Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
JayJay wrote:
> Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
> the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
> most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
> Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
> would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
Good question - my guess is at least three. 18 - 55mm, 55 - 200mm, and
either an extender (teleconvertor) or yet another lens. Nikon offer an
18 - 200mm lens, but it's not cheap.
Unless you need the higher taking speed of a DSLR, the better low-light
performance, or the ability to have multiple lenses and attachments, you
will probably find the FZ18 more than adequate for your needs, as well as
being a lot lighter and easier to carry round. The Panasonic cameras have
excellent lenses (Leica) and can produce very good results. There is even
a compact version in the TZ3 which is even easier to carry, and yet still
has an image stabilised 28 - 280mm lens.
It really depends on what you want to do, how much money and time you want
to spend and so on. There is no single "correct" camera for everyone, and
the results will depend at least as much on your own skill and "eye" for
photographs as on how much you spend on your kit. I would suggest
starting with a camera like the TZ3, and seeing how it goes. Only move to
a DSLR once you have more knowledge. Do visit a camera shop and see how
the different cameras handle for you.
JayJay wrote:
> Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
> the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
> most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
> Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
> would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
The answer is effectively, two. But these would not get you to the
equivalent of 500mm, only to 400, and well above $1500 just for the lenses.
This is not a big loss, as a small crop of the DSLR would give nearly
the same result.
The big plus for the DSLR is much lower noise for low light,
by a very large amount (like a factor of 4). Also, you would
be able to get a much narrower depth of field with the DSLR, if
that is your goal. Other than that, that Panasonic looks like
a very versatile camera.
Maybe you should really be asking, what lenses would I need to shoot the
subjects I want to shoot and give examples on what you want to shoot with
your camera?
"JayJay" <in@valid.com> wrote in message
news:vrloyixi1m17.1qupy7edan42w$.dlg@40tude.net...
> Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
> the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
> most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
> Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
> would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 07:32:56 +1200, JayJay <in@valid.com> wrote:
>Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
>the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
>most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
>Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
>would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
The Panasonics are beautiful cameras, and the virtually identical but
much more expensive Leica brandmates are even more beautiful, but
beware the noise. The sensors in these cameras are less sensitive than
the competitors' and the result shows up as a kind of graininess in
the shadows or as loss of detail when the noise-reduction features of
the Venus III engine smears away the noise.
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 19:45:11 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
> JayJay wrote:
>> Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
>> the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
>> most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
>> Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
>> would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
>
> Good question - my guess is at least three. 18 - 55mm, 55 - 200mm, and
> either an extender (teleconvertor) or yet another lens. Nikon offer an
> 18 - 200mm lens, but it's not cheap.
Okay, another question please; As I would need to purchase three lens
what would be the cheapest to buy i.e. entry level DSLR plus the 3
lens?
> Unless you need the higher taking speed of a DSLR, the better low-light
> performance, or the ability to have multiple lenses and attachments, you
> will probably find the FZ18 more than adequate for your needs, as well as
> being a lot lighter and easier to carry round. The Panasonic cameras have
> excellent lenses (Leica) and can produce very good results. There is even
> a compact version in the TZ3 which is even easier to carry, and yet still
> has an image stabilised 28 - 280mm lens.
There you have me - I have no idea whether I would need the higher
speed or low-light performance. Would a novice notice the difference?
> It really depends on what you want to do, how much money and time you want
> to spend and so on. There is no single "correct" camera for everyone, and
> the results will depend at least as much on your own skill and "eye" for
> photographs as on how much you spend on your kit. I would suggest
> starting with a camera like the TZ3, and seeing how it goes. Only move to
> a DSLR once you have more knowledge. Do visit a camera shop and see how
> the different cameras handle for you.
JayJay wrote:
> Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
> the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
> most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
> Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
> would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
Well considering you haven't even been concerned about budget why would
this make much of a difference either. You could get away with two lenses.
17-55 and 50-500mm. The 50-500mm will set you back about $1000.00.
Jon.
> Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
> the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
> most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
> Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
> would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
You didn't read enough. If you did, you probably wouldn't think
that you need a camera with such an extreme 28-504mm range. To get
that 18x range even a Leica lens design will have compromised image
quality. If you're like most photographers you probably won't use
the 504mm end of the zoom nearly as much as the 28mm end, and 28mm
is pretty good since it's wider than most. But I'd personally much
rather have a zoom lens with a more limited 24-200mm range.
You won't find a DSLR lens having quite that 18x range, although
Sigma's 18-250 (27-375mm equivalent) comes close. Nikon's 18-200mm
lens (27-300mm equivalent) also adds VR. If you add a 10-20mm or
12-24mm zoom to either of these lenses you'd have a two lens
solution that provides an even greater range than 18x with much
better image quality, although with greater size and cost.
Considering that the FZ18 has such a tiny sensor compared to the
DSLR sensors (5.76x4.29mm for the FZ18 vs. 23.7x15.7 for the DSLR,
ie, 24.7sq.mm. vs 372sq.mm.) a 10mp DSLR will produce far better
pictures than the 8mp FZ18 than the slight difference in megapixels
would imply. I wouldn't be at all surprised that if you cropped the
DSLR's image taken with a 300mm or 375mm focal length to match the
image captured by the FZ18 at 504mm, it would provide as much or
more detail. That small sensor in the FZ18 should also result in
very poor images when there isn't much available light. This can
sometimes force the use of the camera's flash, often creating harsh
shadows, very uneven lighting and redeye in situations where a DSLR
without flash would produce much better, more natural pictures.
Unless you need the FZ18 right now, you might be better off
waiting for one of the full reviews to appear. It should also show
you the many other important considerations worth considering.
Megapixels and zoom range hardly tell the complete story. As
frustrating as it can be to have to wait several months, that's a
lot better than being stuck with an unwise purchase for years. And
if you find the review to be very favorable, the wait will have been
worthwhile just in eliminating the risk of a bad purchase.
In article <vrloyixi1m17.1qupy7edan42w$.dlg@40tude.net>, JayJay
<in@valid.com> writes
>Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
>the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
>most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
>Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
>would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
The long end will only need a slight crop if you are determined to have
"504mm", but you will probably crop quite a bit more sometimes. These
might not give you the best performance, but I suspect that it's better
than the FZ18.
* For certain definitions of equivalence.
--
Ian G8ILZ
There are always two people in every picture: the photographer and the viewer.
~Ansel Adams
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 07:32:56 +1200, JayJay <in@valid.com> wrote:
> Thinking about taking up photography as a hobby but the more I read
> the more I'm getting confused. For instance, I get the impression that
> most users recommend SLR cameras rather than digital cameras like the
> Panasonic FZ18. If I decide to purchase a DSLR camera how many lens
> would I need to buy to get the same 28-504mm range that the FZ18 has?
You could get pretty close with two lenses, or maybe three, depending on
the particular lenses from a given manufacturer.
For example, a Nikon SLR with an 18-135 (kit lens for the D80) and a
70-300 would cover a 35mm equiv range of 27-450mm, which is pretty
close.
For some other makers, you might need three, covering wide, normal, and
tele ranges.
How many lens required 
Linear Mode
