PDA

View Full Version : FZ10 or Dimage A1



PixChick
08-14-2004, 10:28 PM
I am researching to buy my first digicam and I THINK I have narrowed it down to the FZ10 or the Dimage A1. I am set on an ultra zoom and of course want high quality photos (after all, what is the point of a camera that takes poor quality photos??). The following are important to me but not in any particular order:

1) Fast performance in terms of focus speed, shutter lag, and shot to shot times. I am sure some of you will recommend a dSLR but I really am not looking to buy one.

2) Good low light/indoor capability. I will definitely use my camera indoors and want a top notch pic when I do.

3) NO red eye. I know it can be removed with software, but I am never impressed when I see the results. I prefer to not have any red eye in the first place.

I am not in a hurry and would be willing to wait to see what happens when the new Panasonic cams are reviewed. Also, I am planning to use my camera for action shots outdoors, scenic shots outdoors, possibly some macro shots in and outdoors (or I may just crop), and shots of my 3 month old son in and outdoors.

Thanks for your input!!!

PixChick :)

eastbluffs
08-15-2004, 12:07 AM
Exactly what I'd like in a camera. Don't need to be Ansel Adams outdoors at expense of being Blury Bert indoors.

I was looking at the Casio Exilim Pro EX-P600 then read a few comments that its photos were less than stellar. Feature-wise, I was very impressed and it is PC Mag's editors choice.

Now I'm wrestling with 2 cameras I've purchased that are capable of great shots but have shutter lag, weak flashes that are too close to the lense (so have red-eye), and I can't figure out the controls.

My first 100 or so shots (mostly low light) are about 3/4 unacceptable and mostly due to bad low-light handling.

Family photos are so often indoors. Its really important for a camera to be pretty dummy-proof there.

Now I'm thinking of re-thinking the Casio for no shutter-lag, no red-eye, good lense, bracketing, etc. Mainly, a family camera.

Still up-in-the-air. Be curious about your final choice.

Cheers,
Brad

Listener
08-15-2004, 09:13 AM
From what I've read you won't be happy with the FZ10 and low-light shooting. *BUT* the FZ20, soon to be released, includes an AF assist lamp and many other enhancements so I would consider that model instead.

In general, I do not like the image quality of the Konica-Minolta's (although their feature set is very good) and for me that's what it ultimately boils down to: trying to get as many features as you're looking for with the best image quality.

PixChick
08-16-2004, 11:44 AM
Well, I am not so sure about the low light thing, even thought there is no AF-assist on the FZ-10. Where did you read about that? I read a post on the Panasonic forum about it and here is an excerpt:



I've gotten excellent flash photos using my FZ10, but I don't have any of the photos on-line where I can easily show you. But I don't think you have much to worry about with this camera, and I'd flat-out say that the statement that "the FZ10 was incapable of taking clear photos in a gymnasium with no flash" is hogwash.


You can go to the forum and look at the whole thread or try this link, if it works, http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=253.


Anyhow I am curious to see what the new Panasonics are like, esp since the redeye test was not up tp my standards on the FZ-10, and the performance was only average. A lot of people seem to really like the FZ-10 though, so I can't ignore that.

Thank you for your input though. I appreciate it.

PixChick :)

speaklightly
08-16-2004, 06:27 PM
Please listen to him. Not only is the FZ-10 a physically huge camera, but it has trouble in low light levels. I own a FZ-10 and I have experienced that exact phenomena.

Sarah Weber
Professional Digital Camera Lecturer

PixChick
08-16-2004, 08:04 PM
Thank you for your input. I appreciate it a lot. I don't think that I am so concerned about size as I am about others, but poor low light performance is a very important factor, as I stated earlier. I am curious what you define as "low light" though--is that just indoors during the day or truly a lack of light where you would want to have an artificial light on for let's say reading purposes? Also, do you think that the new Panasonics will be worth waiting for? Thanks again for any help you can give.

PixChick :)

speaklightly
08-16-2004, 08:59 PM
To me, low light is when you at at ISO 400 and shooting at F2.8 at 1/25th of a second.

Yes, I think that the new Panasonics will be worth the wait.

