well, you read the review so you probably can judge by yourself from what you will be using it for.
Reviews of the FZ-18
- Thread starter p7m13
- Start date
- Status
It sure is a good thing to go for the dslr if you have the cash for it. Until such time you get to realize (and there will surely come those times) when you wished you didn't have to lug around all those different lenses just to come up with the photo op requirement at any particular time and place or event. (sometimes, a need for WA but u brought a prime, sometimes a need for tele but you brought a wide, or sometimes you bought everything but you have to change). That's when you would have wished you got an FZ18. Not unless you got the 28 - 300mm (with IS) on your dslr...some $1000 more in addition to the kit. Please check out dpreview.com, forums, Panasonic talk...thread title "FZ18 vs D40x". Here the author showed shots from both the FZ18 and the Nikon D40x which he asked for the readers to tell each one apart. Which one from which camera? Then you decide from there.
Well you only have to lug around 1 lens if you want to compare "range" cause the tamron 17-250mm covers almost all the zoom range the fz18 can give plus give a 28mm wideangle which im sure lots of people are willing to trade 35mm for a 28mm for a little less zoom. The d40 is so small you can't possibly "lug" it around. Plus a slr is a long term investment where you can upgrade when you feel like yore ready for it without selling your camera. Don't forget the huge plus that you get a proper aperture control unlike the f/8 limit on the fz18 which is ridiculous. Plus as I said before you don't need that kinda range unless youre gonna do bird photography then you need something like the 28-300. If you don't want to spend much the kit lens does fine for starters and you can choose what kinda field you wanna dive into e.g wideangle, telephoto or macro etc.
Since the D40 is so small and light, a normal "consumer" tripod would hold it well without shake and take pictures that are way better than handheld with IS. People rely too much on IS nowadays and don't realize that IS is just not the holy grail of photography. Even if you don't move, the subjects you are taking are still moving so you still get a blur shot in the end so you end up highering your iso and realize when you get home that the shot had too much noise and the picture has to be degraded alot to remove all that noise.
As I said, the shots were easily distinguishable http://www.flickr.com/photos/7131002@N05/ the thunder bird on the d40x has a "proper" exposure and "accurate" color reproduction as compared to the fz18 due to the fact that the Nikon has a larger image sensor than the fz18 which only uses a "compact" equivalent size sensor. If you look carefully at the picture, the sky of the fz18 highlights is already blown out and the plane is still underexposed while the d40x exposed the plane properly without blowing any highlights on the sky as the fz18 does not have enough dynamic range. (there you go solid proof)
I think panasonic overpriced this thing so much you might as well get a d40 or a d40x. Cmon bring it on.....
Since the D40 is so small and light, a normal "consumer" tripod would hold it well without shake and take pictures that are way better than handheld with IS. People rely too much on IS nowadays and don't realize that IS is just not the holy grail of photography. Even if you don't move, the subjects you are taking are still moving so you still get a blur shot in the end so you end up highering your iso and realize when you get home that the shot had too much noise and the picture has to be degraded alot to remove all that noise.
As I said, the shots were easily distinguishable http://www.flickr.com/photos/7131002@N05/ the thunder bird on the d40x has a "proper" exposure and "accurate" color reproduction as compared to the fz18 due to the fact that the Nikon has a larger image sensor than the fz18 which only uses a "compact" equivalent size sensor. If you look carefully at the picture, the sky of the fz18 highlights is already blown out and the plane is still underexposed while the d40x exposed the plane properly without blowing any highlights on the sky as the fz18 does not have enough dynamic range. (there you go solid proof)
I think panasonic overpriced this thing so much you might as well get a d40 or a d40x. Cmon bring it on.....
Why are you guys arguing about this? There is a time and place for every camera and FZ18 do fulfill specific needs... 
Mind you, some ppl do want to consider the following:
1) Handling (It's not just the weight yeah)
2) Framing (The FZ18 has a 100% viewfinder/LCD coverage)
3) "LiveView" - You can more or less see the result prior to pressing the shutter button for the FZ18 and adjust accordingly, can that be done with the D40?
