A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu..

"Andrew MacPherson" <andrew.mcp.DeleteThis@DELETETHISdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:memo.20061125124011.2696B@address_disguised.address_disguised...
>
> Ok, a couple of months ago I bought 4Gb's worth of SD cards to try and
> force myself to choose between an S3 and an FZ50 (both take SD). Now,
> reluctant to support Panasonic's sensor, and desperate for more EVF
> resolution than Canon are prepared to offer, I find myself aiming
> towards a Fuji 9600 (9100 in the USA). 235k EVF, manual focus, similar
> size to FZ50 sadly (ie DSLR sized), superior ISO performance helping
> compensate for the lack of IS. Oh, and it doesn't use SD cards. That'll
> teach me.
>
> Still, at least I have CF cards already from my Canon S1.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts? Apart, that is, from "stop dithering and just
> make a choice you idiot! None of them are bad cameras!"
>

For me, the lack of IS would make the far end of the zoom useless without a
tripod. I owned the little cousin of it (S5100) until the electronics
developed a mind of their own and it was returned to the store. I bought it
for my girlfriend, and for snapping up close, it was fine. I already had a
Sony DSC-H1 with IS and 12X zoom. I could not duplicate the clarity of
pictures with the Fuji that the Sony could produce. And to be honest, the
Sony rivals the clarity of my 350D with my 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM lens
attached. Now, to be fair, I do have a slight shake in the hands that I have
had since I was a kid. Nothing serious or Parkinson-like, but it is there.
Sure, the high ISO will help some, but it would seem to me that you lose
some of the P&S capabilities that are available when you have a good IS.
YMMV.

Oh, and if you find and extra three sided coin, save it for me, as I have a
lens decision to make in the near future.




> Andrew McP... off to find a three sided coin to toss.
>
> PS Of course I could always gamble the money on England winning the
> Ashes instead. I could retire on the odds being offered now.
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

"Andrew MacPherson" <andrew.mcp RemoveThis @DELETETHISdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:memo.20061125124011.2696B@address_disguised.address_disguised...
>
> Ok, a couple of months ago I bought 4Gb's worth of SD cards to try and
> force myself to choose between an S3 and an FZ50 (both take SD). Now,
> reluctant to support Panasonic's sensor, and desperate for more EVF
> resolution than Canon are prepared to offer, I find myself aiming
> towards a Fuji 9600 (9100 in the USA). 235k EVF, manual focus, similar
> size to FZ50 sadly (ie DSLR sized), superior ISO performance helping
> compensate for the lack of IS. Oh, and it doesn't use SD cards. That'll
> teach me.
>
> Still, at least I have CF cards already from my Canon S1.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts? Apart, that is, from "stop dithering and just
> make a choice you idiot! None of them are bad cameras!"
>

For me, the lack of IS would make the far end of the zoom useless without a
tripod. I owned the little cousin of it (S5100) until the electronics
developed a mind of their own and it was returned to the store. I bought it
for my girlfriend, and for snapping up close, it was fine. I already had a
Sony DSC-H1 with IS and 12X zoom. I could not duplicate the clarity of
pictures with the Fuji that the Sony could produce. And to be honest, the
Sony rivals the clarity of my 350D with my 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM lens
attached. Now, to be fair, I do have a slight shake in the hands that I have
had since I was a kid. Nothing serious or Parkinson-like, but it is there.
Sure, the high ISO will help some, but it would seem to me that you lose
some of the P&S capabilities that are available when you have a good IS.
YMMV.

Oh, and if you find and extra three sided coin, save it for me, as I have a
lens decision to make in the near future.




