"One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.
All things considered, though, the Lumix proved to be a worthy travel companion. So good, in fact, that my Nikon D60 DSLR found its way out of the camera bag only one day during an entire week of sightseeing."
From The New York Times November 5, 2009
Personal Tech A Camera Delivers The Joys of Auto Pilot By RIK FAIRLIE
> "One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is > weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot > cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.
> All things considered, though, the Lumix proved to be a worthy travel > companion. So good, in fact, that my Nikon D60 DSLR found its way out of > the camera bag only one day during an entire week of sightseeing."
Sadly, nothing on D P Review showing what the high ISO performance might be like:
Pansonic have a long history of cameras like this, and I was very pleased with the FZ5 I used some time back, so I wish them well with this model. I think the EVF is about 512 x 384 pixels or a shade bigger (201.6K pixels claimed) which might be a welcome improvement.
> "Dudley Hanks" <dha...@blind-apertures.ca> wrote in message > news:Q%DIm.51602$PH1.33535@edtnps82... >> "One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is >> weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot >> cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.
>> All things considered, though, the Lumix proved to be a worthy travel >> companion. So good, in fact, that my Nikon D60 DSLR found its way out of >> the camera bag only one day during an entire week of sightseeing."
> Sadly, nothing on D P Review showing what the high ISO performance might > be like:
> Pansonic have a long history of cameras like this, and I was very pleased > with the FZ5 I used some time back, so I wish them well with this model. I > think the EVF is about 512 x 384 pixels or a shade bigger (201.6K pixels > claimed) which might be a welcome improvement.
> Cheers, > David
According to the reviewer, the lowlight performance, generally, was good. But, it's not exactly an indepth critique...
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:33:36 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" <dha...@blind-apertures.ca> wrote in <Q%DIm.51602$PH1.33535@edtnps82>:
>"One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is >weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot >cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.
It may have been a defective battery -- my DMC-FZ28 is very similar right down to the same battery, and I've yet to run out of power in a day of shooting, even with heavy use of flash.
-- Best regards, John
Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
In article <c166f5dn9dqfhk031kcrtcjagbp637c...@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote: > >"One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is > >weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot > >cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.
> It may have been a defective battery
always an excuse.
> -- my DMC-FZ28 is very similar > right down to the same battery, and I've yet to run out of power in a > day of shooting, even with heavy use of flash.
then you don't shoot much not to mention that it's a different camera with different power demands. panasonic claims 470 shots for the fz35 which i consider to be 'especially brief.' real world shooting is probably less.
> In article <c166f5dn9dqfhk031kcrtcjagbp637c...@4ax.com>, John Navas > <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> >"One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is >> >weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot >> >cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.
>> It may have been a defective battery
> always an excuse.
>> -- my DMC-FZ28 is very similar >> right down to the same battery, and I've yet to run out of power in a >> day of shooting, even with heavy use of flash.
> then you don't shoot much not to mention that it's a different camera > with different power demands. panasonic claims 470 shots for the fz35 > which i consider to be 'especially brief.' real world shooting is > probably less.
And, that rating will be for shooting without flash or active rear display. With heavy flash usage, half the rating. Add in the display, and you're probably down to just over a hundred shots, if that.
In article <D1FIm.51605$PH1.48102@edtnps82>, Dudley Hanks
<dha...@blind-apertures.ca> wrote: > And, that rating will be for shooting without flash or active rear display. > With heavy flash usage, half the rating. Add in the display, and you're > probably down to just over a hundred shots, if that.
i doubt it's that low, but even if it does get its rated 400+ photos, a typical dslr gets 1000-2000 or more. that may seem like a lot of photos but as someone who does a lot of panoramas, one 'scene' can easily be 20-50 shots. it adds up fast.
>> panasonic claims 470 shots for the fz35 >> which i consider to be 'especially brief.' real world >> shooting is >> probably less.
> And, that rating will be for shooting without flash or active > rear > display. With heavy flash usage, half the rating. Add in the > display, and you're probably down to just over a hundred shots, > if > that.
They do say in the press release that those 470 shots are according to CIPA standard. IIRC, that's with flash on every alternate shot, 10 seconds ON period for each shot and one full extension and retraction of the lens for each shot (I assume this is not counting lens movements at power on/off). These are vague recollections of the CIPA specs, so please correct me if I got something wrong.