A lot of ppl rely on IS/VR on SLRs too you know ;p
Edit: I saw the link given, impressive capability for the Pany! Loving it XD
Mind you, some ppl do want to consider the following:
1) Handling (It's not just the weight yeah)
2) Framing (The FZ18 has a 100% viewfinder/LCD coverage)
3) "LiveView" - You can more or less see the result prior to pressing the shutter button for the FZ18 and adjust accordingly, can that be done with the D40?
A lot of ppl rely on IS/VR on SLRs too you know ;p
Edit: I saw the link given, impressive capability for the Pany! Loving it XD
Why are you guys arguing about this? There is a time and place for every camera and FZ18 do fulfill specific needs...
Mind you, some ppl do want to consider the following:
1) Handling (It's not just the weight yeah)
2) Framing (The FZ18 has a 100% viewfinder/LCD coverage)
3) "LiveView" - You can more or less see the result prior to pressing the shutter button for the FZ18 and adjust accordingly, can that be done with the D40?
A lot of ppl rely on IS/VR on SLRs too you know ;p
Edit: I saw the link given, impressive capability for the Pany! Loving it XD
The feel of the slr is much less cramped than the fz18, my friend has a fz18 so I tried it before.(Your fingers crumple behind the protruding grip for the camera dude)
Cmon the viewfinder in the slr is accurate enough I don't see a point getting exactly 100% in exchange for viewing quality which unlike an slr(you get what you see) and the fz18 cannot supply. You can even have a depth of field preview on the d40 which is important for composing shots and the fz18 "live view" is unable to do.
As I said in my earlier post and im repeating this again, "live view" should only be used in cases when you are unable to bend down to a certain angle, in most cases you are able to view the viewfinder if you bend down and you should always try to use the viewfinder as when you press the camera against your face, you steady the camera at the same time, giving you a better chance to get a sharp shot as compared to looking at the live view in your shaking hands.....
Yes they rely on IS/VR but it does not help significantly that you can throw away the tripod. Ive seen the fz18 IS mechanism shake the picture while its on a tripod -_- I had to turn it off to stop the shot from shaking(the tripod was a ballhead so no flimsy tripod issues it held my slr with a 100-400mm before without slipping or shaking...please don't argue about this thing) try it for yourself I know about the mode 1 mode 2 thing...... and the thing was on mode 1 suprisingly. Which goes to show the mechanism does help you to drop the speed by juz a little but not very significant.
And panning can be done by almost any camera you just need to get the angle right.
Plus I forgot to add one more thing, when I was using my friends fz18, I noticed that the flash was seriously underpowered and there was no flash expansion slot. Even the canon G9 has a slot for the flash. Plus the thing about the dynamic range that I had explained earlier. If it was priced around $400 I would say its worth your cash and is a lovelyl camera for that price put put it slightly below a d40, then its too overpriced for the equipment its giving you plus the d40 retain more resale value as compared to the fz18.
Ive covered all the grounds, give me something new, not repetitive like the live view thing....... Im sorry if I sound hostile but just trying to prove my point.
Well the first point I would think that it is highly subjective lar, so I don't think anyone is right or wrong here...
Actually with regard to the 2nd point, my personal experience is that, what you see on the viewfinder may not be what you get in the end!
This was rather emphasised to me when I tried out a friend's 300D during an event two years ago... yes, everything looks nice on the viewfinder but the end results (P mode? heh) speaks otherwise.
I still believe in proper framing and composition which will speak volumes above image quality. How many shots have you seen that are clear and sharp but lack everything else?
I suspect that you have a very narrow-minded view of how LiveView should be used. For my photography, it helps me preview on the imagery I want, and adjust accordingly.
