Comment by Izuan

October 26, 2006 @ 6:56 am

Here’s another review: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/PanasonicFZ50/page2.shtml

Has a short video review of it too. Yea pity the high NR at high ISOs, hopefully a firmware fix will be released to fix that, or at least minimise this issue. Not willing to invest in lenses, I’m getting this later this moth, yeah!

Comment by ShaolinTiger

October 26, 2006 @ 7:55 am

Izuan: Ah thanks man didn’t spot that one, good choice! Firmware won’t change the noise at high ISO, the NR might be improved a bit though.

Comment by Tien Soon

October 26, 2006 @ 10:43 am

Yes, I’m using Lumix FZ30, the father of FZ50 :p

Overall, the performance delivered by FZ30 is really satisfying. As you pointed out, the only weakness in FZ30 that troubling me, is its relatively high level of noise in low light situation and higher ISO. The noise delivered at ISO 400 is not satisfying! Other than this “inherited” noise problem, FZ30 is really a good one.

However, since the FZ50 is using a new Venus Engine III, I’m sure it’s much better than FZ30 in noise handling.

Some of the pictures I took with FZ30, are available in the first 9 pages of this Flickr account, and first 4 pages of this Flickr account.

Comment by ShaolinTiger

October 26, 2006 @ 10:52 am

Tien Soon: The Venus III honestly doesn’t seem much better, in some ways even worse..it still has the horrible habit of smearing the chroma noise all over the place at high ISO and looking like a watercolour painting. Some nice pics, but Sets are good, do a Set of your best/favs or something, easier to surf

Comment by Tien Soon

October 26, 2006 @ 10:55 am

Wah~~~ all the while I thought and expecting the Venus III to be better at handling the noise as promised. Guess I’m wrong though

haha yup I wanted to organize the pics in set. But, my Flickr is a free account, only limited to 2 sets :p Maybe time to upgrade though hahah

Comment by Intensecure

October 26, 2006 @ 2:28 pm

As an FZ30 owner, I would have to agree that the VenusIII engine seems to be a retrograde step from the VII. Far too much atempting to blur noise and artifacts.
The FZ30 might actally be a better buy, if you can get a cheap deal,as with happened with the FZ20 which was still in shops long after the FZ30 arrived.
IMVHO, settings for the FZ30, set contrast, sharpness, and noise reduction (stifles laugh!) to “low”. Saturation can be left at normal, but I leave mine on high as the CCD does not produce very rich colours normally. Then post-process as normal, and adjust to taste!
ISO 80 and 100 are both OK, except in low light. 200 is usable with Neat Image etc. ISO 400 just plain sucks, even with noise recution software.
Oh, and just to add it does really decent videos, even if you can only get 8-10 minutes per gigabyte card. Strangely even in pretty low light, they come out well (better than the stills! ), and IS, and the ability to zoom whilst filming , make this one of the more useful features that seperates it from a DSLR.

Comment by pik

October 26, 2006 @ 10:32 pm

yo. i’m picking up the xti w/ kit.

i’m going to start from there =]

Comment by Albert Ng

October 27, 2006 @ 3:00 am

While at it, check out the the Fujifilm S6500fd and S9600 (I just saw it in Berjaya Times Square.) The S6500fd has ISO3200 (with usable ISO1600!) and amazing continuous auto-focus when recording videos. The S6500fd has less buttons but is still optimized (e.g. S9600 has dedicated Info button for viewing EXIF data; press EV button on S6500fd to view.)

I haven’t tried the FZ50’s manual focus or CAF in video, but the FZ30’s manual focus magnification was very laggy. Its CAF was bad too. Pity the S6500fd has a darker, shorter lens (ending at 300mm F4.9.)

Videos probably come out less noisy because of reduced resolution (8 megapixels down to 640×480 should reduce noise greatly.)

Comment by ShaolinTiger

October 27, 2006 @ 12:05 pm

Intensecure: Thanks for the input, glad you are enjoying the cam anyway, it’s a good choice. Good tips on the settings too, most cameras can use a boost in saturation for normal shooting, just remember to turn it back down when shooting portraits or they come out orange

pik: Good choice, but I’d recommend Nikon D80 instead, far better camera

Albert: I’m always extremely interested in the FujiCCD cameras, I’ve been waiting for their next step of superzoom, still no Image Stabiliser though and the ergonomics of their cameras aren’t great, high ISO noise is crazy good tho. Did you manage to take any shots to test them?

Comment by Albert Ng

October 27, 2006 @ 12:37 pm

You’ve been working without IS so go figure. ISO3200 starts to show chroma noise without zooming in; ISO1600 has luminance noise with noise reduction, but a patch of black is still quite black. Didn’t watch out for zigzag artifacts from noise reduction (apparent on the S9500 and some F30s; a friend has a F30 and compares it to his friend’s F30 which might have newer NR firmware.)

It’s a pity, Fujifilm prosumer lenses used to be real bright, like the S5100 (37-370mm F2.8-3.1!)

I find the ergonomics alright, and their build is more solid than the Panasonic’s.

Will remember to pop in one of my 16MB xDs the next time I test. Though I won’t be able to test much.

pik: If you prefer Canon’s noise and color, go for it.

Comment by ShaolinTiger

October 27, 2006 @ 12:53 pm

Albert: Thanks would have liked to see some test pics! Well I work without IS because I like to shoot close, I have a camera that can handle high ISO and I don’t use long lenses..but if I were using a superzoom with 10x or 12x zoom I don’t think even I could hold it steady. Yah I wish they had kept their old lenses too. Definately a brand to keep any eye out for, if they came out with something the size of the F30 with a decent 6x zoom I’d buy it!

Comment by pik

October 27, 2006 @ 1:47 pm

canon does not have color and noise problems!

Comment by Albert Ng

October 27, 2006 @ 3:04 pm

Pik: I actually prefer Canon’s (look of) noise and punchy color. However, noise is subjective; some people think the Nikon D50 is the cleanest, but I’ve only seen loads of chroma from its ISO1600 (on a 50mm F1.8!). Different labs are not consistent as to which brand has less noise. I like Canon’s noise (it’s not to say there isn’t any noise) because it has less high-frequency specks.

Comment by ShaolinTiger

October 27, 2006 @ 6:23 pm

Pik: Every digital camera has noise problems because of chroma noise, the noise is not pleasing like film noise.

Albert: Yah it’s down to personal taste, actually Nikon has better chroma noise supression but it lets other noise through, Nikon tends to be on the safer side, it exposes for shadows and does less NR so the pictures come out darker generally and sometimes look more noisy, but in reality there is more detail retained. Canon pics tend to be more user friendly out of the cam. Exposed for mid-tones (which leads to blown highlights) and with more noise reduction.