Canon SD300 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX7. Need help!!!

[greekly]

Hello everybody,

I am choosing between Canon SD300 and Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX7. The later one has more pixels (5 MPx vs 4 MPx in Canon) but that's not that big an issue for me. I seem to like everything about SD300. But the fact that Panasonic has image stabilization and SD300 doesn't keeps me from making the final pick.

Is that image stabilization system really a big thing? Is it worth buying the DMC-FX7 just for that fact? Have anybody had any experience with it? If so, please share you thoughts.

Thanks in advance.

[Waste_of_MP]

I have an S1 IS and image stab. is good for two things: Low light/long exposures, and while using the 10x optical zoom. You can shoot much more long shots without using a tripod. I use it a lot for scenery and nature photography and it works wonders! Sharp pictures at max zoom just holding it on my hand. I love the camera for that. It may not do you so much good with only 3x zoom, but if you use the digital zoom it might (which you can actually take advantage of with 5MP). I prefer Canon, having had 2 good ones, A70 & S1, but the Is makes the Lumix about as good. The Panasonic doesn't have an optical viewfinder, is shaky with out using IS, but seems to be a small step above the SD300 with IS. It's videos are not near as good and it's going to use up batteries FAST with that big LCD you can't turn off. Read the reviews, they may help. Ends up: What features are more important to you?

[ProblemSolver]

Why do you think the S1 IS uses four AA batteries? Image stabilizer is a "battery guzzler". I also agree with Waste_of_MP's statement that the large LCD of the Lumix can contribute to draining battery life. So, IS + Large LCD = You end up having to recharge your battery sooner than you expect.

I would say that you go with the SD 300 due to 2 reasons:

1. Quote from Canon Singapore's website "Canon LCD's use 33% less battery" (Hint: Visit the different country sites of camera companies and you're bound to pick up some useful info ;) ). So I guess that applies to the SD 300 as well...

2. Neither do you need an image stabilizer or hands of stone to take steady, clear pictures. I own an Ixus 500 (Digital ELPH S500) and I make use of ISO 400 as an alternative to IS. The downside to ISO 400 is a lot more noise. So, when I use Auto ISO, I hold the sides of the lens barrel with my index finger and thumb (Can't hold it like an SLR because it's way too small) and it helps reduce/eliminate shake.

Hope this helps

[skagen]

.I just got a camera a couple weeks ago. I was looking at these two cameras (among others) and I ended up going with the Panasonic DMC-FX7. SO far I am extremely happy with the decision.

The most important for me was lens/image quality. The pics of the Panasonic are:
- much more real and film-like
- show more actual detail and texture

In contrast the Canon SD pics show less visible noise. But what has happened is that Canon tuned the camera to remove that noise - but it also takes out more detail, thus reducing the picture quality. Also the SD300 has a lot more problems with purple fringing and dark corners

The OIS (image stabilization) in the FX7 is actually very useful even for example taking a picture in a restaurant. I get nice clear sharp pics by forcing the camera to ISO 80 or 100 and keeping the OIS in mode 2 (which by the way doesn't eat battery - it only comes on at the second you click). You can also just turn off the OIS if you want.

As for the absence of optical viewfinder - what do you want it for? In this category of camera (ie non-SLR) those optical viewfinders are ridiculously innacurate: maybe 75-85% accurate. Why would you ever prefer that to a 2.5" LCD which is 99% accurate to your final image when framing? This is a no-brainer to me. The designers of the FX7 were right on that one. Gutsy call and I'm with them all the way. You should not keep outdated and innacurate features, just of habit, when we have better methods available.

People may talk about 60fps video on the SD 300, but for me this is like comparing two mobile phones and trying to use their camera quality to differentiate them. Thats not the primary function of the item - nor one that will generate the most value for you! I think 30fps on the FX7 is more than enough. And video on digicams is still a gimmick anyway. I will always get the camera that takes the best PICTURE, period. Thats what they are for.

Overall the Panasonic DMC-FX7 is a gem. My only complaint is the price. But for that you of course get the better lens, 5MP, the image stabiization and the huge 2.5" screen. Hard to argue with that extra value there, but still I wish it was $40 or $50 cheaper. Still it has no competition in this size class, in terms of picture quality, so what can you really say? It pretty much beats the SD300 hands down.

[speaklightly]

Skagen-

Thanks so much for your post. I for one was anxious to hear how the FX-7 did in the field under actual use. I had hoped that it would be that good. That, at least in my mind, pushes the FX-7 ahead of the SD-300. Thanks!

Sarah Joyce

[John_Reed]

As for the absence of optical viewfinder - what do you want it for? In this category of camera (ie non-SLR) those optical viewfinders are ridiculously innacurate: maybe 75-85% accurate. Why would you ever prefer that to a 2.5" LCD which is 99% accurate to your final image when framing? This is a no-brainer to me. The designers of the FX7 were right on that one. Gutsy call and I'm with them all the way. You should not keep outdated and innacurate features, just of habit, when we have better methods available.I agree with most of what you said, and it's true that optical viewfinders aren't accurate, with lots of parallax error, particularly on closeup shots. But me, I'm an older shaky-handed guy, and I get nice sharp images from my FZ1 and FZ10 cameras mainly because I use the optical viewfinder (EVF). Using it, I have to hold the camera against my eye and face, and that sort of negates the shaky hand issue. If I had to hold the camera out at arm's length to frame and shoot each shot, I wouldn't do half as well, I'm afraid. I actually tried to take some FX7 shots at the local Fry's some time back, and I didn't get a single sharp one. :(