David J Taylor wrote: > "Dudley Hanks" <dha...@blind-apertures.ca> wrote in message > news:Q%DIm.51602$PH1.33535@edtnps82... >> "One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its >> battery >> life is weak. All superzooms consume more power than average >> point-and-shoot cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed >> especially brief. All things considered, though, the Lumix >> proved to be a worthy travel >> companion. So good, in fact, that my Nikon D60 DSLR found its >> way >> out of the camera bag only one day during an entire week of >> sightseeing."
> Sadly, nothing on D P Review showing what the high ISO > performance > might be like:
> Pansonic have a long history of cameras like this, and I was > very > pleased with the FZ5 I used some time back, so I wish them well > with > this model. I think the EVF is about 512 x 384 pixels or a > shade > bigger (201.6K pixels claimed) which might be a welcome > improvement.
That link is to a press release, so it's not likely to show any critical evaluation. I'd also like to know what the noise level is like. I really like my Panas but there's no denying that their noise level is higher than average. I sure wish they'd go back to no more than 8 MP for their small-sensor cameras.
>>> panasonic claims 470 shots for the fz35 >>> which i consider to be 'especially brief.' real world shooting is >>> probably less.
>> And, that rating will be for shooting without flash or active rear >> display. With heavy flash usage, half the rating. Add in the >> display, and you're probably down to just over a hundred shots, if >> that. > They do say in the press release that those 470 shots are according to > CIPA standard. IIRC, that's with flash on every alternate shot, 10 seconds > ON period for each shot and one full extension and retraction of the lens > for each shot (I assume this is not counting lens movements at power > on/off). These are vague recollections of the CIPA specs, so please > correct me if I got something wrong.
I'm not sure how the CIPA standards are determined / implemented. But, I'm guessing that the flash output is not full discharge each time.
Just going by my own experience using cams in low-light, I have yet to use one which achieves the stated number of shots.
I do much / most of my work in low-light, and the flash often is at or near full output. Add in the rear display and I'm lucky to actually fire 1/4 of the CIPA guesstimation. Granted, I tend to take longer framing each shot than most photographers, but I still get a chuckle whenever I read the specs on new cams...
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:33:06 -0500, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote: >In article <c166f5dn9dqfhk031kcrtcjagbp637c...@4ax.com>, John Navas ><spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> >"One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is >> >weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot >> >cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.
>> It may have been a defective battery
>always an excuse.
>> -- my DMC-FZ28 is very similar >> right down to the same battery, and I've yet to run out of power in a >> day of shooting, even with heavy use of flash.
>then you don't shoot much not to mention that it's a different camera >with different power demands. panasonic claims 470 shots for the fz35 >which i consider to be 'especially brief.' real world shooting is >probably less.
Sigh ... the troll who depends on what he reads online rather than relying 1s-hand experience with any equipment at all. Nothing more needs be said.
>>>> panasonic claims 470 shots for the fz35 >>>> which i consider to be 'especially brief.' real world shooting is >>>> probably less.
>>> And, that rating will be for shooting without flash or active rear >>> display. With heavy flash usage, half the rating. Add in the >>> display, and you're probably down to just over a hundred shots, if >>> that. >> They do say in the press release that those 470 shots are according to >> CIPA standard. IIRC, that's with flash on every alternate shot, 10 seconds >> ON period for each shot and one full extension and retraction of the lens >> for each shot (I assume this is not counting lens movements at power >> on/off). These are vague recollections of the CIPA specs, so please >> correct me if I got something wrong.
>I'm not sure how the CIPA standards are determined / implemented. But, I'm >guessing that the flash output is not full discharge each time.
Nor will they compare which batteries they use. Which vary widely from OEM to OEM. Poor testing methods results in garbage in = garbage out.
>Just going by my own experience using cams in low-light, I have yet to use >one which achieves the stated number of shots.
>I do much / most of my work in low-light, and the flash often is at or near >full output. Add in the rear display and I'm lucky to actually fire 1/4 of >the CIPA guesstimation. Granted, I tend to take longer framing each shot >than most photographers, but I still get a chuckle whenever I read the specs >on new cams...
