|
Post by lindaw on Dec 8, 2012 7:54:31 GMT -5
So I am looking for a super-zoom digital. Don't want to go for a DSLR because both my daughter and husband have Nikons and I can use theirs for shooting locally. I want something portable to throw in my purse, but something versatile. The most important thing for me is a hot-shoe so I can better control lighting - those little pop-ups rot - and a fast lens.
Enter the Leica V-Lux 4 vs the Panasonic FZ-200. They are almost identical, save for some Leica tweaks and the price-point. Both feature a long zoom (to 600 mm by 35mm standards) and most importantly, the 2.8 aperture is held throughout . This will allow better depth-of-field control than other cameras in this class, and will also give more versatility in low-light situations.
The Leica is $300 more than the Panasonic The debate is, what do you get for that $300 aside from red-dot prestige, something that I would not pay $300 for.
I did huge amounts of research yesterday and discovered the Leica makes some tweaks to the firmware (along with better quality control all-around), improving the way jpegs are rendered. They also tweak the menus and change the body design a bit, to a design I feel is more pleasing to my eye. Leica's warranty is also longer and they stand by their product more than Panasonic does. You also get Photoshop's Lightroom with the Leica, as opposed to Panasonic's proprietary software. Lightroom is $100 on its own.
Needless to say, I'm leaning towards the Leica version, as I hear the tweaks to firmware do make a difference.
Does anyone have a favorite digital camera or brand? Can they tell me why?
Thx.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Schist on Dec 8, 2012 9:01:56 GMT -5
So I am looking for a super-zoom digital. Don't want to go for a DSLR because both my daughter and husband have Nikons and I can use theirs for shooting locally. I want something portable to throw in my purse, but something versatile. The most important thing for me is a hot-shoe so I can better control lighting - those little pop-ups rot - and a fast lens. Enter the Leica V-Lux 4 vs the Panasonic FZ-200. They are almost identical, save for some Leica tweaks and the price-point. Both feature a long zoom (to 600 mm by 35mm standards) and most importantly, the 2.8 aperture is held throughout . This will allow better depth-of-field control than other cameras in this class, and will also give more versatility in low-light situations. The Leica is $300 more than the Panasonic The debate is, what do you get for that $300 aside from red-dot prestige, something that I would not pay $300 for. I did huge amounts of research yesterday and discovered the Leica makes some tweaks to the firmware (along with better quality control all-around), improving the way jpegs are rendered. They also tweak the menus and change the body design a bit, to a design I feel is more pleasing to my eye. Leica's warranty is also longer and they stand by their product more than Panasonic does. You also get Photoshop's Lightroom with the Leica, as opposed to Panasonic's proprietary software. Lightroom is $100 on its own. Needless to say, I'm leaning towards the Leica version, as I hear the tweaks to firmware do make a difference. Does anyone have a favorite digital camera or brand? Can they tell me why? Thx. The compact Panasonic versions of these products have been personal favorites of pros for years. I forget the model we have that's probably 1.5 + years old but the customer I share my SLR gear with got the Leica version because he's had Leica film cameras for years. After he got over his leather case and red dot he admitted if it's firmware is any better it's not really seen because he will use desktop software for any correction to an image. I know they make these nice point n shoots in two body sizes - larger with some more features and faster lenses. A cousin has the larger. When we did a trip with kids last spring he said that because he has other superior camera gear he wished he had the more compact model. My personal opinion is this family of cameras are great and often not well enough appreciated by people who don't know better. The lenses on these variations and iterations of product have generally superior the competition via less barrel distortion and good image stabilization. I think it's actually the Z or ZX, ZS? series that my pro associates love so much and that ours is part of. This love is because these (incl me) all have top level gear available so get something highly portable that's beyond what any camera phone or cheapest point and shoot will do. It was my having the camera in a pocket and my cousin not able to do that when he made the comment. The new small non-SLR removable lens cameras are so good that I would go there or something very compact and less expensive. There are no rights or wrongs here but you'll get more out of a desktop software upgrade than camera firmware considering they Leica and Panasonics share same lens and CCD. I digress but Google bought the Snapseed publisher and just made the mobile free, desktop version cheap! If you belong to COSTCO look there. They often have the model of a camera about to be replaced or just replaced at super prices. In this case it would be the Panasonic before the Leica. One important tip. These Pana/Leicas and others have been good camcorders in past few years. Not all have stereo microphones. A camera with a stereo mic will often make much better content for you. Our camcorder died and we've only used the Panasonic with a fast memory card since. FYI: Some I know will only travel with the Panasonic version on purpose because they don't want to be a target or stand out. I don't know where you go or travel but it can be wise to not stand out.
|
|
|
Post by hodagg on Dec 8, 2012 10:55:50 GMT -5
Linda, Did you think to drop Steve an email and get his opinion? Nah.....I suppose not! My only advice is stay away from Olympus. I got three of their cameras at school for use with creating the yearbook not even two months ago and one has froze up and is totally shot already. It's dead in the water.
