Panasonic FZ1 (and FZ2) vs. New FZ3

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mfy, Oct 2, 2004.

  1. mfy

    mfy Guest

    I am planning to purchase either a new Panasonic Lumix FZ3 (12x
    optical zoom, Leica lens, 3 megapixel...$399) or a Panasonic FZ1 from
    Ritz camera (same lens, but only 2 megapixel and some other
    differences...$249).

    Is anyone possibly familiar with these two camera? If so, might you
    help me understand if the price difference is worth it, and if the
    functional and/or physical differences are substantial.

    Thanks so much.
     
    mfy, Oct 2, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "mfy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I am planning to purchase either a new Panasonic Lumix FZ3 (12x
    > optical zoom, Leica lens, 3 megapixel...$399) or a Panasonic FZ1 from
    > Ritz camera (same lens, but only 2 megapixel and some other
    > differences...$249).
    >
    > Is anyone possibly familiar with these two camera? If so, might you
    > help me understand if the price difference is worth it, and if the
    > functional and/or physical differences are substantial.


    I'd recommend the FZ10 or FZ20 over the FZ1/2/3.

    The larger cameras are a lot easier to use and when shot at f/5.6 at ISO 50,
    the FZ10 at least can produce amazingly good images. (I've seen enough good
    FZ10 images to be fairly confident in recommending it. But they were all
    shot at f/5.6 at ISO 50<g>.)

    Buy (and use!) a solid tripod.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Oct 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "mfy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I am planning to purchase either a new Panasonic Lumix FZ3 (12x
    > optical zoom, Leica lens, 3 megapixel...$399) or a Panasonic FZ1 from
    > Ritz camera (same lens, but only 2 megapixel and some other
    > differences...$249).
    >
    > Is anyone possibly familiar with these two camera? If so, might you
    > help me understand if the price difference is worth it, and if the
    > functional and/or physical differences are substantial.


    I'd recommend the FZ10 or FZ20 over the FZ1/2/3.

    The larger cameras are a lot easier to use and when shot at f/5.6 at ISO 50,
    the FZ10 at least can produce amazingly good images. (I've seen enough good
    FZ10 images to be fairly confident in recommending it. But they were all
    shot at f/5.6 at ISO 50<g>.)

    Buy (and use!) a solid tripod.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Oct 2, 2004
    #3
  4. mfy

    ArtKramr Guest

    >Subject: Panasonic FZ1 (and FZ2) vs. New FZ3
    >From: (mfy)
    >Date: 10/2/2004 1:23 PM Pacific Standard Time
    >Message-id: <>
    >
    >I am planning to purchase either a new Panasonic Lumix FZ3 (12x
    >optical zoom, Leica lens, 3 megapixel...$399) or a Panasonic FZ1 from
    >Ritz camera (same lens, but only 2 megapixel and some other
    >differences...$249).
    >
    >Is anyone possibly familiar with these two camera? If so, might you
    >help me understand if the price difference is worth it, and if the
    >functional and/or physical differences are substantial.
    >
    >Thanks so much.
    >



    For about $350 you can get a 4mp- Kodak 6490. It has a Schneider lens, is
    screaming sharp and has a lot of controls. Just take a look. Just one look.



    Arthur Kramer
    344th BG 494th BS
    England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
    Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
    http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer
     
    ArtKramr, Oct 2, 2004
    #4
  5. (ArtKramr) writes:

    > >Subject: Panasonic FZ1 (and FZ2) vs. New FZ3
    > >From: (mfy)
    > >Date: 10/2/2004 1:23 PM Pacific Standard Time
    > >Message-id: <>
    > >
    > >I am planning to purchase either a new Panasonic Lumix FZ3 (12x
    > >optical zoom, Leica lens, 3 megapixel...$399) or a Panasonic FZ1 from
    > >Ritz camera (same lens, but only 2 megapixel and some other
    > >differences...$249).
    > >
    > >Is anyone possibly familiar with these two camera? If so, might you
    > >help me understand if the price difference is worth it, and if the
    > >functional and/or physical differences are substantial.
    > >
    > >Thanks so much.
    > >

    >
    >
    > For about $350 you can get a 4mp- Kodak 6490. It has a Schneider lens, is
    > screaming sharp and has a lot of controls. Just take a look. Just one look.