> "One of my few complaints about the DMC-FZ35 is that its battery life is > weak. All superzooms consume more power than average point-and-shoot > cameras, but the FZ35's battery life seemed especially brief.
I think most user reviews indicate pretty good battery life on the FZ35. I hope that's right, because I just ordered one yesterday. Based on user reviews, it looks to me like the best of the new superzooms.
I've had an FZ15 for quite a while, and like it better than other superzooms in my experience. The Leica lens is really something, and (unusual for this type of camera) on the FZ15 its max aperture is f/2.8 *all the way*. That is really nice.
>>>>> panasonic claims 470 shots for the fz35 >>>>> which i consider to be 'especially brief.' real world >>>>> shooting is >>>>> probably less.
>>>> And, that rating will be for shooting without flash or >>>> active rear >>>> display. With heavy flash usage, half the rating. Add in >>>> the >>>> display, and you're probably down to just over a hundred >>>> shots, if >>>> that. >>> They do say in the press release that those 470 shots are >>> according >>> to CIPA standard. IIRC, that's with flash on every alternate >>> shot, >>> 10 seconds ON period for each shot and one full extension and >>> retraction of the lens for each shot (I assume this is not >>> counting >>> lens movements at power on/off). These are vague >>> recollections of >>> the CIPA specs, so please correct me if I got something >>> wrong.
>> I'm not sure how the CIPA standards are determined / >> implemented. >> But, I'm guessing that the flash output is not full discharge >> each >> time.
> Nor will they compare which batteries they use. Which vary > widely > from OEM to OEM. Poor testing methods results in garbage in = > garbage > out.
I'd think that the question of brand doesn't arise with proprietary batteries. And there has to be *some* standard for testing to be able to provide a technical specification. The alternative would be a test result published with something like "under normal shooting conditions" which will be so vague and so variable as to be even more meaningless - for publication on a specs sheet.
For real world trials, well, that's what independent reviewers are for. But the results would hardly be precise enough to qualify for inclusion on a specs sheet.
If we suspect or can prove that the manufacturer lied about the test results, that's a different matter.
Even with cameras using AA batteries, a test would have to be run with a popular brand while assuming that it has approximately the stated capacity. Otherwise, the particular batteries used would also have to be tested outside the camera and the shot capacity statement would have to be accompanied by something like "This camera was tested with battery model X, production batch Y and serial #Z, which was tested to have xx% of the nominal mAh capacity"
> I've had an FZ15 for quite a while, and like it better than > other > superzooms in my experience. The Leica lens is really > something, and > (unusual for this type of camera) on the FZ15 its max aperture > is > f/2.8 *all the way*. That is really nice.
After keeping an FZ20 and an FZ30 together for quite some time, I had a chance to sell either of them for a good price last year. It was tough deciding which one to keep. I like the fast turn-on, ring zoom, swivel LCD, etc of the FZ30, but I also preferred the constant f/2.8 and overall out-of the-box image quality of the FZ20. In the end, I reluctantly chose to sell the FZ20. I really miss the constant f/2.8.
>> I've had an FZ15 for quite a while, and like it better than other >> superzooms in my experience. The Leica lens is really something, and >> (unusual for this type of camera) on the FZ15 its max aperture is >> f/2.8 *all the way*. That is really nice.
> After keeping an FZ20 and an FZ30 together for quite some time, I had a > chance to sell either of them for a good price last year. It was tough > deciding which one to keep. I like the fast turn-on, ring zoom, swivel > LCD, etc of the FZ30, but I also preferred the constant f/2.8 and overall > out-of the-box image quality of the FZ20. In the end, I reluctantly chose > to sell the FZ20. I really miss the constant f/2.8.
The FZ30 is impressive, and the FZ50 too, of course. I've been following FZ50s from time to time on eBay, in hopes of getting a really nice one at a bargain price. Alas, there are seldom if ever any real bargains on eBay; it's too efficient a market. FZ50s in excellent to mint condition seem to go for $350 to $400 or more, probably a fair enough price. I don't know what they last sold for new but I assume it was well above that.
I'm wondering if Panasonic will produce a successor to the FZ30/FZ50.
|