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Dec 8, 2012 12:58:37 GMT -5
HA! Love it Dagg! I think I'll be ignoring anything Steve says. Won't he push the Canon anyway? Were I do do a DLSR, I'd pick a Nikon as my husband has a ton of lenses and I could use them.
I've seen some distinct color differences, especially favoring the Leica, at low light situations. Also a lot less noise. I don't want to constantly have to tweak all photos to get that better color - just too time-consuming. The Lightbox software, I'll use to post-process jewelry photos. The rest I want to come out of the cameral looking as good as possible. Panasonics have been tested and found to have unnatural skin tones, kind of 'plastic-looking' compared to the Leica. I definitely want the latest model, due to that 2.8 along the zoom length lens. I have a very small Canon that I would take were I going to go to Paris or any other area where pickpockets are likely. It takes nice snapshots and that's all I'd need there.
I don't travel much right now. If I do, it's to the Cape, to Cali and to AZ to visit my parents.
I don't like the way the Panasonic looks - it simply looks cheap to me compared to the physical changes that Leica made. Given the free Lightbox software, a $100 value and the better warranty and customer service, I can't see myself quibbling over a $100 or so, which is all the difference ends up to be.
I simply cannot find a camera in this superzoom class that has that fast lens. Does anyone know of a brand?
|
|
|
Post by Holy Schist on Dec 8, 2012 19:55:26 GMT -5
If you want best color and images save as raw files with both. That makes the firmware differences almost inconsequential if not inconsequential. So much more data in the raw file is the key.
Both of those cameras are not compacts so the small body Nikon SLRs with resources already in the family will get you the most.
If you want Leica for status or what photographers would consider a real one you get an M.
IMO reconsider the system your family has if you're not getting something that is easy to pocket.
I can't help you on the favorite brand question. I have and had great camera stuff from several great companies including the ones mentioned here, and give credit to knowing photography very well and luck (right place, right time) over gear. The exceptions are use of flash and lenses the V-Lux and Fz-200 can't do but your family SLR system could.
I hope that's a fair explanation of why I favor the compact models or systems vs what's between.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Schist on Dec 8, 2012 20:09:47 GMT -5
I simply cannot find a camera in this superzoom class that has that fast lens. Does anyone know of a brand? I think a super zoom camera is the wrong target in your shopping if fast lens is a high priority. I won't be near let alone in the league of the SLR system options already in your family, and the Leica/Panasonic stable mates with shorter lenses have a super reputation in that area if that's the brand you really want. You can take a memory card to a camera store to test this as a good option. The real key for low light is a tripod which can be mini or some simple tricks to steady a camera.
