Lumix ZS3 zoom showing off

[Greg04]

http://greg09.zenfolio.com/p183732326

Just a few shots showing the capabilities of this digicam

 

[DaWhim]

this is so gonna be my next p&s camera!

 

[DaWhim]

man...i ordered this. mainly because seeing the zoom-ability in here!

 

[Mant]

Wow. I had discounted this one because of the f/3.3 lens. I may have to revisit it. How are low-light photos?

 

[Gooberlx2]

Wow. I had discounted this one because of the f/3.3 lens. I may have to revisit it. How are low-light photos?

lowlight is passable...nothing spectacular, but not horrible either. High-ISO details look like water color at 100%...but I'm rarely looking at a 10mpx pocket cam image at 100%. Some other pocket cams are better. Honestly though lowlight performance just isn't a feature I look for in cameras this size.

I took pics and video at the Nuggets game tonight, and I think they turned out great. That 12x zoom and HD video is fuggin' awesome.

 

[hackmole]

Won't you have trouble with super large file sizes with the HD video at 60 frames per second. And the ZS3 also includes stereo sound, making file sizes even bigger. Like I wouldn't want to fill up my entire 8 gig memory stick for only 5 minutes of video.

The Lumix ZR1 is more compact and seems better for carrying around. It still has 8 zoom but no HD video just 640 by 480.

A guy at a camera shop today told me that Canon and Panasonic make the best cameras for image quality. I asked him what about all the other cameras like Nikon, Pentax, Fuji, Samsung, Olympus, Sony. There couldn't be that much difference. He said, there is.

I like the Nikon s630, very compact with 7 zoom, highly rated for low light photos and includes HD video. But if the images are not as good, then I don't know.

It's like you need to buy 5 or 10 different cameras that you would consider, take the same photos with each of them in different light settings and then pick the camera that has the best quality photos that you like the best and take all the rest back.

 

[Gooberlx2]

A 4gb card records a few hundred images. My vids seem to be ~9.5min/gb.

There's wierd trickery going on with the 30fps/60fps stuff. It appears the sensor grabs video at 30fps, but the cam encodes at 60fps in attempt to be AVC standards compliant...or something. Here's a discussion.

Anyway, opening a raw vid with mediainfo says:

Frame rate                        : 29.970 fps
Original frame rate              : 59.940 fps

 

[ElFenix]

A guy at a camera shop today told me that Canon and Panasonic make the best cameras for image quality. I asked him what about all the other cameras like Nikon, Pentax, Fuji, Samsung, Olympus, Sony. There couldn't be that much difference. He said, there is.

other than the occasional sony or fuji most tiny cameras other than canon and panasonic are universally panned. i've never heard of a nikon compact being praised for low light performance. that said, i haven't been paying attention in the last year and maybe sony's new sensor has worked wonders for them.

i don't know why dpreview didn't do another series of roundups this year. that was about the perfect format for tiny cameras.

 

[MotF Bane]

That's impressive.

 

[shiner]

other than the occasional sony or fuji most tiny cameras other than canon and panasonic are universally panned. i've never heard of a nikon compact being praised for low light performance. that said, i haven't been paying attention in the last year and maybe sony's new sensor has worked wonders for them.

i don't know why dpreview didn't do another series of roundups this year. that was about the perfect format for tiny cameras.

The Nikon mentioned above is universally panned. Haven't read a single positive review of it.

 

[martensite]

Has anyone used the ZS1 (TZ6 in my neck of the woods) which is a slightly watered down version of the ZS3 (TZ7) in terms of HD recording and minor features, but is nearly the same otherwise?

I was thinking of recommending one of these two models to a friend, since my first choice, the FZ35/30 superzoom, is out of his budget.

 

[martensite]

other than the occasional sony or fuji most tiny cameras other than canon and panasonic are universally panned.

Very true. Canon and Panasonic are the best options in the P&S segment. The FZ28 that I bought for my sister in '08 is really excellent and has produced some spectacular photos in the last 1+ year even under harsh conditions (deserts to high altitude). If I ever buy another P&S, it's going to be an FZ.

I used to have a 4 mp Coolpix 4300 a few years ago (still works, but it's with a friend now) that produced some very decent images in it's time. But Nikon seem to have decided not to pursue the P&S market seriously; none of their current models are worth considering in terms of IQ.

Also, given the staggering number of options in the P&S segment currently, buying a camera that does justice to it's price and specs can be a daunting task. Narrowing it down to just two major contenders makes the job easier

Picking a dslr is so much easier: K-7, 7D or D300s

 

[alyarb]

A 4gb card records a few hundred images. My vids seem to be ~9.5min/gb.

There's wierd trickery going on with the 30fps/60fps stuff. It appears the sensor grabs video at 30fps, but the cam encodes at 60fps in attempt to be AVC standards compliant...or something. Here's a discussion.

