Advise needed - Panasonic DMC-FZ38 or similar

[malente]

Hi,

I've decided to get me a proper camera. I've surfed on the net and the Panasonic DMC-FZ38 seems neat.

Anyone have experience with that camera, or some camera that is similar ("prosumer"), but cheaper/ better/ ...?

I don't want a SLR, as don't want to fuss around with optics. Also no small point & shoot camera.

I'd rather like a camera that has good optics & zoom, for nature shots, macros, full manual control, video (youtube) etc, taking photography a bit more seriously.

I do have a tripod.

Thanks for any pointers.

Mike

 

[mace242]

I was in the same position as you a while ago and bought a fuji finepix 6500fd. Now it was a good camera but as I took more and more pictures I really grew out of it and putchased an SLR.

If you at all think you may progress in what you do reconsider an SLR - if you're doing longer range zoom or really close in macro stuff you may regret not doing so. Some of the cheaper SLRs you can buy with a reasonable lens in a kit and you'll get ok pictures on the auto modes if you don't want to get into all the gubbins.

Also if you're doing nature stuff on a tripod then things like remote shutter triggers may be of use and you may not get that on a non-SLR.

Just some thoughts for you.

 

[Grooveski]

I use one at work sometimes. It has the edge on my own camera(Canon S5IS) in all sorts of ways.

The zoom is stronger, the autofocus works better, the adaptor/filter thread is much more solid than the canon's bayonet-type-thingy and I like the rubbery feel.

It also takes more pixels but the sensor's no bigger. Personaly I find the 8mp of the canon to be fine although having more would give more scope for cropping I suppose.

The things I prefer about the canon are the button layout, menus(both of which could just be because I'm more used to them) and the flip and twist lcd(handy for sitting the camera on rocks if I've no tripod).

Couldn't really say anything about image quality as all I use it for is to take pics of concrete defects in bridges.

Seems a pretty good camera.

 

[malente]

Thanks guys for the input.

mace242 I know exactly what you mean. I still have a very good analogue (as opposed to digital I guess ) SLR with quite good optics (short, tele, normal, fisheye) with filters etc, rather SWMBO has, so if I ever move up I can pick up that. And I don't want to take SWMBOs camera bushcrafting... :twak:

I'd like a take along, digital better-than-point-and-shoot kinda camera, if that makes sense.

Grooveski, thanks for the info. Does it have a remote?

Cheers

Mike

 

[Grooveski]

Does it have a remote?

'Fraid not. Dug out the manual in case it was an option but no mention of them.

 

[brancho]

They are quite nice as far as the limited handling I have had.

Also consider the TZ7

 

[malente]

I was able to handle one in the shop now. And I have to say that I was less impressed once I actually handled it as opposed to when I just read the marketing blurb of it. So I went over to the DSLRs, thinking about mace242's comment and had to grin.

Also, I was able to handle a DSLR from my brother-in-law over the weekend, and he gave some sound advise as well...

To cut a long deliberation process short now I think I'll actually go for a DSLR right away, maybe one of the Canon's (450D or similar), but I really like the Sony Alphas (the A350 in particular)...

 

[SCOMAN]

The Sony's Alpha's does have a pedigree they bought the minolta line as a basis and developed the Alpha. I have the Canon 400D and it's a great camera, I've had it in the desert, up hills and down dales never failed me yet. I've put Sigma lenses on it as I couldn't fork out for Canon ones and IMHO I've captured some great photo's. You can't fail with a Canon. By the way I don't work for them or out!

 

[Jay.in.the.woods]

I'd go for a Cannon like grooveski said good solid camera's that take great photos.

 

[malente]

How about the Nikon D80 with Nikkor 18-200mm VR lens...

 

[East Coaster]

You sure you want to give up on the FZ38?
I got one fairly recently after putting up with a wee compact for a few years and am very impressed. Image quality for me is fantastic, but I'm no expert. These 'bridge' cameras seem to have come a long way over the past couple of years.
I used to have an SLR and find the convenience of not having to cart about the extra weight and bulk and not having to change lenses a huge benefit. I suppose it's just a matter of opinion and I'm not trying to put you off a DSLR if that's what's suitable for you.
What was it about them that you didn't like?

 

[malente]

Hi East Coaster.

It's not that I didn't like it.

I am just getting into all this photography malarkey, and had a chat with a few people that really know the stuff, and most of are of the opinion to get a DSLR body, either new or used off evilbay, plus some good glass (i.e. lenses). I think that's what I'm gonna do.

Reasons are flexibility, like landscape photography, bushcrafty makro, taking family pics (2 toddlers), sports, arty-fary experimenting etc. So I think a bridge camera would be limiting. And for a little bit more I can get a basic DSLR starter set, with room to grow...

Right now I'm pretty much set on Nikon. D5000 or D90. But hey, all is in the air.

Cheers & ATB

Mike

 

[Rumcajs]

First of all, I have to disagree with some folks here. Camera doesn’t take good pictures, photographer does.

