I spent my past times visiting camera shops and electronic stores, and
look, feel and try various cameras. When I tried to shoot any
pictures, and check the LCD screen... I found that Panasonic cameras
appear to have the colour and sharpness that I like. am I biased
toward this particular brand? I am not just talking about the high end
Panasonic cameras... but also the cheapest models. They seems to
produce sharp, colour contrasting images. Tried the FZ8, the LZ2 and
I usually said to myself... WOW!. However, when I checked the image
quality rating from camera reviews, Panasonic is not superior from the
other famous brand names. So, what's happening here? Is it just a
perception here?
I also asked previously if any of the readers of these forums know a
website where they do "torture test" or "long term use test". Do they
ever show whether one brand camera has better long term consistency in
its image quality than the others? I think they should have such a
test to see how good the camera is built. Show a photo taken by the
camera when it is new, and show it again when it has already taken
over 10,000 images... or 20,000 images,. etc. But in my previous query
about this subject... no one ever commented on this question.
I believe that more expensive and professional cameras, the parts are
designed better and designed to last, and therefore it will keep on
working perfectly for longer period or higher shots.
The way digital has changed the marketplace for camera choices we are now
faced with electronics companies whom previously were not part of the camera
market.
However since many of them have gone it alone or purchased or merged with
the conventional names in the photographic field.
The Lumix is a very interesting choice with it offering one of the few
companies sporting a 28mm wide angle and Leica lenses.
The field now is very wide and makes the choice of camera even more
difficult. So by the time you've made the choice the new version has arrived
and the process starts all over again with it being a fraction of the price
of the one before with better/more features!
Duncan
<aniramca@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185855650.133317.194560@g4g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com...
>I spent my past times visiting camera shops and electronic stores, and
> look, feel and try various cameras. When I tried to shoot any
> pictures, and check the LCD screen... I found that Panasonic cameras
> appear to have the colour and sharpness that I like. am I biased
> toward this particular brand? I am not just talking about the high end
> Panasonic cameras... but also the cheapest models. They seems to
> produce sharp, colour contrasting images. Tried the FZ8, the LZ2 and
> I usually said to myself... WOW!. However, when I checked the image
> quality rating from camera reviews, Panasonic is not superior from the
> other famous brand names. So, what's happening here? Is it just a
> perception here?
>
> I also asked previously if any of the readers of these forums know a
> website where they do "torture test" or "long term use test". Do they
> ever show whether one brand camera has better long term consistency in
> its image quality than the others? I think they should have such a
> test to see how good the camera is built. Show a photo taken by the
> camera when it is new, and show it again when it has already taken
> over 10,000 images... or 20,000 images,. etc. But in my previous query
> about this subject... no one ever commented on this question.
> I believe that more expensive and professional cameras, the parts are
> designed better and designed to last, and therefore it will keep on
> working perfectly for longer period or higher shots.
>
"Duncan" <writeonline@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:PqOdnbfR1cZTRDPbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@bt.com...
> The way digital has changed the marketplace for camera choices we are now
> faced with electronics companies whom previously were not part of the
> camera market.
> However since many of them have gone it alone or purchased or merged with
> the conventional names in the photographic field.
>
> The Lumix is a very interesting choice with it offering one of the few
> companies sporting a 28mm wide angle and Leica lenses.
But what is in a name. Leica was the name of a camera body that used Lietz
lens just like Ziess on Sony and Shnieder There only names.
> The field now is very wide and makes the choice of camera even more
> difficult. So by the time you've made the choice the new version has
> arrived and the process starts all over again with it being a fraction of
> the price of the one before with better/more features!
>
> Duncan
>
>
> <aniramca@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1185855650.133317.194560@g4g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com...
>>I spent my past times visiting camera shops and electronic stores, and
>> look, feel and try various cameras. When I tried to shoot any
>> pictures, and check the LCD screen... I found that Panasonic cameras
>> appear to have the colour and sharpness that I like. am I biased
>> toward this particular brand? I am not just talking about the high end
>> Panasonic cameras... but also the cheapest models. They seems to
>> produce sharp, colour contrasting images. Tried the FZ8, the LZ2 and
>> I usually said to myself... WOW!. However, when I checked the image
>> quality rating from camera reviews, Panasonic is not superior from the
>> other famous brand names. So, what's happening here? Is it just a
>> perception here?
>>
>> I also asked previously if any of the readers of these forums know a
>> website where they do "torture test" or "long term use test". Do they
>> ever show whether one brand camera has better long term consistency in
>> its image quality than the others? I think they should have such a
>> test to see how good the camera is built. Show a photo taken by the
>> camera when it is new, and show it again when it has already taken
>> over 10,000 images... or 20,000 images,. etc. But in my previous query
>> about this subject... no one ever commented on this question.