    But it doesn't have image stabalization, so you had better hope you can shoot
    in bright light to avoid camera shake.

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email:
    http://www.the-meissners.org
     
    Michael Meissner, Oct 3, 2004
    #5
  6. (mfy) writes:

    > I am planning to purchase either a new Panasonic Lumix FZ3 (12x
    > optical zoom, Leica lens, 3 megapixel...$399) or a Panasonic FZ1 from
    > Ritz camera (same lens, but only 2 megapixel and some other
    > differences...$249).
    >
    > Is anyone possibly familiar with these two camera? If so, might you
    > help me understand if the price difference is worth it, and if the
    > functional and/or physical differences are substantial.


    If memory serves, the FZ1 does not have much in the way of manual controls (ie,
    be able to use aperture or shutter priority modes). However there is an update
    that gives you most of the FZ2 functionality including manual controls, but I'm
    not aware of whether it is an extra cost version. If you can't use the update
    or it is too expensive, you basically will be limited to shooting only in full
    automatic. Which is fine if you don't want to be bothered with the controls,
    but it would be limiting if you want to do some things you can't do in auto
    mode, and couldn't.. Note, the FZ1 is last years model, so presumably Ritz is
    only selling existing stock.

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email:
    http://www.the-meissners.org
     
    Michael Meissner, Oct 3, 2004
    #6
  7. On 02 Oct 2004 21:08:23 -0400, Michael Meissner
    <> wrote:

    >However there is an update
    >that gives you most of the FZ2 functionality including manual controls, but I'm
    >not aware of whether it is an extra cost version.


    Michael,

    the FZ1-2 firmware update was floating around the 'net. I still
    have it, I believe.

    It's now a clever way to get a fairly good camera for very
    little money. The FZ1 should be very cheap, now that it's been
    obsolete for quite some time. Or one could buy it used for even
    less. $249 is too much.

    Hans-Georg

    --
    No mail, please.
     
    Hans-Georg Michna, Oct 3, 2004
    #7
  8. mfy

    Linda_N Guest

    "mfy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I am planning to purchase either a new Panasonic Lumix FZ3 (12x
    > optical zoom, Leica lens, 3 megapixel...$399) or a Panasonic FZ1 from
    > Ritz camera (same lens, but only 2 megapixel and some other
    > differences...$249).
    >
    > Is anyone possibly familiar with these two camera? If so, might you
    > help me understand if the price difference is worth it, and if the
    > functional and/or physical differences are substantial.
    >
    > Thanks so much.


    All 3 are good cameras for the low cost (in comparison to other large
    zooms), but if I'm remembering correctly the FZ3 is the only one with IS to
    prevent shake. That alone is well worth the extra you'll pay for the new
    FZ3. Besides $399 is pretty darn cheap as it is for a digital camera with
    lots of useful features.

    The FZ1 is pretty old at this point (probably discontinued) so only getting
    $150 off (or between newest model and oldest) is not very good in my
    opinion.

    It is probably out of your price range, but the Panasonic DMC FZ20 is a
    tremendous value at approximately $550, and the DMC FZ15 (also new release)
    is close in dollars to what you are looking at with the FZ3. Both are better
    cameras including in build quality.

    Linda
     
    Linda_N, Oct 3, 2004
    #8
  9. mfy

    Linda_N Guest

    "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    news:cjn402$7qn$...
    >
    > "mfy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> I am planning to purchase either a new Panasonic Lumix FZ3 (12x
    >> optical zoom, Leica lens, 3 megapixel...$399) or a Panasonic FZ1 from
    >> Ritz camera (same lens, but only 2 megapixel and some other
    >> differences...$249).
    >>
    >> Is anyone possibly familiar with these two camera? If so, might you
    >> help me understand if the price difference is worth it, and if the
    >> functional and/or physical differences are substantial.

    >
    > I'd recommend the FZ10 or FZ20 over the FZ1/2/3.
    >
    > The larger cameras are a lot easier to use and when shot at f/5.6 at ISO
    > 50,
    > the FZ10 at least can produce amazingly good images. (I've seen enough
    > good
    > FZ10 images to be fairly confident in recommending it. But they were all
    > shot at f/5.6 at ISO 50<g>.)
    >
    > Buy (and use!) a solid tripod.
    >
    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan
    >


    I agree with looking at the new FZ20 or FZ15, or even the older FZ10 first.
    The price difference isn't that drastic and you would be getting a much
    better build quality and value for the dollar.