> Andrew McP... off to find a three sided coin to toss.
>
> PS Of course I could always gamble the money on England winning the
> Ashes instead. I could retire on the odds being offered now.
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

"Andrew MacPherson" <andrew.mcp.DeleteThis@DELETETHISdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:memo.20061125124011.2696B@address_disguised.address_disguised...
>
> Ok, a couple of months ago I bought 4Gb's worth of SD cards to try and
> force myself to choose between an S3 and an FZ50 (both take SD). Now,
> reluctant to support Panasonic's sensor, and desperate for more EVF
> resolution than Canon are prepared to offer, I find myself aiming
> towards a Fuji 9600 (9100 in the USA). 235k EVF, manual focus, similar
> size to FZ50 sadly (ie DSLR sized), superior ISO performance helping
> compensate for the lack of IS. Oh, and it doesn't use SD cards. That'll
> teach me.
>
> Still, at least I have CF cards already from my Canon S1.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts? Apart, that is, from "stop dithering and just
> make a choice you idiot! None of them are bad cameras!"
>

For me, the lack of IS would make the far end of the zoom useless without a
tripod. I owned the little cousin of it (S5100) until the electronics
developed a mind of their own and it was returned to the store. I bought it
for my girlfriend, and for snapping up close, it was fine. I already had a
Sony DSC-H1 with IS and 12X zoom. I could not duplicate the clarity of
pictures with the Fuji that the Sony could produce. And to be honest, the
Sony rivals the clarity of my 350D with my 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM lens
attached. Now, to be fair, I do have a slight shake in the hands that I have
had since I was a kid. Nothing serious or Parkinson-like, but it is there.
Sure, the high ISO will help some, but it would seem to me that you lose
some of the P&S capabilities that are available when you have a good IS.
YMMV.

Oh, and if you find and extra three sided coin, save it for me, as I have a
lens decision to make in the near future.




> Andrew McP... off to find a three sided coin to toss.
>
> PS Of course I could always gamble the money on England winning the
> Ashes instead. I could retire on the odds being offered now.
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

"Andrew MacPherson" <andrew.mcp RemoveThis @DELETETHISdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:memo.20061125124011.2696B@address_disguised.address_disguised...
>
> Ok, a couple of months ago I bought 4Gb's worth of SD cards to try and
> force myself to choose between an S3 and an FZ50 (both take SD). Now,
> reluctant to support Panasonic's sensor, and desperate for more EVF
> resolution than Canon are prepared to offer, I find myself aiming
> towards a Fuji 9600 (9100 in the USA). 235k EVF, manual focus, similar
> size to FZ50 sadly (ie DSLR sized), superior ISO performance helping
> compensate for the lack of IS. Oh, and it doesn't use SD cards. That'll
> teach me.
>
> Still, at least I have CF cards already from my Canon S1.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts? Apart, that is, from "stop dithering and just
> make a choice you idiot! None of them are bad cameras!"
>

For me, the lack of IS would make the far end of the zoom useless without a
tripod. I owned the little cousin of it (S5100) until the electronics
developed a mind of their own and it was returned to the store. I bought it
for my girlfriend, and for snapping up close, it was fine. I already had a
Sony DSC-H1 with IS and 12X zoom. I could not duplicate the clarity of
pictures with the Fuji that the Sony could produce. And to be honest, the
Sony rivals the clarity of my 350D with my 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM lens
attached. Now, to be fair, I do have a slight shake in the hands that I have
had since I was a kid. Nothing serious or Parkinson-like, but it is there.
Sure, the high ISO will help some, but it would seem to me that you lose
some of the P&S capabilities that are available when you have a good IS.
YMMV.

Oh, and if you find and extra three sided coin, save it for me, as I have a
lens decision to make in the near future.




> Andrew McP... off to find a three sided coin to toss.
>
> PS Of course I could always gamble the money on England winning the
> Ashes instead. I could retire on the odds being offered now.
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

no-one.RemoveThis@nowhere.com (U-Know-Who) wrote:
> For me, the lack of IS would make the far end of the zoom
> useless without a tripod.

That is, sadly, the one thing making me hold back. My S1 has spoiled me,
and I'm very used to taking shots in what I used to consider impossible
situations.

On the flip side I get 28mm wide angle (which I've missed greatly from
my SLR days). It does seem that there's a conspiracy to produce cameras
which contain nearly every feature I want.... and another feature I
really *don't* want!

I promised myself I'd stick with the S1 until someone remedied that. But
that doesn't stop me hanging around review sites like a drooling dog
waiting for his dinner.

