Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Are Kodak P850 better than Panasonic FZ5?

Reply
Thread Tools

Are Kodak P850 better than Panasonic FZ5?

 
 
tiresia2@hotmail.it
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
dimension are the same,zoom 12 x also,but P850 have:

Video 640x480
Excellent lcd 2,5 with 230.000 pixels
excellent evf with 230.000 pixels
manual focus(?)
raw
ecc.

I think;if site tests aren't much negative,i buy her....
What do you think about....?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> dimension are the same,zoom 12 x also,but P850 have:
>
> Video 640x480
> Excellent lcd 2,5 with 230.000 pixels
> excellent evf with 230.000 pixels
> manual focus(?)
> raw
> ecc.
>
> I think;if site tests aren't much negative,i buy her....
> What do you think about....?


Kodak cameras have a reputation for producing a poor JPEG image - perhaps
too much compression? I would check image quality very carefully. Even
Canon have not been able to produce a lens (on their S2) matching the
quality of the Panasonic FZ5, so can Kodak?

David


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
tiresia2@hotmail.it
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005

David J Taylor ha scritto:

> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> > dimension are the same,zoom 12 x also,but P850 have:
> >
> > Video 640x480
> > Excellent lcd 2,5 with 230.000 pixels
> > excellent evf with 230.000 pixels
> > manual focus(?)
> > raw
> > ecc.
> >
> > I think;if site tests aren't much negative,i buy her....
> > What do you think about....?

>
> Kodak cameras have a reputation for producing a poor JPEG image - perhaps
> too much compression? I would check image quality very carefully. Even
> Canon have not been able to produce a lens (on their S2) matching the
> quality of the Panasonic FZ5, so can Kodak?
>
> David


...agree David.
But for me ,a little bit more of noise or purple fringing (or a little
less resolution),isn't a problem.
Kodak also have 50 asa !!(pana 80,273 difference)
i hope in a test....
hi

 
Reply With Quote
 
Daniel Silevitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:00:55 GMT, David J Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> dimension are the same,zoom 12 x also,but P850 have:
>>
>> Video 640x480
>> Excellent lcd 2,5 with 230.000 pixels
>> excellent evf with 230.000 pixels
>> manual focus(?)
>> raw
>> ecc.
>>
>> I think;if site tests aren't much negative,i buy her....
>> What do you think about....?

>
> Kodak cameras have a reputation for producing a poor JPEG image - perhaps
> too much compression? I would check image quality very carefully. Even
> Canon have not been able to produce a lens (on their S2) matching the
> quality of the Panasonic FZ5, so can Kodak?


To be fair, the differences between the S2 and the FZ5 are pretty minor.
Real, but minor. I have no idea about the Kodak, though. A quick look
through a couple of the usual review sites didn't turn up any reviews of
the P850. On paper (see Kodak's page at
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQueri...q-locale=en_US )
it looks pretty good.

I'd ask other questions, like how quickly can the Kodak focus? How
powerful is the built-in flash, and how long does it take to
recharge? How good is its burst mode? How effective is its image
stabilizer? How good is its noise reduction for low-light pictures?
Which of these questions is important to ask depends on what
kind of photos you want to take.

-dms
 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
Daniel Silevitch wrote:
[]
> To be fair, the differences between the S2 and the FZ5 are pretty
> minor.
> Real, but minor.


Agreed, unless movie resolution is a critical factor for someone.

> I have no idea about the Kodak, though. A quick look
> through a couple of the usual review sites didn't turn up any reviews
> of
> the P850.


That's part of the problem - there are a lot of unanswered questions about
that camera. The lack of reviews concerns me slightly - why no reviews?
Some sites seems not to review cameras which might get less than a
"Recommended" rating....

David


 
Reply With Quote
 
Daniel Silevitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:53:13 GMT, David J Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote:
> Daniel Silevitch wrote:
> []
>> To be fair, the differences between the S2 and the FZ5 are pretty
>> minor.
>> Real, but minor.

>
> Agreed, unless movie resolution is a critical factor for someone.
>
>> I have no idea about the Kodak, though. A quick look
>> through a couple of the usual review sites didn't turn up any reviews
>> of the P850.

>
> That's part of the problem - there are a lot of unanswered questions about
> that camera. The lack of reviews concerns me slightly - why no reviews?
> Some sites seems not to review cameras which might get less than a
> "Recommended" rating....


There are some reviews of the lower-spec Kodak superzoom (the Z740). Of
course, that has a 10x (unstabilized) lens, vs the 12x of the P850, so
extrapolating to the higher-end model probably isn't all that useful.
The major complaint about the Z740 was the very slow data handling;
before considering an 850, I'd want some assurance that it didn't suffer
from the same ills.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/kodakz740/

-dms
 
Reply With Quote
 
josepharmbruster@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
I have had the Kodak P850 for two weeks now, it is my first digital
camera. If you have any questions, or would like sample photos, let me
know. If you would like to see the users manual to see details on the
settings provided, you can look at it here:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/servi...l?pq-path=7549

Good Luck deciding,
Joe



Daniel Silevitch wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:53:13 GMT, David J Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote:
> > Daniel Silevitch wrote:
> > []
> >> To be fair, the differences between the S2 and the FZ5 are pretty
> >> minor.
> >> Real, but minor.