Sarah Joyce

PixChick
08-16-2004, 10:14 PM
Thank you. But any thoughts on the A1 in comparison? I am starting to wonder if I should consider the Sony 828, but I am wary of the 8 megapixels and noise. It did seem to have a lot of pluses in terms of what I am looking for. If it was just a 5 mp, it probably would have been perfect for me...sigh :(

PixChick :)

D70FAN
08-17-2004, 09:03 AM
Thank you. But any thoughts on the A1 in comparison? I am starting to wonder if I should consider the Sony 828, but I am wary of the 8 megapixels and noise. It did seem to have a lot of pluses in terms of what I am looking for. If it was just a 5 mp, it probably would have been perfect for me...sigh :(

PixChick :)

If the size of the Sony 828 is not a problem for you then consider the F717 which is similar to the 828 with a 5MP sensor. Downsides are: The 717 has a lesser movie mode and does not store RAW images.

The A1 is a pretty nice camera as well. And with very few gremlins once you figure it out.

The new crop of FZ cameras coming from Panasonic are also very enticing, if for no other reason than a very fast and fine 12X zoom, and they have added an AF assist lamp for indoor, low-light, shooting

Since you are looking at some rather full-sized cameras, you may want to consider the Canon and Nikon consumer dSLR's (EOS 300D Digital Rebel, and D70). These are strictly still cameras (no video) but have performance, and picture quality, above that of consumer all-in-ones.

As always we try to point everyone in the general direction they seem to want to go. A trip to the local camera store will either confirm or deny that direction, but in the store you can completely change directions and actually give it a try.

PixChick
08-17-2004, 10:42 AM
So which would you prefer as an overall package, considering what I mentioned in my first post? The A1 or the FZ-10? I guess that is really the point of my whole thread, but it seems to have taken a few detours. I really have considered the dSLR route, but it is just not for me, at least not at this time. I currently have a rather large and very, very heavy Yashica film camera and one thing I wanted to do was downsize a bit b/c I get pretty sick of lugging it around. At first I was looking at more compact cameras (for instance Cannon A80 and Oly C-765/770) but there were too many things that each didn't offer that I would not compromise about, so I bumped up to looking at some bigger and more complex cameras. That was my compromise--to get bigger/bulkier but not go over the edge. While the performace and picture quality of a dSLR would be exactly what I want, I am not willing to fiddle with different lenses to get all of the things I want out of the camera, and I wouldn't want to carry it all with me to go anywhere. I am set on an all-in-one for that reason. While I think I lean toward the A1, the complexity of it turns me off a bit, although I would be okay with it if I chose it. I will consider the Sony, but, bottom line, which is better overall--A1 or FZ-10??? I know different people will have different opinions, but I am curious to see what people have to say. Thanks.

PixChick :)

D70FAN
08-17-2004, 12:23 PM
While the performace and picture quality of a dSLR would be exactly what I want, I am not willing to fiddle with different lenses to get all of the things I want out of the camera, and I wouldn't want to carry it all with me to go anywhere. I am set on an all-in-one for that reason. While I think I lean toward the A1, the complexity of it turns me off a bit, although I would be okay with it if I chose it. I will consider the Sony, but, bottom line, which is better overall--A1 or FZ-10??? I know different people will have different opinions, but I am curious to see what people have to say. Thanks.

PixChick :)

Sorry for detouring your train of thought, but there were a couple of tracks to follow. so in reality we are down to a choice between 2.

The bottom line is that both of these cameras would do what you want. So now it's a matter of what YOU want. The only way to determine that aspect is for you to try them out and see which one you would like to carry and operate.

My choice would be the FZ10 because I would want as much zoom as possible from the non-detachable lens system. I would also wait for the FZ15 in this case.

In fact I'm seriously looking at the FZ3 as a low cost ($399) fun camera. 3MP is plenty for just goofing around, and the package is very compact for a 12X zoom (same size as the FZ1). Oops guess I introduced another choice.

judge9847
08-17-2004, 12:23 PM
In the digital photography world, I really think this is the most difficult question to answer. At best, all anyone can do is give their own view or try and reflect the thoughts of others they respect. So I'll give it a go from that point of view.

I have an FZ10 and I am very, very pleased with it, to the point of smugness. Basically I've found that the photos that contain errors and mistakes or aren't up to scratch for whatever reason are nothing at all to do with the camera. I've found that I can put almost all of the errors etc. down to my own stupidity or being over ambitious with the camera, particularly when using the long lens. For instance, for a long while, I tended to get too close to the subject and then tried to use the lens to get closer still. That was stupid because there's a limit to what any camera and lens will handle but I eventually found what was right and I've learned to resist temptation. Once I realised that, I've noticed that I keep a lot more images than I did before. Always a good benchmark I'd suggest.

And that's it with the FZ10 - I've had to learn how to get the best from it by using it and using it and using it and then using it some more. And I really believe I've still got plenty to learn about it to get the best from it under all the conditions I might want to use it in.