For the IS/VR issue, I may not have been clear on this. Well, because you say about people relying too much on image stabilization, what say you to the SLR peeps who lug along their IS/VR lenses? I do apologise if I didn't make it clear heh
And lastly, the D40 and the D40x does not have a DOF preview at all (Yeap, I am getting a DSLR next month so I was doing my research on which cameras to buy)
PS. I do realize that the tone of your posting is rather confrontational, although you probably are a bit too young to realise it. It's okay lar, at the end of the day, as long as everyone is happy taking photos, why bother with the camera used right?
well, prosumer and dSLR got nothing to compare with...
some just prefer the way prosumer is (compact, light, no trouble with changing lens... etc)
while on the other hand some will take dSLR anytime for the speed, ability to "customise" your setup, image quality... and the list just goes on...
I wun say which is better, if im serious, i go for dSLR otherwise i think Prosumer or even PnS fit the bill.
some just prefer the way prosumer is (compact, light, no trouble with changing lens... etc)
while on the other hand some will take dSLR anytime for the speed, ability to "customise" your setup, image quality... and the list just goes on...
I wun say which is better, if im serious, i go for dSLR otherwise i think Prosumer or even PnS fit the bill.
Well the first point I would think that it is highly subjective lar, so I don't think anyone is right or wrong here...
Actually with regard to the 2nd point, my personal experience is that, what you see on the viewfinder may not be what you get in the end!
This was rather emphasised to me when I tried out a friend's 300D during an event two years ago... yes, everything looks nice on the viewfinder but the end results (P mode? heh) speaks otherwise.
I still believe in proper framing and composition which will speak volumes above image quality. How many shots have you seen that are clear and sharp but lack everything else?
I suspect that you have a very narrow-minded view of how LiveView should be used. For my photography, it helps me preview on the imagery I want, and adjust accordingly.
For the IS/VR issue, I may not have been clear on this. Well, because you say about people relying too much on image stabilization, what say you to the SLR peeps who lug along their IS/VR lenses? I do apologise if I didn't make it clear heh
And lastly, the D40 and the D40x does not have a DOF preview at all (Yeap, I am getting a DSLR next month so I was doing my research on which cameras to buy)
PS. I do realize that the tone of your posting is rather confrontational, although you probably are a bit too young to realise it. It's okay lar, at the end of the day, as long as everyone is happy taking photos, why bother with the camera used right?
Well what you see in the viewfinder is really what you get according to the framing wise, other settings do come into play too, you have to do way more than just switch to P mode and fire, you have to either have clear in your mind in what depth of field or speed in which you wish to take the photo, only then would what you see in the viewfinder come out in the photo.
I think you should know that by now after 2 years of experience.If you want a proper preview of the photo you can take the photo first then review on what you want to change, you can delete the picture if you want to save space, this isn't film we all know the wonders of digital, plus if you know the importance of the histogram, the shot you took would provide you with a nice chart for you to refer to. From my perspective I think the live view feature is just another nice to have feature, it won't kill your photo output if you don't have one. Purely a nice to have.
I didn't say that it is bad to have image stabilization, I said its nice to have, but not very extremely effective. There's nothing wrong with carrying lenses that have image stabilization but people sometimes tend to think that the feature is some kinda magical shortcut to the perfect photo and they rely too much on it and forget that they still need a decent shutter speed to get a good shot. Most of the newer slr lenses come with IS like it or not.
Well if there is no DOF preview, you can still zoom in on the photo to check it, plus you can more or less standerdise the amount of depth you get as f/8 on a canon is almost the same as f/8 on a nikon lens unlike the pana where f/8 may equal to f/16 or less on a slr and the f/2.8 isn't really f/2.8.
I am sorry if my tone was kinda confrontational but thats just my style of debating :bsmilie:.Yeah agree totaly if everyone is happy taking it doesn't matter what cam u use.
Thats what im talking about
For all the powerful features of a slr you only need to pay slightly more than this camera.poweful, but for all the other trouble of changing lenses... etc, it might not fit everyone.Thats what im talking about
its about the same like choosing a MP4 player with HUGE screen yet you only use it to listen to mp3, pretty pointless isn't it? carrying around a huge thingy without even using them.
and yes, im one of those who choose a smaller player over any huge and nice LCD mp4 player as portability is one of my main concern...