Andrew McP
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

Andrew MacPherson wrote:
> no-one.RemoveThis@nowhere.com (U-Know-Who) wrote:
>> For me, the lack of IS would make the far end of the zoom
>> useless without a tripod.
>
> That is, sadly, the one thing making me hold back. My S1 has spoiled
> me, and I'm very used to taking shots in what I used to consider
> impossible situations.
>
> On the flip side I get 28mm wide angle (which I've missed greatly from
> my SLR days). It does seem that there's a conspiracy to produce
> cameras which contain nearly every feature I want.... and another
> feature I really *don't* want!
>
> I promised myself I'd stick with the S1 until someone remedied that.
> But that doesn't stop me hanging around review sites like a drooling
> dog waiting for his dinner.
>
> Andrew McP

I have a similar camera, Andrew, the Panasonic FZ5, and I don't want to
let go of IS either. For wide-angle work, I have the Nikon 8400 with has
a 24mm (eq) lens and swivel LCD etc. Great.

For a low-cost DSLR approach to the same tasks, I am considering the new
Nikon D40 with the 18 - 200mm (24 - 300mm eq) VR (image-stabilised) lens.
However, this does nothing for me at the wide-angle end, but might provide
better pictures in low-light conditions.

Cheers,
David
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

david-taylor.RemoveThis@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk (David J
Taylor) wrote:

> For wide-angle work, I have the Nikon 8400 with has
> a 24mm (eq) lens and swivel LCD etc.

Nice range on that camera. I've realised I miss wide angle flexibility
far more compared to the rare occasions when I *really* need the 420 end
of a modern zoom. Besides, more pixels (compared to my S1) will give me
a free zoom factor anyway.

> Nikon D40 with the 18 - 200mm (24 - 300mm eq) VR

That lens sounds expensive. But that's a superb range, so dust
shouldn't be an issue... you'd never need to take it off!

Andrew McP
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

Andrew MacPherson wrote:
> david-taylor.DeleteThis@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk (David J
> Taylor) wrote:
>
>> For wide-angle work, I have the Nikon 8400 with has
>> a 24mm (eq) lens and swivel LCD etc.
>
> Nice range on that camera. I've realised I miss wide angle flexibility
> far more compared to the rare occasions when I *really* need the 420
> end of a modern zoom. Besides, more pixels (compared to my S1) will
> give me a free zoom factor anyway.
>
>> Nikon D40 with the 18 - 200mm (24 - 300mm eq) VR
>
> That lens sounds expensive. But that's a superb range, so dust
> shouldn't be an issue... you'd never need to take it off!
>
> Andrew McP

There is a program out there which will analyse a batch of photos and give
you a histogram of (amongst other things) the focal length used.

http://www.cpr.demon.nl/prog_plotf.html

It was running that which convinced me about the need for wider angles.
Of course, in some cases you can stitch together to emulate the wide-angle
shot.

Yes, I was thinking one camera and one lens, otherwise I get into carrying
round an outfit, and if that gets too heavy it gets left at home or in the
hotel, and no photos is the result..... No dust is another benefit!

Cheers,
David
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

I too went through the same dilema searching for the right camera for
me be it prosumer P&S or dslr. In my case, IS was of utmost importance
followed by IQ and a long zoom for travel photgraphy. Read all the
reviews and liked the FZ50 with some trepidations of the sensor. This
ended once I went to Dp reviews Panasonic forum and saw the shots taken
with this camera. One poster took the same shot with the FZ50 and the
Canon 30D. After many guesses, it was about even as to which was the
30D!

I suggest you visit DP reviews camera brand specific forums for great
input from owners.

Also try this web site, it's in French but easy to get around, where
you can compare cameras against each other taking the same set of
photos.

http://www.lesnumeriques.com/duels.php?ty=1&ma1=60&mo1=233&p1=1323&ma2...mo2=214

After several months of research, I went with the FZ50 and have no
regrets whatsoever. The Leica lens is just supurb unmatched by any
other non-dslr. In fact better than low end dslr lenses.

Regarding the Fuji, they are good cameras, however my first prosumer
was the finepix 6900. Good camera in most respects, took many good
pictures, but also many bad ones, that plus thelack of IS dropped Fuji
from my list. High ISO is better than Panny, but still more grain.
The Panny IS gets you a couple of stops so the image can be taken at
lower ISO. Actually I have only taken a few shots at 200 or higher ISO
on this and my old Fuji.

