may have the funds for more R&D, and I, for one, am eagerly awaiting to see what they will pull out of their hat next!

Thanks again to all who have posted!:D

[Serafin 100]

Took these pictures in my room. The room was fairly dark when I took this. (I should have chosen a different picture. I was 35 pounds heavier then.) On P mode ISO800 to make it look bright I set the aperture on the first picture at +2/3. 2nd picture is at +1. Maybe its because im new with cameras but I find this to be pretty good with noise and the picture looks pretty good also. And I was holding the camera in my hand. Some photoshop and it could come out pretty nice. If this is what everybody calls high noise and coloring of the pictures then so be it.



http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/421514652/136.JPG

http://www2.propichosting.com/Images/421514652/135.JPG

[Dario D.]

I believe a summary is in order at this point:

Let us all agree that (for good or ill), Panasonic digital cameras do have higher than average noise in the jpegs produced by the camera.
I agree. My old $120 Konica Minolta DiMAGE Z10 handles noise way better than my otherwise great FZ7. Considering how long these cams have been around, you'd think they'd do something about it eventually.

[jthutcheson]

Considering how long these cams have been around, you'd think they'd do something about it eventually.
David,

I agree, and I believe that the manufacturers are finally waking up. With the emphasis on reduced noise in each camera's press release this year, I think that Panasonic has realized their weakness and are at least trying to improve their image (no pun intended:rolleyes: ). Maybe with this year's late models and next year's models (I'm guessing TZ4/5, FZ60, FZ9, LX3, etc.) they will nip that problem in the bud...or at least use slightly larger sensors. The 1/2.35" sensor in the TZ3 has me intrigued, i must say... We'll have to see what the effect is

[danielmendes]

Excellent thread and, although new here, I'm happy to realize more and more people already understand the importante of CCD size, exposure ranges etc. are more important than just saying "I've a 10-megapixel digicam!" like it, alone, could mean better pictures.

(Myself, I'm waiting for the final PMA 2007 news and still undecided betwenn Fuji's S6000fd and Panasonic's new FZ8)

Now my 2 cents: an important aspect also is to consider what you're doing with your pictures. Using my old Sony P32 (3.2MP on a 1/2.7" CCD, imagine this) I can get *excellent* results if

- I'm printing 4x6",
- I don't want to picture low light and far subjects,
- I watch it on a PC or TV screen, or
- I'm not expecting great results from sports pictures.

Sure enough I've missed picture opportunities because of this, but my point is: if you're not printing 8x10", or consistently using your camera for real low light and far subjects, just choose the camera you like better and let it go.

Take a look at DP Review's sample pictures for the FZ8 - specially the last ones - at http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/panasonicfz8_samples/; download the full size pictures, print them at the size you normally use, open it on your picture viewer.

Then just decide for yourself: can I live with that noise? Can I SEE that much of a noise?

I'm inclined not to fully agree with the notion that most people won't say their "toys" are not very good as pointed here - specially if you consider selecting a place to buy them that provides hassle-free return in case you don't like it!

[LoveLife]

Panasonic has been producing image sensors for a good many years now. They are now in their 3rd incarnation of their VENUS processor. So why, oh why, do their images still end up looking like watercolors???

I understand that NR algorithms are exceptionally difficult mathematical formulae which we mere mortals can never begin to understand, but is there any reason that Panasonic is not increasing to the less-noisy 1/1.8" sensors that Canon employs? I'm sure there is an electrical engineer laughing at my naivete, but give me a break people!

The VENUS III engine is an amazing device, and its approach to NR extremely noteworthy. I think that a more balanced approach to NR between the luminance and chroma channels would yield greater results. But I guess we'll have to wait for the VENUS IV for that, eh?

One last comment, and I do apologize for the long post: I think that the sensor on the TZ3 is a large step in the right direction. I am really looking forward to seeing exactly what that item is capable of in the near future.

I sincerely believe that should Panny fix the noise SNAFU with their cameras, Canon would be sweating bullets (if they aren't already).

Faster CPUs mean nothing. Fix the CCD problem and eliminate NR. NR is the antitheses of image quality.

[Luscinia]

Do Anyone know if the Noise Reductions could be turned off on the Panasonics TZ1 and FZ7. In another thread it's said that it couldn't be turned off on FZ30 and FZ50.