About the lens part, please read my previous post ive already mentioned about it.
so what? the weight is still about twice that of the fz18... :dunno:
and yes, changing of lens is just ONE of the con that i mention for dSLR, there are still many more of them for one to avoid getting dSLR. price is another 1 even with the cheapest k100d body + any of the super zoom 18-200 or 18-250.. etc, the cost is still close to 2x of fz18.
Read the part of my post about the kit lens and superzoom. Repeat arguments.... post here when you find something new....
unless you telling me that kit lens offer the same zoom ratio as a 18-200 or 18-250... 1st you talk about those lens, after that kit lens.. :dunno:
and yes, if in this world dSLR is so superior to PnS/Prosumer, why do so many brands (sony, canon, nikon, pana, oly) still produce them?? its simply because the style of using them is MUCH better to the consumer (live-view is one of the attraction)
I explained why extreme zoom is not necessary for the starters (read it carefully again I covered that part already).
Yes were going in a loop again the DSLR is so much more superior and you know it and yet the cost of this prosumer is almost the same as the DSLR which I stated the cons of the prosumer to the dslr to convince you that its not worth buying this camera or even comparing it to the dslr in the first place. Heres another repeat answer to your argument.
They make pns for people who can't bother much about photography and just want to see the picture. Then if youre paying the price for a pns which is almost the same as a dslr, that shows some hint or sign of interest in this hobby and I convincing you why you should get the dslr that is just worth a little more.
The style of prosumers are more oriented for the the people who are just slightly more interested in photography than the common joe so they are fitted with many "fancy" features to attract the buyer. But if the price goes all the way up to almost the price of a DSLR then I say its overpriced and not worth getting. You simply can't compare the prosumer to the dslr's power. I think you guys don't see where im coming from.
unless you can prove that ALL starters do not need the extra zoom from fz18, the price of a dSLR with lenses for the "extra zoom", don mind the extra weight, "Live view". If not I don't see why your explaination could stand for EVERYONE.
and I shall repeat, different people or application have different needs. Prosumer might suit more than a dSLR at many times.
I wun say anymore, if you still can't understand why some prefer prosumer over dSLR, good luck and live with your dSLR. :thumbsup:
and I shall repeat, different people or application have different needs. Prosumer might suit more than a dSLR at many times.
I wun say anymore, if you still can't understand why some prefer prosumer over dSLR, good luck and live with your dSLR. :thumbsup:
As I said you don't understand where im coming from.... im not against why people choose prosumer but if the prosumer price is so close to the dslr you might as well choose another brand or type of prosumer or get the dslr. I think i repeat this like 5 or 6 times already.
And if zoom range is "THAT" important, don't you think all the pns compacts would come with superzooms already? Yet they still have the standard zoom range. That goes to show that super zoom is just another of their "fancy" features to make you pay more there you go proof. Plus live view has been in pns all the while cause they can't see through the lens, I don't see why there is a sudden "live view" feature poping out, its been around for ages... more proof.
Well I do understand why people prefer prosumer but for the price "this" prosumer is a :thumbsd: ultimately if youre serious enough youre still gonna go for the dslr so why make the extra step? Don't get me wrong, I had a lumix superzoom before "mentioned in my previous post" then i made the progress to dslr and I nvr turned back I felt the prosumer was kinda restricted after 1 week and regret buying the prosumer. Just my advice, if you have the budget for this cam, pay a little more for the dslr, trust me its worth it!
OK OK I (and many others) know the the prosumer price is so close to the dslr and you have 1001 justifications for the dslr - but ultimately I (and many others) still like the prosumer and much prefer it over the dslr OK?
Please learn to respect that other people have different views and likes from yours
Chill.. perhaps he is not aware of the effect that his words have caused? ;p
I think all of us here are aware of both type of camera's pros and cons, but hopefully he will get our points too.
Price is not everything!
- Status
Similar threads
