Panasonic DMC-FZ30K or FujiFilm FinePix S9000 ??????

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by webhound2000@hotmail.com, Feb 18, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Given the choice between these two, any and all comments are
    appreciated. I will use the camera primarily for landscapes.
    , Feb 18, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. nellybly Guest

    In article <>,
    <> wrote:

    > Given the choice between these two, any and all comments are
    > appreciated. I will use the camera primarily for landscapes.


    They are both great cameras, but I prefer the way the Fuji handles. If
    you have the opportunity to try the two before you buy, I am sure you
    will have no trouble making the decision. See how it feels in your
    hands!
    NB
    nellybly, Feb 18, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <180220060155373035%>,
    nellybly <> wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > Given the choice between these two, any and all comments are
    > > appreciated. I will use the camera primarily for landscapes.

    >
    > They are both great cameras, but I prefer the way the Fuji handles. If
    > you have the opportunity to try the two before you buy, I am sure you
    > will have no trouble making the decision. See how it feels in your
    > hands!


    And I'm assuming you have done a side-by-side comparison over at
    DPReview. On that basis the Fuji has the edge on a lot of features but
    on my FZ30 I really appreciate the Image Stabiliser and I use the rear
    screen's flip and twist surprisingly often. It's not as versatile as the
    Canon version but still very useful.

    I just went back to DPReview to have a look at the respective In-depth
    Reviews.....tough call!

    --
    Dibley
    Dibley Fanshaw, Feb 18, 2006
    #3
  4. Monkee Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Given the choice between these two, any and all comments are
    > appreciated. I will use the camera primarily for landscapes.


    Depends on who you talk to and your own personal needs and preferences...

    Check out plenty of reviews from sites like:

    http://www.cameralabs.com/

    www.dpreview.com

    www.steves-digicams.com


    Also make sure you read the forums on dpreview and get some views and actual
    pictures from real life owners.

    Personally I went for the panasonic, the extra zoom and IS made more sense
    for me than better low light performance and I liked the feel and control
    layout of the Panasonic better than the fuji.
    Monkee, Feb 18, 2006
    #4
  5. ASAAR Guest

    On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 22:15:19 +1300, Dibley Fanshaw wrote:

    >> They are both great cameras, but I prefer the way the Fuji handles. If
    >> you have the opportunity to try the two before you buy, I am sure you
    >> will have no trouble making the decision. See how it feels in your
    >> hands!

    >
    > And I'm assuming you have done a side-by-side comparison over at
    > DPReview. On that basis the Fuji has the edge on a lot of features but
    > on my FZ30 I really appreciate the Image Stabiliser and I use the rear
    > screen's flip and twist surprisingly often. It's not as versatile as the
    > Canon version but still very useful.


    Then the FZ30 is probably the best choice for you. But those two
    features wouldn't really benefit the OP or others that are primarily
    interested in landscape photography. Much more important would be a
    good tripod! Some cameras have difficulty focusing on the type of
    distant objects commonly found in scenics landscapes. I don't know
    if this would be a problem with either the FZ30 or the S9000, but
    the latter has a quite effective manual focusing mode that would
    eliminate that problem should it ever arise. Even more important
    would be the widest available focal length. I don't know what these
    two cameras offer, but from an old magazine I see that the FZ20 and
    S7000 aren't particularly impressive, having lenses that zoom out to
    36mm and 35mm, respectively. For both of these cameras (the FZ30
    and S9000, that is) it might be worth checking how wide the lenses
    go as well as the availability of wide angle adapter lenses.
    ASAAR, Feb 18, 2006
    #5
  6. ant Guest

    Dibley Fanshaw wrote:

    > And I'm assuming you have done a side-by-side comparison over at
    > DPReview. On that basis the Fuji has the edge on a lot of features but
    > on my FZ30 I really appreciate the Image Stabiliser and I use the rear
    > screen's flip and twist surprisingly often. It's not as versatile as
    > the Canon version but still very useful.
    >
    > I just went back to DPReview to have a look at the respective In-depth
    > Reviews.....tough call!


    I was basically down to these 2 cameras, too, in my hunt for a fake SLR. I
    briefly looked at the Sony R1 but it was just too pricey...
    When I compared the Fuji to the Panasonic, the Panasonic's lense in the end
    swung it for me. Also some other features, but that was the crux of it. Good
    glass.

    Interestingly, other pundits saw the Fz30 as a serious camera, witnessed by
    the "shootout" between it and a fully specced Canon SLR.
    <http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/panasonic_lumix_dmc-fz30_canon_eos-20d_camera_shootout/>

    --
    ant
    ant, Feb 19, 2006
    #6
  7. Kent Clarke Guest

    In article <>,
    ASAAR <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 22:15:19 +1300, Dibley Fanshaw wrote:
    >
    > >> They are both great cameras, but I prefer the way the Fuji handles. If
    > >> you have the opportunity to try the two before you buy, I am sure you
    > >> will have no trouble making the decision. See how it feels in your
    > >> hands!