[Riley]

Do Anyone know if the Noise Reductions could be turned off on the Panasonics TZ1 and FZ7. In another thread it's said that it couldn't be turned off on FZ30 and FZ50.

no you cant turn it off
the only aversion is if your camera shoots RAW

[jthutcheson]

Luscinia,

You cannot turn off the NR, however, on the FZ7 you can turn down the NR.

Setup->Camera Settings->Noise Reduction->Low

It helps preserve at least a little more detail.



Lovelife,

They have fixed the "CCD problem", its known as CMOS sensors. However, until Sony's recent annoucement (read it here (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0702/07021801sonyhighspeedcmos.asp)), it was unfeasable to place CMOS into a compact body, not to mention that it removed the CCD ability of a live view (before the Panasonic "LiveMOS" sensor was introduced).

As far as NR is concerned, there is no way to eliminate it completely, save keeping the ISO as low as possible and not doing any long exposures. That does limit the uses of the camera though.

Noise comes from stray charges on the sensor, and as long as sensors are run by electricity, they will occur. Even high-end CMOS sensors have some noise, but the larger pixel-pitch of these sensors better prevents the voltage leakage common to small, high-MP CCD sensors.

So basically we have a choice, large cameras or noise. As with all life's conundrums, balance is the key.

[Gaffle]

I am still learning digital photography. My current camera is the TZ1. Now I am happy with this camera, but the noise is there. I am not blowing up these pictures to their full capacity, so noise is not a total issue. That being said, here are 2 examples from my trip to St.Lucia. The first picture is a straight up nature shot. No noise that I can see. The second shot is of a little falcon I noticed on a power line. This bird was about the size of a parakeet, maybe a bit larger. I don't remember if I used my zoom all the way, but it was pretty close. It was nice to have the zoom on this trip.

I think Pana has noise problems, but I can get around those probs most of the time.

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m133/Gaffle/171.jpg

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m133/Gaffle/202.jpg

[jthutcheson]

Gaffle,

Those are some really great photos, thanks for sharing them!!

Also, thanks for your comments, its always great to have them from owners! I agree that getting around the limitations is easy most of the time. And when it isn't, well, that's what NeatImage is for, right? ;)

[great_guns]

As long as we consumers keep buying digital cameras by shopping on megapixels, then size and styling, then image stabilization, then ease of use - while completely ignoring image quality - Panasonic will continue to be strongly incentivized to keep offering tiny sensors with noise problems.

Until consumers shop on image quality as a first criteria and then those other factors as distant seconds, we will keep seeing ever smaller and noisier sensors with corresponding noise reduction.

Fuji went with a strategy of conspicuously avoiding megapixel wars and instead focusing on image quality. They blew away all other point-and-shoot manufacturers with clean, low-noise images, and their cameras should have been very successful. Instead, consumers flocked to the sexier, thinner, higher megapixel Panasonics and Canons. The market doesn't guarantee the best images...it only guarantees to provide the best of whatever is valued. In this case, megapixels above all else.

Guys, I thought Sony with its sorry-ass Cybershot superzooms did this. I mean how lame is it to have a joystick to manual focus?

[jthutcheson]

guns,

Actually, i have found the joystick on my FZ7 a great help to manual focus, more so than the four-way buttons, anyways.

As for Sony, their line lately has been showing major improvements. If they would ditch their precious Memory Sticks, they might actually have a chance...:rolleyes:

The megapixel wars, most unfortunately:( , are still raging, though thankfully not the 2-4 MP jumps we saw before.

In regards to Fuji, they just don't have brand recognition here in the US. When was the last time anyone saw a Fuji commercial??:confused:

[great_guns]

Hey TJ,

LOL, four way buttons are even lamer for manual focus. I was talking about the manual focus (fluid damped) ring on the FZ-20 that I have. THAT is authentic and also a joy to use.

MP wars are totally idiotic. I mean, I'd NEVER buy a camera more than 5MP if I had the choice but the problem is that I no longer HAVE a choice. The minimum MP configuration available now is 6MP and it grows every year.

Does anyone know a good place to buy older models of cameras? Not used ones but maybe old stock that never got sold out bevause of introduction of a newer model.