Good luck in your search and let us know what you decide.

JerryB in Colorado




Andrew MacPherson wrote:
> Ok, a couple of months ago I bought 4Gb's worth of SD cards to try and
> force myself to choose between an S3 and an FZ50 (both take SD). Now,
> reluctant to support Panasonic's sensor, and desperate for more EVF
> resolution than Canon are prepared to offer, I find myself aiming
> towards a Fuji 9600 (9100 in the USA). 235k EVF, manual focus, similar
> size to FZ50 sadly (ie DSLR sized), superior ISO performance helping
> compensate for the lack of IS. Oh, and it doesn't use SD cards. That'll
> teach me.
>
> Still, at least I have CF cards already from my Canon S1.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts? Apart, that is, from "stop dithering and just
> make a choice you idiot! None of them are bad cameras!"
>
> Andrew McP... off to find a three sided coin to toss.
>
> PS Of course I could always gamble the money on England winning the
> Ashes instead. I could retire on the odds being offered now.
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

David J Taylor je napisao/la:
> Yes, there's a lot of choice right now, and perhaps more coming. I found
> the Sony DCS-R1 (APS sensor with fixed lens) camera a big disappointment,
> and I see it's now discontinued. With the corrections which can be done
> in software (and perhaps firmware in the future) for barrel an pincushion
> distortion, the idea of an almost "fixed lens" DSLR becomes more viable.
> Just the minimum of changing lenses. The other improvement will be to add
> a swivel LCD finder to those situations where direct view is inconvenient
> or impossible, and that's starting to appear as well.


Just out of curiosuty - why was R1 such a disappointment? I bought
recently and found it's incredible camera, unless one need 300mm and
more...

Zoran
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

Andrew MacPherson wrote:
....snip..

>
> PS Of course I could always gamble the money on England winning the
> Ashes instead. I could retire on the odds being offered now.


You can't retire on nothing !

David (in Australia)
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

David J Taylor je napisao/la:
> Mostly size and weight. I get a very similar coverage in the Nikon 8400,
> 113 x 82 x 75mm weighing just 470g. The Sony is 138 x 168 x 97mm and
> weighs 995g. It's an big, ugly brute. Nice lens, perhaps. No image
> stabilisation (which I have come to value a lot on my Pansonic FZ5, which
> goes up to 432mm eq.). Once you add an extension lens to the Sony to try
> and approach the longer focal length, it just gets even more bulky and
> doesn't even match the 432mm of the Panasonic. Of course, you have to
> give up movies with the Sony, as well.
>
> My guess is that you could get a DSLR with a similar coverage lens for the
> same weight, more compact, and have the extra versatility of
> interchangeable lenses. You loose the movies, though.
>
> I was also disappointed that the 4/3 format didn't allow designers to
> shrink the overall size as much as they might have done. Perhaps the lens
> mount doesn't allow that.
>
> I'm sure the Sony is a fine camera providing that what it offers meets
> your requirements. It just didn't suit me (and that's without handling
> one).


Yep, that's true. My biggest concern was the size, but since DSLRs fall
within same league, and I don't need long focal length, I picked R1.

But somehow I think they are discontinuing it to make more room for
Alpha, too bad
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu.. 

> http://www.cpr.demon.nl/prog_plotf.html
Very useful, thanks for the link. It confirms that 40% of my shots are
at the 35mm end of the spectrum, with a fairly even spread up the scale
to a blip at the max zoom.

> Yes, I was thinking one camera and one lens
You've led me to do some study of 18-200/250/300 lenses. A Pentax K100D
has been on my fantasy shopping list for a while (as I have PK lenses
already) but dust is my biggest concern. I spent too long trying to
remove dust from my slide scanner & scanned photos to want to play that
game. But an "all-in-one" lens would probably suit my fairly humble needs.

Of course, then I wouldn't be using the various lenses I already own, so
don't need to restrict myself to Pentax. So...

Mmm... you close one door of choice and another one opens!

Andrew McP
 >> Stay informed about: A bridge too far: Canon S3? No. Panasonic FZ50? Er, no. Fu..