    I doubt you need a tripod though. The IS on those models is very good from
    what I've read from various sources.

    Linda
     
    Linda_N, Oct 3, 2004
    #9
  10. "Linda_N" <> writes:

    > I agree with looking at the new FZ20 or FZ15, or even the older FZ10 first.
    > The price difference isn't that drastic and you would be getting a much
    > better build quality and value for the dollar.
    >
    > I doubt you need a tripod though. The IS on those models is very good from
    > what I've read from various sources.


    I have a camera with image stabalization (Olympus C-2100UZ) and while the IS is
    certainly useful for handheld shots, it doesn't completely eliminate the need
    for a tripod. I use a tripod for instance to shoot fireworks (4-10 seconds),
    and in places where I want to accurately frame something (portraits, macro,
    etc.).

    --
    Michael Meissner
    email:
    http://www.the-meissners.org
     
    Michael Meissner, Oct 3, 2004
    #10
  11. mfy

    Linda_N Guest

    "Michael Meissner" <> wrote in message
    news:-meissners.org...
    > "Linda_N" <> writes:
    >
    >> I agree with looking at the new FZ20 or FZ15, or even the older FZ10
    >> first.
    >> The price difference isn't that drastic and you would be getting a much
    >> better build quality and value for the dollar.
    >>
    >> I doubt you need a tripod though. The IS on those models is very good
    >> from
    >> what I've read from various sources.

    >
    > I have a camera with image stabalization (Olympus C-2100UZ) and while the
    > IS is
    > certainly useful for handheld shots, it doesn't completely eliminate the
    > need
    > for a tripod. I use a tripod for instance to shoot fireworks (4-10
    > seconds),
    > and in places where I want to accurately frame something (portraits,
    > macro,
    > etc.).
    >

    I agree that for some situations it is useful to turn IS off and use a
    tripod instead. A tripod is not needed often though for the average person
    who will buying the cameras (and type of IS they have) in question. I'm
    somewhat inclined to think that the quality and ability of IS differs from
    company to company and the mechanics each utilizes. From readings and
    reviews it seems Canon and Konica-Minolta have the icing for the cake when
    it comes to high performance IS and good IS mechanics.

    Linda
     
    Linda_N, Oct 3, 2004
    #11
  12. Linda,

    at max zoom, the equivalent of 420 mm focal length, free-hand
    shooting is still a bit problematic.

    I always carry a bean bag with the camera and use it to lean the
    camera against some firm structure, for example in the corner of
    a car window when I shoot from the car. This always works fine.

    I never use a tripod.

    Hans-Georg

    Photo samples at http://www.michna.com/kenya2004/.

    --
    No mail, please.
     
    Hans-Georg Michna, Oct 4, 2004
    #12
  13. On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:26:08 -0300, "Linda_N"
    <> wrote:

    >All 3 are good cameras for the low cost (in comparison to other large
    >zooms), but if I'm remembering correctly the FZ3 is the only one with IS to
    >prevent shake.


    Linda,

    all Panasonic DMC-FZx cameras have essentially the same Leica
    lens with image stabilizer. The only difference is that the FZ1,
    FZ2, and FZ3 are quite a bit smaller (because they have a
    smaller sensor and a smaller lens etc.) than the FZ10, FZ15, and
    FZ20.

    As I wrote already, the really sweet price spot is obtained by
    buying an FZ1 and upgrading it to an FZ2 by loading the
    firmware. I've done that on mine and am happy with it.

    However, the FZ3 has more pixels, and the FZ10, FZ15, and FZ20
    have even more.

    Hans-Georg

    --
    No mail, please.
     
    Hans-Georg Michna, Oct 4, 2004
    #13
  14. Hans-Georg Michna <> wrote:

    > On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:26:08 -0300, "Linda_N"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >All 3 are good cameras for the low cost (in comparison to other large
    > >zooms), but if I'm remembering correctly the FZ3 is the only one with IS to
    > >prevent shake.