When I was shopping around and waiting far too long for Panasonic to deliver the FZ10 to Europe, I did seriously think about the A1. It's got a lot going for it. On the technical specification side, it is a good deal better than the FZ10. But if I could suggest that if you're not into complex stuff as you state, then it's probably (please note "probably") not what you want.

Personally speaking, I think attempting a comparison between these two particular cameras isn't the right thing to do. In many ways, they're not really in the same division so any results are likely to be skewed.

You do ask which is the "better" camera so I'd say that on a technical front the A1 has to be the superior. But you'll need to spend a mighty long while with it to master it, especially if you're not technically minded as you seem to be saying. At the end of the day, it's more flexible than the FZ10 with what it can do.

The FZ10 does however score hugely with it's magnificent lens and if that's the most important feature for you, then that's easily the best one of the two cameras. I wanted it to photograph local wildlife and birds at the nearby nature reserve and I've not been at all disappointed with the results which are almost entirely down to the lens. I've added a 2.2 converter lens to bring it in though the camera definitely needs to be fixed to a tripod or a monopod for optimum performance when that's on.

I don't find the FZ10 at all bulky and I've not got the biggest hands in the world by any means.

Once again, I have not been at all disappointed with the FZ10 which has given me lots of challenges but I reckon they're part of the fun of it all. I've had some (to me anyway) wonderful results with it. And quite honestly, I've not been at all disappointed that I didn't get the A1 and waited for the FZ10 to appear here.

That's my opinion and I hope it helps.

PixChick
08-17-2004, 12:52 PM
Personally speaking, I think attempting a comparison between these two particular cameras isn't the right thing to do. In many ways, they're not really in the same division so any results are likely to be skewed.

You do ask which is the "better" camera so I'd say that on a technical front the A1 has to be the superior. But you'll need to spend a mighty long while with it to master it, especially if you're not technically minded as you seem to be saying. At the end of the day, it's more flexible than the FZ10 with what it can do.




Thanks--I appreciate it. Maybe it isn't fair to try to compare the two cameras, but I guess I wasn't trying to be too "deep" about it, just an up front, basic opinion (although don't get me wrong, I appreciate the detail in your post, and in others as well). As far as the technical side goes, I am sure I could master the A1 but not sure I want to have a big learning curve. I really started out looking for a simple camera to start in the digital realm. I just wasn't satisfied with what they had to offer. If the A1 is the camera that is the best choice for me, I will deal with that aspect, I was just hoping to avoid a big learning curve if I could. I know I will have to give both cameras a test drive when it is all said and done, but I think it is still good to know what other people have to say about each camera, which is the reason I started this thread.

BTW George, I have considered the Z3 as well ;) Choices, choices...and soon I am sure there will be even more. Sometimes I think it was easier before we had all this rapidly advancing technology.

Again thanks for the input!

PixChick :)

speaklightly
08-17-2004, 12:56 PM
Each of these two digital cameras have few faults. Not critical faults, but things that would require a "work around." The new Panasonic FZ series that will have low light level illuminators might be a more viable alternative.

Sad to say, but there is no absolutely perfect digital camera out there current in the market place. So we all choose a digital camera that will meet most of our needs, and we figure out a way to work around the problems.

I own the FZ-10 but I dislike the largeness of the digital camera, so I use my Olympus C-765 which I was able to purchase at a great price and is a much smaller digital that I can easily carry easily in my purse.

Like you I don't want to cross over to a DSLR, so that is what I am working with on an everyday basis.

Sarah Joyce

D70FAN
08-17-2004, 01:11 PM
BTW George, I have considered the Z3 as well ;) Choices, choices...and soon I am sure there will be even more. Sometimes I think it was easier before we had all this rapidly advancing technology.

Again thanks for the input!

PixChick :)

Actually it's the FZ3 from Panasonic. It's the little brother of the new FZ group. The Z3 is from Konica-Minolta, but also 12X stabilized zoom. Confusing isn't it?

PixChick
08-17-2004, 01:37 PM
Actually it's the FZ3 from Panasonic. It's the little brother of the new FZ group. The Z3 is from Konica-Minolta, but also 12X stabilized zoom. Confusing isn't it?

OOPS! My mistake--it sure is confusing. You would think with this many choices and upgrades coming so fast that we could all find something we like with ease :rolleyes: Maybe I will consider just getting the FZ3 (yes the FZ3, the Panasonic) to hold me over until my dream camera is made (yeah right!)