>> I believe that more expensive and professional cameras, the parts are
>> designed better and designed to last, and therefore it will keep on
>> working perfectly for longer period or higher shots.
>>
>
>
Trev wrote:
> "Duncan" <writeonline@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
[]
>> The Lumix is a very interesting choice with it offering one of the
>> few companies sporting a 28mm wide angle and Leica lenses.
>
> But what is in a name. Leica was the name of a camera body that used
> Lietz lens just like Ziess on Sony and Shnieder There only names.
I used to ask the same question, but having seen the consistently high
quality of the Leica lenses on a number of Panasonic cameras, I think
there probably /is/ something in the name.
Duncan wrote:
> The way digital has changed the marketplace for camera choices we are now
> faced with electronics companies whom previously were not part of the camera
> market.
Panasonic sold film cameras, though I don't think that they ever
marketed them in the U.S.. They've always been very big in camcorders,
both consumer and professional, so the progression to digital cameras
was a logical step. Same for Sony, but I don't think they had any film
cameras, though they did have an instant camera at one time that
appeared to be just a relabeled Polaroid.
> The Lumix is a very interesting choice with it offering one of the few
> companies sporting a 28mm wide angle and Leica lenses.
Yes, this is true. If you want a smaller P&S with a 28mm lens your
choices are very limited. If you want a small P&S with 28mm at the wide
end of a zoom lens, image stabilization, and an optical viewfinder, your
choices are only one Canon model. Fortunately for the camera
manufacturers, apparently very few P&S camera buyers understand the
value of a wider angle lens, and instead get carried away with the
telephoto side of the zoom (after all, big numbers are better than small
numbers!).
> The field now is very wide and makes the choice of camera even more
> difficult.
It's not so difficult, especially if you want that 28mm. Applying just
some very basic requirements you can eliminate most cameras from
consideration:
1. Low-noise
2. Optical Viewfinder (or at least an EVF)
3. Zoom of at least 28mm at the wide end
Here's what you end up with (let me know if I've missed any):
Pocket
------
Canon SD800 IS
Compact
-------
None
ZLR
---
Fuji FinePix S8000fd (probably...too new to know about the noise)
If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
end with the use of a conversion lens. But if you're going to muck with
conversion lenses, which are relatively low quality, you may as well get
a D-SLR, and get low shutter/auto-focus lag in the bargain.
Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:37:20 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
>there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
>end with the use of a conversion lens.
Who started this bizarre and totally wrong "ZLR" acronym? It makes absolutely no
sense whatsoever. People who keep using it are just parroting others that
invented this misnomer without realizing the error.
ZLR, Zoom-Lens-Reflex for a long-zoom P&S camera? The R needs to be thrown out.
"Reflex" in SLR (single lens reflex) and d-SLR (digital single lens reflex)
stands for the ancient mirror and reflected light path required in that camera
design. If R is thrown out to be more accurate, then you have a ZL (zoom lens)
camera? Great, so every P&S camera with 1.1x to 18x qualifies as a ZL camera.
You can be more accurate with UZPS (ultra-zoom P&S), since everyone keeps
calling non-DSLR cameras as P&S cameras, even though DSLRs are revered for being
even more of a P&S camera than P&S cameras. Again, just more nonsense on the
net.
Don't you just hate it when erroneous information and nonsense catch-phrases
start spreading like wildfire on the net, everyone repeating it without even
understanding why they are saying it, then everyone starts looking like idiots.
They think it means something because someone else said it, looking just as
foolish as the first person that used it.
Get your acts together people. Find words and acronyms that accurately describe
these different cameras or don't talk about them at all until you figure it out.
I propose, for accuracy, that:
* P&S should be done away with completely, since ALL cameras today are P&S
cameras, especially DSLRs. Instead use "SLDC" for "Single Lens Digital Camera".
* An "SLDC" with ultra-zoom (10x optical-zoom or more) as "UZDC", "Ultra-Zoom
Digital Camera", since they are generally in a class of their own the last few
years and everyone knows what design you are referring to. The UZDC being just a
subset of all SLDCs
* DSLR can remain DSLR. Or if being praised for how fast they perform
automatically then a "DSLR-P&S" if you want to be accurate.
Of course this is never going to happen because the DSLR crowd loves throwing
around the P&S acronym as a handy (but totally inaccurate) and childish insult
to anyone that doesn't buy a DSLR. Even though their DSLR is a high-priced P&S
but they won't admit it. (This is no different than christians that run around
calling people Pagans and Heathens never knowing what Pagan really means, or
that Heathen just means one who lives on the Heath. Or the wealthy who run
around calling everyone who has less as "hicks" just so they can feel better
about being greedy.) Calling an SLDC as a P&S is one of the few ways they can
pretend to be superior, they'll never give up that. Sometimes it's all they have
left in light of the new advances in SLDC and UZDC designs.