    >
    > Linda,
    >
    > all Panasonic DMC-FZx cameras have essentially the same Leica
    > lens with image stabilizer. The only difference is that the FZ1,
    > FZ2, and FZ3 are quite a bit smaller (because they have a
    > smaller sensor and a smaller lens etc.) than the FZ10, FZ15, and
    > FZ20.
    >
    > As I wrote already, the really sweet price spot is obtained by
    > buying an FZ1 and upgrading it to an FZ2 by loading the
    > firmware. I've done that on mine and am happy with it.
    >
    > However, the FZ3 has more pixels, and the FZ10, FZ15, and FZ20
    > have even more.


    I think the F3 also has a somewhat speedier and mor powerful processor
    than the FZ1. Therefore it also has a certain plus value.

    theo
     
    Theo van Riet, Oct 4, 2004
    #14
  15. mfy

    Linda_N Guest

    "Hans-Georg Michna" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Linda,
    >
    > at max zoom, the equivalent of 420 mm focal length, free-hand
    > shooting is still a bit problematic.
    >
    > I always carry a bean bag with the camera and use it to lean the
    > camera against some firm structure, for example in the corner of
    > a car window when I shoot from the car. This always works fine.
    >
    > I never use a tripod.
    >
    > Hans-Georg
    >


    Good tip on the bean bag, Hans. Anything to avoid having to lug a tripod
    around is good to know.

    Linda
     
    Linda_N, Oct 4, 2004
    #15
  16. mfy

    Linda_N Guest

    "Hans-Georg Michna" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:26:08 -0300, "Linda_N"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>All 3 are good cameras for the low cost (in comparison to other large
    >>zooms), but if I'm remembering correctly the FZ3 is the only one with IS
    >>to
    >>prevent shake.

    >
    > Linda,
    >
    > all Panasonic DMC-FZx cameras have essentially the same Leica
    > lens with image stabilizer. The only difference is that the FZ1,
    > FZ2, and FZ3 are quite a bit smaller (because they have a
    > smaller sensor and a smaller lens etc.) than the FZ10, FZ15, and
    > FZ20.
    >
    > As I wrote already, the really sweet price spot is obtained by
    > buying an FZ1 and upgrading it to an FZ2 by loading the
    > firmware. I've done that on mine and am happy with it.
    >
    > However, the FZ3 has more pixels, and the FZ10, FZ15, and FZ20
    > have even more.
    >
    > Hans-Georg
    >


    Arrrgghhh I did it again. I mixed the Panasonic FZ1, FZ2, and FZ3 up with
    the Konica-Minolta Z1, Z2 and Z3. Only the Z3 has IS, the other did not have
    it, and the Z3 now has 12X optical instead of 10X from the Z1 and Z2.
    Matters get complicated by Konica-Minolta also having a Z10 series similar
    to Panasonic's FZ# series. I wish manufacturers would stop doing that.

    Yeah the firmware upgrades (hacks) are really getting on manufacturer's
    nerves. The hack for the Rebel 300D works perfectly fine, but also spoils
    Canon's plans to do nothing but enable some features for the next model that
    are currently disabled in the Rebel 300D. My guess is they slap in a larger
    sensor, enable the features as was the original plan, and call it the Rebel
    T-400D or some such.

    Linda
     
    Linda_N, Oct 4, 2004
    #16
  17. mfy

    Jer Guest

    Linda_N wrote:

    > "Hans-Georg Michna" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 09:26:08 -0300, "Linda_N"
    >><> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>All 3 are good cameras for the low cost (in comparison to other large
    >>>zooms), but if I'm remembering correctly the FZ3 is the only one with IS
    >>>to
    >>>prevent shake.

    >>
    >>Linda,
    >>
    >>all Panasonic DMC-FZx cameras have essentially the same Leica
    >>lens with image stabilizer. The only difference is that the FZ1,
    >>FZ2, and FZ3 are quite a bit smaller (because they have a
    >>smaller sensor and a smaller lens etc.) than the FZ10, FZ15, and
    >>FZ20.
    >>
    >>As I wrote already, the really sweet price spot is obtained by
    >>buying an FZ1 and upgrading it to an FZ2 by loading the
    >>firmware. I've done that on mine and am happy with it.
    >>
    >>However, the FZ3 has more pixels, and the FZ10, FZ15, and FZ20
    >>have even more.
    >>
    >>Hans-Georg
    >>