    > >
    > > And I'm assuming you have done a side-by-side comparison over at
    > > DPReview. On that basis the Fuji has the edge on a lot of features but
    > > on my FZ30 I really appreciate the Image Stabiliser and I use the rear
    > > screen's flip and twist surprisingly often. It's not as versatile as the
    > > Canon version but still very useful.

    >
    > Then the FZ30 is probably the best choice for you. But those two
    > features wouldn't really benefit the OP or others that are primarily
    > interested in landscape photography. Much more important would be a
    > good tripod! Some cameras have difficulty focusing on the type of
    > distant objects commonly found in scenics landscapes. I don't know
    > if this would be a problem with either the FZ30 or the S9000, but
    > the latter has a quite effective manual focusing mode that would
    > eliminate that problem should it ever arise. Even more important
    > would be the widest available focal length. I don't know what these
    > two cameras offer, but from an old magazine I see that the FZ20 and
    > S7000 aren't particularly impressive, having lenses that zoom out to
    > 36mm and 35mm, respectively. For both of these cameras (the FZ30
    > and S9000, that is) it might be worth checking how wide the lenses
    > go as well as the availability of wide angle adapter lenses.


    I wouldn't choose either for landscapes--neither are wide enough, being
    designed more for nature shots of dangerous or skittish critters. The
    Fuji's 28mm is hampered by corner softness and purple fringing, and
    although the FZ's lens is better, adding a wide-angle adapter reduces
    detail overall (I have an FZ30 and an Oly wideangle converter, and I
    love the camera, but you gotta be realistic.). If you had to have a
    fixed lens camera, maybe the Sony R1 would be better (24mm, lower noise,
    and sharp optics).

    The thing is, for landscapes you typically want a wide angle to get in
    the whole mountain, and the trees in the mid-ground, and the flower in
    the foreground. All of this tack sharp for blowing up to poster size or
    projecting on the wall. Since you'll have bright highlights on the
    clouds and water reflections, but dark shadows too, you need low noise
    and good dynamic range, polarizing and ND-grad filters notwithstanding.
    This is digital SLR territory. A Canon Rebel or 20D, for example, with a
    good wide-angle lens would be more suitable. Classically, it's medium
    format territory, so even the best bridge digicams have a long way to
    go.
    Kent Clarke, Feb 21, 2006
    #7
  8. On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:57:00 -0500, Kent Clarke wrote:

    >I wouldn't choose either for landscapes--neither are wide enough, being
    >designed more for nature shots of dangerous or skittish critters. The
    >Fuji's 28mm is hampered by corner softness and purple fringing, and
    >although the FZ's lens is better, adding a wide-angle adapter reduces
    >detail overall (I have an FZ30 and an Oly wideangle converter, and I
    >love the camera, but you gotta be realistic.). If you had to have a
    >fixed lens camera, maybe the Sony R1 would be better (24mm, lower noise,
    >and sharp optics).
    >
    >The thing is, for landscapes you typically want a wide angle to get in
    >the whole mountain, and the trees in the mid-ground, and the flower in
    >the foreground. All of this tack sharp for blowing up to poster size or
    >projecting on the wall. Since you'll have bright highlights on the
    >clouds and water reflections, but dark shadows too, you need low noise
    >and good dynamic range, polarizing and ND-grad filters notwithstanding.
    >This is digital SLR territory. A Canon Rebel or 20D, for example, with a
    >good wide-angle lens would be more suitable. Classically, it's medium
    >format territory, so even the best bridge digicams have a long way to
    >go.


    Kent,

    an interesting and clever solution is Autostitch.

    You could even go as far as to photoshop that flower into the
    big picture.

    Hans-Georg

    --
    No mail, please.
    Hans-Georg Michna, Feb 21, 2006
    #8
  9. Kent Clarke Guest

    In article <>,
    Hans-Georg Michna <> wrote:

    > On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:57:00 -0500, Kent Clarke wrote:
    >
    > >I wouldn't choose either for landscapes--neither are wide enough, being
    > >designed more for nature shots of dangerous or skittish critters. The
    > >Fuji's 28mm is hampered by corner softness and purple fringing, and
    > >although the FZ's lens is better, adding a wide-angle adapter reduces
    > >detail overall (I have an FZ30 and an Oly wideangle converter, and I
    > >love the camera, but you gotta be realistic.). If you had to have a
    > >fixed lens camera, maybe the Sony R1 would be better (24mm, lower noise,
    > >and sharp optics).
    > >
    > >The thing is, for landscapes you typically want a wide angle to get in
    > >the whole mountain, and the trees in the mid-ground, and the flower in
    > >the foreground. All of this tack sharp for blowing up to poster size or
    > >projecting on the wall. Since you'll have bright highlights on the
    > >clouds and water reflections, but dark shadows too, you need low noise
    > >and good dynamic range, polarizing and ND-grad filters notwithstanding.
    > >This is digital SLR territory. A Canon Rebel or 20D, for example, with a
    > >good wide-angle lens would be more suitable. Classically, it's medium
    > >format territory, so even the best bridge digicams have a long way to
    > >go.

    >
    > Kent,
    >
    > an interesting and clever solution is Autostitch.
    >
    > You could even go as far as to photoshop that flower into the
    > big picture.