So there you have it, "SLDC" and "UZDC" to describe these cameras. Start using
them or something just as accurate. Or appear to look the fool forever more --
just as you have been appearing since the use of "P&S" became commonplace.
SMS wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
>> The way digital has changed the marketplace for camera choices we
>> are now faced with electronics companies whom previously were not
>> part of the camera market.
>
> Panasonic sold film cameras, though I don't think that they ever
> marketed them in the U.S.. They've always been very big in camcorders,
> both consumer and professional, so the progression to digital cameras
> was a logical step. Same for Sony, but I don't think they had any film
> cameras, though they did have an instant camera at one time that
> appeared to be just a relabeled Polaroid.
>
>> The Lumix is a very interesting choice with it offering one of the
>> few companies sporting a 28mm wide angle and Leica lenses.
>
> Yes, this is true. If you want a smaller P&S with a 28mm lens your
> choices are very limited. If you want a small P&S with 28mm at the
> wide end of a zoom lens, image stabilization, and an optical
> viewfinder, your choices are only one Canon model. Fortunately for
> the camera manufacturers, apparently very few P&S camera buyers
> understand the value of a wider angle lens, and instead get carried
> away with the telephoto side of the zoom (after all, big numbers are
> better than small numbers!).
>
>> The field now is very wide and makes the choice of camera even more
>> difficult.
>
> It's not so difficult, especially if you want that 28mm. Applying just
> some very basic requirements you can eliminate most cameras from
> consideration:
>
> 1. Low-noise
> 2. Optical Viewfinder (or at least an EVF)
> 3. Zoom of at least 28mm at the wide end
>
> Here's what you end up with (let me know if I've missed any):
>
> Pocket
> ------
> Canon SD800 IS
>
>
> Compact
> -------
> None
>
>
> ZLR
> ---
> Fuji FinePix S8000fd (probably...too new to know about the noise)
>
>
> If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
> there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
> end with the use of a conversion lens. But if you're going to muck
> with conversion lenses, which are relatively low quality, you may as
> well get a D-SLR, and get low shutter/auto-focus lag in the bargain.
I think it's unrealistic to expect an optical viewfinder in a
wide-zoom-range compact camera (e.g. 10:1 zoom) both from size and cost
considerations, so I would add the Panasonic TZ3 to your compact or pocket
list:
Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras
Henry Hank wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:37:20 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
>> there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
>> end with the use of a conversion lens.
>
> Who started this bizarre and totally wrong "ZLR" acronym? It makes
> absolutely no sense whatsoever. People who keep using it are just
> parroting others that invented this misnomer without realizing the
> error.
>
> ZLR, Zoom-Lens-Reflex for a long-zoom P&S camera? The R needs to be
> thrown out. "Reflex" in SLR (single lens reflex) and d-SLR (digital
> single lens reflex) stands for the ancient mirror and reflected light
> path required in that camera design.
In a ZLR the reflex is electronic. IIRC, Olympus started the term, but I
could be wrong.
> If R is thrown out to be more
> accurate, then you have a ZL (zoom lens) camera? Great, so every P&S
> camera with 1.1x to 18x qualifies as a ZL camera. You can be more
> accurate with UZPS (ultra-zoom P&S), since everyone keeps calling
> non-DSLR cameras as P&S cameras, even though DSLRs are revered for
> being even more of a P&S camera than P&S cameras. Again, just more
> nonsense on the net.
>
> Don't you just hate it when erroneous information and nonsense
> catch-phrases start spreading like wildfire on the net, everyone
> repeating it without even understanding why they are saying it, then
> everyone starts looking like idiots. They think it means something
> because someone else said it, looking just as foolish as the first
> person that used it.
>
> Get your acts together people. Find words and acronyms that
> accurately describe these different cameras or don't talk about them
> at all until you figure it out.
>
>
> I propose, for accuracy, that:
>
> * P&S should be done away with completely, since ALL cameras today
> are P&S cameras, especially DSLRs. Instead use "SLDC" for "Single
> Lens Digital Camera".
>
> * An "SLDC" with ultra-zoom (10x optical-zoom or more) as "UZDC",
> "Ultra-Zoom Digital Camera", since they are generally in a class of
> their own the last few years and everyone knows what design you are
> referring to. The UZDC being just a subset of all SLDCs
>
> * DSLR can remain DSLR. Or if being praised for how fast they perform
> automatically then a "DSLR-P&S" if you want to be accurate.