Mike, I think first place where you should start your research is dpreview.com, where you get all info you need about all cameras.
Your first choice, Panasonic DMC-FZ38, wasn’t bad.
Pros:
Small, easy to use, image quality, good image quality with high ISO.
Cons:
No proper viewfinder,
Battery life,
4:3 sensor. Some will say no big deal. For me it is because I like my photos in 3:2 format (6” by 4” prints). You lose top, bottom or both edges and have to remember about it when composing your shot.
Sensor size, most DSLR sensors are APS-C. P&S and bridge cameras have even smaller sensors so you lose on picture quality straight away. If your prints are no bigger than 6x4 you don’t have to worry about it but, if you prefer bigger prints, say A3 format DSLR is what you should get.
DSLR is not just camera is a system so you have to really think which brand you buy into.
It is very hard to change brands once you have more gear as it can be really expensive to replace it.
Nikon is very good choice and given D5000 and D90 I would go for D90.
Both cameras are pretty much same when it comes to guts, same sensor, same ISO, WB, metering, shutter speed, autofocus. Both do video
Difference is in viewfinder, D90 has pentaprism which is far better than D5000’s pentamirror, and LCD 3” with 920,000 dots compared to 2.7” with just 230,000 dots. I have big hands and find D90 to be better for me.

Personally I owe PENTAX K10D because it was much cheaper than the other cameras in same class, it’s weather resistant, with built in Shake Reduction so I don’t have to spent fortune on stabilized lenses, and is backward compatible so I can stick every lens Pentax ever produced (some with limitations).

At the end of the day it's just a tool and it is important that it does what you want it to do.

I spent three months researching market and looking for camera that will be best for me and I have what I wanted and I wouldn’t change it.

 

[malente]

First of all, I have to disagree with some folks here. Camera doesn’t take good pictures, photographer does.

Mike, I think first place where you should start your research is dpreview.com, where you get all info you need about all cameras.
Your first choice, Panasonic DMC-FZ38, wasn’t bad.
Pros:
Small, easy to use, image quality, good image quality with high ISO.
Cons:
No proper viewfinder,
Battery life,
4:3 sensor. Some will say no big deal. For me it is because I like my photos in 3:2 format (6” by 4” prints). You lose top, bottom or both edges and have to remember about it when composing your shot.
Sensor size, most DSLR sensors are APS-C. P&S and bridge cameras have even smaller sensors so you lose on picture quality straight away. If your prints are no bigger than 6x4 you don’t have to worry about it but, if you prefer bigger prints, say A3 format DSLR is what you should get.
DSLR is not just camera is a system so you have to really think which brand you buy into.
It is very hard to change brands once you have more gear as it can be really expensive to replace it.
Nikon is very good choice and given D5000 and D90 I would go for D90.
Both cameras are pretty much same when it comes to guts, same sensor, same ISO, WB, metering, shutter speed, autofocus. Both do video
Difference is in viewfinder, D90 has pentaprism which is far better than D5000’s pentamirror, and LCD 3” with 920,000 dots compared to 2.7” with just 230,000 dots. I have big hands and find D90 to be better for me.

Personally I owe PENTAX K10D because it was much cheaper than the other cameras in same class, it’s weather resistant, with built in Shake Reduction so I don’t have to spent fortune on stabilized lenses, and is backward compatible so I can stick every lens Pentax ever produced (some with limitations).

At the end of the day it's just a tool and it is important that it does what you want it to do.

I spent three months researching market and looking for camera that will be best for me and I have what I wanted and I wouldn’t change it.

Thanks for your reply!

I will need to have a look at the Pentax!

At the moment, I'm reading a lot about photography, especially cameras, and I think I have read every review on dpreview there is lol. Also, cameralabs is very good also, I've read every article there too!

The thing is, it's all theory for me, and half of it doesn't (yet?) make sense to me. There are tons of specs to compare, yet I have no clue what will be the important specs for me. And I won't know that until I have handled a camera (any camera, be it bridge or DSLR) for at least a few months. Catch 22.

Also the idea to buy into a system with the switching costs associated to switching the more lenses and accessories you've accumulated (bloddy hell are flashes expensive!) doesn't make it easier, and steers me towards one of the big two, i.e. Canon or Nikon.

I'm planning to buy the camera in January or so, so I still got some time (and a few days off work) to go to shops and pick up different cameras etc.

jambowl you are quite right that the camera is just a tool, and good photography comes from being a good photographer, which is essentially a combination of talent and skill. I don't know about my talent... I am of the opinion to get the right tool for the job to learn the skills properly. Talent comes by itself

Mike

PS I've also written a few deliberating posts on my blog for anyone to care to have a look... (should be uploaded and up to date later tonight)

 

[malente]

Blog now up to date with my DSLR-related thoughts.

 

[Rumcajs]

It looks like you've set your mind on D5000. Not sure about that but still believe Nikon is very good choice.

 

[malente]

I'll keep you posted

 

[malente]

Oh well. I finally took the plunge, and bought a camera after Christmas. It's a Nikon D90 with Sigma 28-70mm lens, off Evilbay, but mint condition. This is going to be interesting...

I'll post a review/ firt impressions at a later date.

 

[Rumcajs]

Congratulations on your purchase.
Have fun with it.

 

[malente]

Cheers! I am a very happy chappy lol