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Dec 8, 2012 23:56:14 GMT -5
I had to compromise somewhere. I ended up buying the Leica today for a few reasons. I do want the long lens AND the faster speed and 2.8 across the length is good enough for what I'll be using it for (everyday snapshots and my jewelry/dress/purse/etc. photography for online use. Any finer needed and I can use one of my husband's Nikon DSLRs, or even my daughter's and the combined stable of lenses. What I really, REALLY want is a digital camera back to fit my old Olympus 4T or Mamiya 645, but they aren't making them, and if they are, it's stupid-expensive. Old dinosaurs like me die hard - we want our old stuff dammit :-)
Want the kicker? I not only bought the Leica, but I ended up getting my husband the new D600 for Christmas. Got the D600 with the 24-85mm lens for the price of just the D600 body. He's been coveting that camera and I've been a bit of a peri-menopausal b*tch lately (betcha didn't notice ;-))so I'm treating him to it as a reward for his sense of humor and great tolerance.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Schist on Dec 9, 2012 7:39:58 GMT -5
I had to compromise somewhere. I ended up buying the Leica today for a few reasons. I do want the long lens AND the faster speed and 2.8 across the length is good enough for what I'll be using it for (everyday snapshots and my jewelry/dress/purse/etc. photography for online use. Any finer needed and I can use one of my husband's Nikon DSLRs, or even my daughter's and the combined stable of lenses. What I really, REALLY want is a digital camera back to fit my old Olympus 4T or Mamiya 645, but they aren't making them, and if they are, it's stupid-expensive. Old dinosaurs like me die hard - we want our old stuff dammit :-) Want the kicker? I not only bought the Leica, but I ended up getting my husband the new D600 for Christmas. Got the D600 with the 24-85mm lens for the price of just the D600 body. He's been coveting that camera and I've been a bit of a peri-menopausal b*tch lately (betcha didn't notice ;-))so I'm treating him to it as a reward for his sense of humor and great tolerance. Enjoy. If you have not had a camera with that output, make sure you work with raw files when you want top image quality. A lot of people don't realize those files hold much more information so your editing or catalog program can do more with it. We still have my wife's Olympus OM, and I kept one special film camera from 1953. I always liked the smaller body size of those Olympus. I gave other nice stuff to high school kids interested in photography and darkroom work who could not afford a camera with manual adjustments. All this new stuff is shooting fish in barrel to me because photography started my tech career. There's no time of day for it but I've considered showing my kids how I used a basement bathroom as dark room when I was a teen. I don't know if that would register as a thrill for a generation that plays video games on their mom's phone and computer. Again, enjoy and I hope your husband enjoys his gift.
|
|
|
Post by lindaw on Dec 9, 2012 20:40:32 GMT -5
Thanks. I am still dodgy about the Leica over the Panasonic for the reasons you mentioned, but love the camera on the whole. I might regret spending the extra couple hundred but after buying my husband's Nikon, well, kind of moot. LOL. He's going to LOVE that camera! Husband wants to buy me a flash to go with the Leica, but I'm hoping to get my old ones working with it, though they won't be TTL; I'll have to do some calculations I guess.
Those Olympus cameras were so nice, weren't they? What camera do you have from '53? I have my grandfather's old polaroid and I'm quite sure I have an SX-70 kicking around somewhere. Good idea giving the cameras to a schools. How long do you think before film is obsolete? Will be a sad day for me. Kodachrome was killer stuff!
My husband does a lot of work with the raw format. He's telling me to shoot raw for exactly the reasons you say.
Have you used one of those wireless data cards? I'm thinking of buying one. Will be nice to be able to shoot an image or two to my iPad. You have the new 3 right? Photos will look great on it I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by Holy Schist on Dec 9, 2012 23:09:08 GMT -5
Thanks. I am still dodgy about the Leica over the Panasonic for the reasons you mentioned, but love the camera on the whole. I might regret spending the extra couple hundred but after buying my husband's Nikon, well, kind of moot. LOL. He's going to LOVE that camera! Husband wants to buy me a flash to go with the Leica, but I'm hoping to get my old ones working with it, though they won't be TTL; I'll have to do some calculations I guess. Those Olympus cameras were so nice, weren't they? What camera do you have from '53? I have my grandfather's old polaroid and I'm quite sure I have an SX-70 kicking around somewhere. Good idea giving the cameras to a schools. How long do you think before film is obsolete? Will be a sad day for me. Kodachrome was killer stuff! My husband does a lot of work with the raw format. He's telling me to shoot raw for exactly the reasons you say. Have you used one of those wireless data cards? I'm thinking of buying one. Will be nice to be able to shoot an image or two to my iPad. You have the new 3 right? Photos will look great on it I'm sure. The 1953 (pretty sure) camera is a Bolsey. It was a small US-made 35mm camera in an age when most were big or different film size. Maybe I should have kept more stuff but my digital SLR system is like shooting fish in a barrel and the two film cameras left are also ties to my father who died young and my wife's aunt who died young and how she got the OM and its lenses. I don't personally use wifi cards. I share gear with my customer who has a studio. One Canon back there has wireless. I use low cost fast memory cards bought as cheap as possible. You might have a hard time with an old flash because modern cameras have pre-flash for their metering. That has also rendered some wireless slave units not part of a modern control system obsolete. Regardless don't forget the importance of flash and a tripod. Spend time with the new camera manual at bedside and breakfast table if nothing else so you're ready to get the most out of it!
|
|