Anyway, opening a raw vid with mediainfo says:

Frame rate                        : 29.970 fps
Original frame rate              : 59.940 fps

did you stop after reading that post? because if you read on there is a guy who says he sees 60 progressive and unique frames in virtualdub.

 

[Gooberlx2]

did you stop after reading that post? because if you read on there is a guy who says he sees 60 progressive and unique frames in virtualdub.

Yeah I saw that. I haven't verified it myself. I could be wrong though.

edit: I loaded a vid into Avidemux, and it does seem to be 60p frames. A different progressive scene for each frame. So...I dunno. Maybe it's 30fps and every other frame is interpolated somehow (as the posters in the thread suggest, even the one that says he saw 60p came around to it)...but I don't see any interlacing artifacts or anything. Maybe the interlacing algorithms are a lot better than they used to be?

*shrug* Whatever, it works and looks great.

 

[matas]

that is insane. Was like a special lens used to take those pics or just a straight up camera by itself?

 

[ElFenix]

Picking a dslr is so much easier: K-7, 7D or D300s

if pentax would stick the k-x's sensor in the K7's body (K7.2?) it'd be harder to dismiss.

maybe olympus will stick whatever sensor is coming in the panasonic G2 (G1 has been discontinued, apparently) into an E-5 and have something fairly competitive as well.


the D300 has some serious staying power for a camera in the consumer electronics age. nIkon really hit that one out of the park

 

[Gooberlx2]

if pentax would stick the k-x's sensor in the K7's body (K7.2?) it'd be harder to dismiss.

maybe olympus will stick whatever sensor is coming in the panasonic G2 (G1 has been discontinued, apparently) into an E-5 and have something fairly competitive as well.


the D300 has some serious staying power for a camera in the consumer electronics age. nIkon really hit that one out of the park

I'm loving my K-7. It's a HUGE step up from the original Canon DRebel (300D). The lower noise sensor of the K-X would certainly be nice, but a lot (not all) of that disparity is mitigated by shooting RAW.

My guess is the next iteration (probably another 1.5 years away) will have a much improved, non-samsung sensor.

 

[extra]

I'm loving my K-7. It's a HUGE step up from the original Canon DRebel (300D). The lower noise sensor of the K-X would certainly be nice, but a lot (not all) of that disparity is mitigated by shooting RAW.

My guess is the next iteration (probably another 1.5 years away) will have a much improved, non-samsung sensor.

Meh, it's not like the K7's IQ is bad either. It's not that good at high iso...but at low iso it's good...imho at base iso it looks better than the K-X and captures a little more detail, so meh. Just depends on what you use more I guess. I think the K7 is great for someone who does a lot of hiking or outdoors stuff. The body is really well built and solid and it has just about every feature imaginable hehe...

I haven't actually played with a K-X, but it looks like a damn nice low price body. (Just fyi I shoot Canon--a 7d and a 450d). However the lack of af points in the viewfinder would be a deal breaker for me though I think.

The K-X's high iso has a dirty little secret though. It only looks clean because the camera is throwing away a TON of color information. I don't know if this is software NR or on-chip hardware RAW NR (that sony has been known to use in the past).

For example, I've seen the claim that the K-X's iso 6400 is better than the D300s iso 6400...and on the surface it does look a bit cleaner...however...look at this:
Nikon: http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/D300S/FULLRES/D300ShSLI6400_NR_NORM.JPG
K-X: http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/KX/FULLRES/KXhSLI06400_NR2D.JPG

The proportional scale on this image illustrates what the K-X does. The blue letters on the scale (which are still blue in the Nikon image, like they should be) are now black. The chroma info is completely destroyed.

Or compare it's iso 12.8k output vs the 7d's for example...same thing with the blue letters there. Look at the red letters on the bottle that say "Samuel Smith's is a small, independent British brewery". The red letters have been completely desaturated in the K-X image.

So it's not that the sensor is awesome at high iso unfortunately. In reality there is some very very destructive noise reduction going on behind the scenes in the chroma channel. In most cases it looks like the output is pretty good though, but still--people should know what is really going on. I don't know whether this NR is applied to the RAW files or not though (like some Sony cameras do/did).

 

[davestar]

My TZ3 was recently drowned, so I was about to pick up the TZ7/ZS3 but then the Sony HV5V and Casio EX-FH100 were announced at CES. If either one of those cameras improve upon the ZS3's low light performance while also adding manual controls (and RAW support in the case of the Casio), I'm definitely jumping the Panasonic ship. Matching the Leica optics is probably going to be a challenge for those new cameras, though.

Then again, there's always the update to the ZS3 that will likely be announced at the end of the month...

 

[Gooberlx2]

eh, it's not like the K7's IQ is bad either. It's not that good at high iso...but at low iso it's good...imho at base iso it looks better than the K-X and captures a little more detail, so meh.

I totally agree. I got the K7 exactly for hiking and shooting in the mountains. I think its detail retention bests most of the competition. Like I said, I love it.