    >
    >
    > Arrrgghhh I did it again. I mixed the Panasonic FZ1, FZ2, and FZ3 up with
    > the Konica-Minolta Z1, Z2 and Z3. Only the Z3 has IS, the other did not have
    > it, and the Z3 now has 12X optical instead of 10X from the Z1 and Z2.
    > Matters get complicated by Konica-Minolta also having a Z10 series similar
    > to Panasonic's FZ# series. I wish manufacturers would stop doing that.
    >
    > Yeah the firmware upgrades (hacks) are really getting on manufacturer's
    > nerves. The hack for the Rebel 300D works perfectly fine, but also spoils
    > Canon's plans to do nothing but enable some features for the next model that
    > are currently disabled in the Rebel 300D. My guess is they slap in a larger
    > sensor, enable the features as was the original plan, and call it the Rebel
    > T-400D or some such.
    >
    > Linda



    I've recommended they call the new Rebel "TZ4" :)

    --
    jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'
     
    Jer, Oct 4, 2004
    #17
  18. mfy

    Linda_N Guest

    "Jer" <> wrote in message
    news:cjrhef$...
    > Linda_N wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Arrrgghhh I did it again. I mixed the Panasonic FZ1, FZ2, and FZ3 up with
    >> the Konica-Minolta Z1, Z2 and Z3. Only the Z3 has IS, the other did not
    >> have it, and the Z3 now has 12X optical instead of 10X from the Z1 and
    >> Z2. Matters get complicated by Konica-Minolta also having a Z10 series
    >> similar to Panasonic's FZ# series. I wish manufacturers would stop doing
    >> that.
    >>
    >> Yeah the firmware upgrades (hacks) are really getting on manufacturer's
    >> nerves. The hack for the Rebel 300D works perfectly fine, but also spoils
    >> Canon's plans to do nothing but enable some features for the next model
    >> that are currently disabled in the Rebel 300D. My guess is they slap in a
    >> larger sensor, enable the features as was the original plan, and call it
    >> the Rebel T-400D or some such.
    >>
    >> Linda

    >
    >
    > I've recommended they call the new Rebel "TZ4" :)
    >

    LOL, brat. ;-P````` <--- free shower for you.

    Linda
     
    Linda_N, Oct 4, 2004
    #18
  19. On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 09:32:17 -0300, "Linda_N"
    <> wrote:

    >Good tip on the bean bag, Hans. Anything to avoid having to lug a tripod
    >around is good to know.


    Linda,

    having a fairly small camera, my self-made bean bag doesn't
    actually contains beans, it contains some small grains whose
    English name I'm not sure about.

    Rice could perhaps be used as well, but you have to be sure it
    doesn't crumble.

    The bag can be fairly small, so it doesn't weigh much and
    doesn't take much room. If you make one yourself, it has to be
    filled only about half.

    Hans-Georg

    --
    No mail, please.
     
    Hans-Georg Michna, Oct 4, 2004
    #19
  20. On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 13:18:17 +0200,
    (Theo van Riet) wrote:

    >I think the F3 also has a somewhat speedier and mor powerful processor
    >than the FZ1. Therefore it also has a certain plus value.


    Theo,

    ah, didn't know that.

    Too early to upgrade though. I'll skip one development step and
    wait another year or two.

    What I would really want is an articulated viewfinder (like on
    the Canon Powershot S1 IS or on the Nikon Coolpix 5700) and
    focussing in the dark (like on the Sony F828).

    Hans-Georg

    --
    No mail, please.
     
    Hans-Georg Michna, Oct 4, 2004
    #20
    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. Dave Brown

    Lumix FZ1, FZ2 and FZ10 opinions and experiences

    Dave Brown, Oct 3, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    826
  2. The Sperminator

    Lumix FZ1, FZ2 and FZ10 opinions and experiences

    The Sperminator, Oct 3, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    333
    The Sperminator
    Oct 3, 2003
  3. Alex

    Panasonic FZ1/FZ2 FAQ

    Alex, Jan 21, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    907
    Barry Smith
    Jan 22, 2004
  4. Linda_N

    Re: Panasonic FZ1 (and FZ2) vs. New FZ3

    Linda_N, Oct 10, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    299
    PETERWOJ
    Oct 11, 2004
  5. Tony

    Panasonic FZ3 and FZ20

    Tony, Jan 1, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    363
    Bruce Graham
    Jan 3, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page