    I suppose so. A split macro lens would work too. But everything is
    easier if you can get it right in the camera.
    Kent Clarke, Feb 22, 2006
    #9
  10. In article <>,
    Hans-Georg Michna <> wrote:

    > On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:57:00 -0500, Kent Clarke wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >The thing is, for landscapes you typically want a wide angle to get in
    > >the whole mountain, and the trees in the mid-ground, and the flower in
    > >the foreground. All of this tack sharp for blowing up to poster size or
    > >projecting on the wall. Since you'll have bright highlights on the
    > >clouds and water reflections, but dark shadows too, you need low noise
    > >and good dynamic range, polarizing and ND-grad filters notwithstanding.
    > >This is digital SLR territory. A Canon Rebel or 20D, for example, with a
    > >good wide-angle lens would be more suitable. Classically, it's medium
    > >format territory, so even the best bridge digicams have a long way to
    > >go.


    (Jumping one poster...) surely the big depth of field is one thing in
    favour of the FZ30, to the extent that it is difficult to squeeze a
    narrow depth of field out of them when you want it. The SLRs have to go
    to very small apertures to get even close.

    --
    Dibley
    Dibley Fanshaw, Feb 22, 2006
    #10
  11. Neil Ellwood Guest

    On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:28:36 +1300, Dibley Fanshaw wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Hans-Georg Michna <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:57:00 -0500, Kent Clarke wrote:
    >>
    >> >
    >> >The thing is, for landscapes you typically want a wide angle to get in
    >> >the whole mountain, and the trees in the mid-ground, and the flower in
    >> >the foreground. All of this tack sharp for blowing up to poster size or
    >> >projecting on the wall. Since you'll have bright highlights on the
    >> >clouds and water reflections, but dark shadows too, you need low noise
    >> >and good dynamic range, polarizing and ND-grad filters notwithstanding.
    >> >This is digital SLR territory. A Canon Rebel or 20D, for example, with a
    >> >good wide-angle lens would be more suitable. Classically, it's medium
    >> >format territory, so even the best bridge digicams have a long way to
    >> >go.

    >
    > (Jumping one poster...) surely the big depth of field is one thing in
    > favour of the FZ30, to the extent that it is difficult to squeeze a
    > narrow depth of field out of them when you want it. The SLRs have to go
    > to very small apertures to get even close.

    I disagree, the advantage of an slr is that the depth of field is so much
    easier to control.

    --
    Neil
    Delete l to reply
    Neil Ellwood, Feb 22, 2006
    #11
  12. Kent Clarke Guest

    In article <>,
    Dibley Fanshaw <> wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Hans-Georg Michna <> wrote:
    >
    > > On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 00:57:00 -0500, Kent Clarke wrote:
    > >
    > > >
    > > >The thing is, for landscapes you typically want a wide angle to get in
    > > >the whole mountain, and the trees in the mid-ground, and the flower in
    > > >the foreground. All of this tack sharp for blowing up to poster size or
    > > >projecting on the wall. Since you'll have bright highlights on the
    > > >clouds and water reflections, but dark shadows too, you need low noise
    > > >and good dynamic range, polarizing and ND-grad filters notwithstanding.
    > > >This is digital SLR territory. A Canon Rebel or 20D, for example, with a
    > > >good wide-angle lens would be more suitable. Classically, it's medium
    > > >format territory, so even the best bridge digicams have a long way to
    > > >go.

    >
    > (Jumping one poster...) surely the big depth of field is one thing in
    > favour of the FZ30, to the extent that it is difficult to squeeze a
    > narrow depth of field out of them when you want it. The SLRs have to go
    > to very small apertures to get even close.


    Yes, the small-chip digicams' large dof does help keep more things in
    focus, so that would be a point in its favour. Certainly lots of good
    landscape shots are possible with the FZ30 (I'm hoping).

    Still, setting the SLR to hyperfocal distance usually gives you enough
    dof, and the small aperture isn't as much of a problem with it as with
    digicams.
    Kent Clarke, Feb 23, 2006
    #12
  13. Kent Clarke wrote:
    []
    > Yes, the small-chip digicams' large dof does help keep more things in
    > focus, so that would be a point in its favour. Certainly lots of good
    > landscape shots are possible with the FZ30 (I'm hoping).

    []

    ... and it's easy to get a wider FOV by using programs like AutoStitch.
    You may not need that very expensive DSLR wide-angle lens after all!

    David
    David J Taylor, Feb 23, 2006
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    624
    Silverstrand
    Feb 5, 2006
  2. ggal

    Fujifilm Finepix S5200/5600 or S9000/9500?

    ggal, Oct 12, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    532
    Conrad
    Nov 25, 2005
  3. QX

    Panasonic DMC-FZ30K (Comments ????)

    QX, Jan 26, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    323
  4. QX

    Alternative to Panasonic DMC-FZ30K (USA)

    QX, Feb 23, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    308
    Isaiah Beard
    Feb 24, 2006
  5. Fujifilm FinePix S9000?

    , Jun 2, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    650
    Barry Pearson
    Jun 18, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page