> >
> > Agreed, unless movie resolution is a critical factor for someone.
> >
> >> I have no idea about the Kodak, though. A quick look
> >> through a couple of the usual review sites didn't turn up any reviews
> >> of the P850.

> >
> > That's part of the problem - there are a lot of unanswered questions about
> > that camera. The lack of reviews concerns me slightly - why no reviews?
> > Some sites seems not to review cameras which might get less than a
> > "Recommended" rating....

>
> There are some reviews of the lower-spec Kodak superzoom (the Z740). Of
> course, that has a 10x (unstabilized) lens, vs the 12x of the P850, so
> extrapolating to the higher-end model probably isn't all that useful.
> The major complaint about the Z740 was the very slow data handling;
> before considering an 850, I'd want some assurance that it didn't suffer
> from the same ills.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/kodakz740/
>
> -dms


 
Reply With Quote
 
David J Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> I have had the Kodak P850 for two weeks now, it is my first digital
> camera. If you have any questions, or would like sample photos, let
> me know. If you would like to see the users manual to see details on
> the settings provided, you can look at it here:
> http://www.kodak.com/global/en/servi...l?pq-path=7549
>
> Good Luck deciding,
> Joe


What made you choose the Kodak over the Panasonic FZ5 or Canon S2 IS?

David


 
Reply With Quote
 
Daniel Silevitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
On 26 Sep 2005 10:01:45 -0700, (E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Daniel Silevitch wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:53:13 GMT, David J Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote:
>> > Daniel Silevitch wrote:
>> > []
>> >> To be fair, the differences between the S2 and the FZ5 are pretty
>> >> minor.
>> >> Real, but minor.
>> >
>> > Agreed, unless movie resolution is a critical factor for someone.
>> >
>> >> I have no idea about the Kodak, though. A quick look
>> >> through a couple of the usual review sites didn't turn up any reviews
>> >> of the P850.
>> >
>> > That's part of the problem - there are a lot of unanswered questions about
>> > that camera. The lack of reviews concerns me slightly - why no reviews?
>> > Some sites seems not to review cameras which might get less than a
>> > "Recommended" rating....

>>
>> There are some reviews of the lower-spec Kodak superzoom (the Z740). Of
>> course, that has a 10x (unstabilized) lens, vs the 12x of the P850, so
>> extrapolating to the higher-end model probably isn't all that useful.
>> The major complaint about the Z740 was the very slow data handling;
>> before considering an 850, I'd want some assurance that it didn't suffer
>> from the same ills.
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/kodakz740/

>
> I have had the Kodak P850 for two weeks now, it is my first digital
> camera. If you have any questions, or would like sample photos, let me
> know. If you would like to see the users manual to see details on the
> settings provided, you can look at it here:
> http://www.kodak.com/global/en/servi...l?pq-path=7549
>
> Good Luck deciding,


I was perhaps a bit unclear. I'm not in the market for such a camera
myself; I bought an FZ5 some months ago and am quite happy with it. I
was speaking hypothetically, listing the questions and concerns I'd have
if I were shopping today.

What is your general sense of the camera? If you had to repeat the
buying decision, would you still opt for the P850, or switch to one of
the competing models like the FZ5 or the S2 IS?

-dms
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-27-2005
David J Taylor wrote:
> Daniel Silevitch wrote:
> []
>> To be fair, the differences between the S2 and the FZ5 are pretty
>> minor.
>> Real, but minor.

>
> Agreed, unless movie resolution is a critical factor for someone.
>
>> I have no idea about the Kodak, though. A quick look
>> through a couple of the usual review sites didn't turn up any reviews
>> of
>> the P850.

>
> That's part of the problem - there are a lot of unanswered questions about
> that camera. The lack of reviews concerns me slightly - why no reviews?
> Some sites seems not to review cameras which might get less than a
> "Recommended" rating....
>
> David
>
>

Full specs are on the Kodak site. Since the camera was announced only
on Aug 2, it probably hasn't become available for testing yet.
If it lives up to the specs, it should be a real winner.


--
Ron Hunter (E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kodak EasyShare P850 Accessories? Wakke Digital Photography 11 02-11-2006 01:32 AM
Kodak P850 and QuickTime Nemo Digital Photography 22 01-18-2006 01:08 AM
Recommended External Flash for Kodak P850 domtam@hotmail.com Digital Photography 10 01-06-2006 10:27 PM
Kodak P850 RAW files. KennyJr Digital Photography 1 10-17-2005 09:29 PM
Kodak P850 clint Digital Photography 12 10-01-2005 12:19 PM



Advertisments