>
> Of course this is never going to happen because the DSLR crowd loves
> throwing around the P&S acronym as a handy (but totally inaccurate)
> and childish insult to anyone that doesn't buy a DSLR. Even though
> their DSLR is a high-priced P&S but they won't admit it. (This is no
> different than christians that run around calling people Pagans and
> Heathens never knowing what Pagan really means, or that Heathen just
> means one who lives on the Heath. Or the wealthy who run around
> calling everyone who has less as "hicks" just so they can feel better
> about being greedy.) Calling an SLDC as a P&S is one of the few ways
> they can pretend to be superior, they'll never give up that.
> Sometimes it's all they have left in light of the new advances in
> SLDC and UZDC designs.
>
> So there you have it, "SLDC" and "UZDC" to describe these cameras.
> Start using them or something just as accurate. Or appear to look the
> fool forever more -- just as you have been appearing since the use of
> "P&S" became commonplace.
I don't particularly like the term ZLR, but why didn't you suggest your
ideas in late 2004 when all this was discussed, and before the new
newsgroups created?
For those interested in ZLR cameras (full-control cameras with an SLR-like
shape), there is a newsgroup already created here:
rec.photo.digital.zlr
Your welcome to dicuss such cameras there, whatever you want to call them!
Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digitalcameras
Henry Hank wrote:
> Who started this bizarre and totally wrong "ZLR" acronym? It makes absolutely no
> sense whatsoever. People who keep using it are just parroting others that
> invented this misnomer without realizing the error.
>
> ZLR, Zoom-Lens-Reflex for a long-zoom P&S camera? The R needs to be thrown out.
> "Reflex" in SLR (single lens reflex) and d-SLR (digital single lens reflex)
> stands for the ancient mirror and reflected light path required in that camera
> design. If R is thrown out to be more accurate, then you have a ZL (zoom lens)
> camera? Great, so every P&S camera with 1.1x to 18x qualifies as a ZL camera.
> You can be more accurate with UZPS (ultra-zoom P&S), since everyone keeps
> calling non-DSLR cameras as P&S cameras, even though DSLRs are revered for being
> even more of a P&S camera than P&S cameras. Again, just more nonsense on the
> net.
>
> Don't you just hate it when erroneous information and nonsense catch-phrases
> start spreading like wildfire on the net, everyone repeating it without even
> understanding why they are saying it, then everyone starts looking like idiots.
> They think it means something because someone else said it, looking just as
> foolish as the first person that used it.
>
> Get your acts together people. Find words and acronyms that accurately describe
> these different cameras or don't talk about them at all until you figure it out.
>
>
> I propose, for accuracy, that:
>
> * P&S should be done away with completely, since ALL cameras today are P&S
> cameras, especially DSLRs. Instead use "SLDC" for "Single Lens Digital Camera".
>
> * An "SLDC" with ultra-zoom (10x optical-zoom or more) as "UZDC", "Ultra-Zoom
> Digital Camera", since they are generally in a class of their own the last few
> years and everyone knows what design you are referring to. The UZDC being just a
> subset of all SLDCs
>
> * DSLR can remain DSLR. Or if being praised for how fast they perform
> automatically then a "DSLR-P&S" if you want to be accurate.
>
> Of course this is never going to happen because the DSLR crowd loves throwing
> around the P&S acronym as a handy (but totally inaccurate) and childish insult
> to anyone that doesn't buy a DSLR. Even though their DSLR is a high-priced P&S
> but they won't admit it. (This is no different than christians that run around
> calling people Pagans and Heathens never knowing what Pagan really means, or
> that Heathen just means one who lives on the Heath. Or the wealthy who run
> around calling everyone who has less as "hicks" just so they can feel better
> about being greedy.) Calling an SLDC as a P&S is one of the few ways they can
> pretend to be superior, they'll never give up that. Sometimes it's all they have
> left in light of the new advances in SLDC and UZDC designs.
>
> So there you have it, "SLDC" and "UZDC" to describe these cameras. Start using
> them or something just as accurate. Or appear to look the fool forever more --
> just as you have been appearing since the use of "P&S" became commonplace.
>
Phew Henry. I can't disagree with anything you say. Unfortunately the world
isn't ruled by accuracy and information, but marketing and numbers - usually
masquerading as accuracy and information.
I just wish that people would stop thinking that all photography should be
referred to in 35mm terms. And that they'd stop inexplicably typing a trailing
'e' on the word lens. Just because it isn't common to end a word -ns, people,
doesn't mean it is wrong.
Trev wrote:
> "Duncan" <writeonline@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:PqOdnbfR1cZTRDPbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@bt.com...
> But what is in a name. Leica was the name of a camera body that used
> Lietz lens just like Ziess on Sony and Shnieder There only names.
>
The Leica lens on my Panasonic FZ30 is far better than the 3 Nikon lenses on
my D70s, so if it is only a name, it must be a very good name!
Panasonic digital cameras 
Linear Mode
