Good compact

[left210]

Panasonic has announced two new TZ series cameras. TZ2 and TZ3. Haven't had a chance to get all the info but one thing interesting is they have changed the zoom range. They are 10x zoom

The zoom on the TZ1 is 35-350mm zoom. The new ones will be 28-280mm zoom.

So is this an upgrade for the TZ3 or a downgrade. I was considering the TZ1 but not sure if I should hold out for the TZ3.

 

[jann1033]

if you are concerned with the noise issues of high iso i would check out the samples at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/
he does side by side comparisons and it's easier to tell the difference since some use really heavy noise reduction to make "better" shots... you have to decide if you hate the way it looks or not

and to some of the posters
and BTW hello there are some canon users on this site who don't really appreciate you slamming our cameras...we don't do that to you.. it's not our fault you got inferior cameras and are trying to overcompensate, (oh wait was that a slam????) right now we might be in the minority on here but the tide will turn again buckaroos


seriously though you make an investment when you buy a dslr and right now with pentax your investment stops at entry level body. what if you want to progress beyond that? maybe someday they will produce a pro level camera maybe not, just know your lenses are not going to be very useful if you can't find a better body to fit them. i have never seen a review/comparison between the $1000+ L canon line( with IS ) and the cheaper pentax line which might be an interesting comparison...even though some of their lenses creep up pretty close to that mark as well (ie the 100 macro is like $800 i think) and just glancing quickly i noticed a number of their zooms don't have a better aperture than 4-5.6 so that is really closer to non L canon which is way under $1000 with IS ie $350-500 or 600)

 

[ukcatfan]

and to some of the posters
and BTW hello there are some canon users on this site who don't really appreciate you slamming our cameras...we don't do that to you.. it's not our fault you got inferior cameras and are trying to overcompensate, (oh wait was that a slam????)

Don't get upset with me! ( I know you are not) I was asked why I didn't go with the XT or a Nikon, so I shared my opinions. Let me elaborate some on my earlier comments. I actually love Canons and Nikons (sorry Groucho). I am just disappointed by the Rebel line. They could do so much more with it, but then that would hurt the higher end sales. The Rebel XT felt like an upgraded "S" series to me (i.e. it felt like an overgrown p&s). The Nikon and Pentax felt like true SLRs to me. The ergonomics were not a deal killer for me though. There were many other considerations.

I knew that my available funds would limit me to the kit for a basic zoom for at least a year (BTW, I mostly shoot wide, so not a cramp in my style). I personally feel that the Pentax kit beats the Nikon and blows away the Canon. Don't be offended by my review of it. Canon knows that it is sub-par and they want it that way. C & N really do not want someone to stick with a kit lens. They have the market strength to take this position and force another sale of an upgraded lens. What % of Canon users stick with just the kit? I doubt it is very high. Pentax is trying to gain market share and are willing to throw you a bone and give up that possible right away lens sale to get their foot in your door. Besides, my kit only cost me $17 over the body alone. That is the best camera deal I have ever made.

Also, for someone like me that does not plan a bunch of new lens purchases, it is tough to pass up the built in IS of the K100D. I could never have convinced the DW that I needed a $500+ IS lens. If I hit the lottery, I would still have a tough time talking her into it.

The MP race was never even thrown into my consideration. I was happy with the 3MP of my S1 IS. My 6MP is plenty for me even with aggressive cropping.

If I had twice the $$ to spend when I bought my K100D, I would probably have the Canon 30D or Nikon D80 right now. Possibly even a Sony would have been considered. If it were right now, the Pentax K10D would be my choice at that level, but it would be a tougher decision.

right now we might be in the minority on here but the tide will turn again buckaroos

You are not the minority, we Pentaxians are just long winded!

Like I said, we all have nice cameras, it is just a matter of personal preferences.

Kevin

 

[ukcatfan]

seriously though you make an investment when you buy a dslr and right now with pentax your investment stops at entry level body. what if you want to progress beyond that? maybe someday they will produce a pro level camera maybe not, just know your lenses are not going to be very useful if you can't find a better body to fit them. i have never seen a review/comparison between the $1000+ L canon line( with IS ) and the cheaper pentax line which might be an interesting comparison...even though some of their lenses creep up pretty close to that mark as well (ie the 100 macro is like $800 i think) and just glancing quickly i noticed a number of their zooms don't have a better aperture than 4-5.6 so that is really closer to non L canon which is way under $1000 with IS ie $350-500 or 600)

I see how it is now Jann, you edit your post and add on another paragraph about Pentax after I hit the reply button...

You are correct that right now there is no pro Pentax, but the K10D is not entry level. It is at the 30D and D80 level. If Pentax comes out with a K1D (or whatever name), then it should be at the low side of pro level at a minimum. BTW, there is a pro out there using a K10D right now. He is over on the DPReview boards I think.

Even if Pentax abandons the line, I am only out about $600 for my entire lineup. I have three lenses and the body. I will likely add another $400-500 over the next two years or so, but even at $1,000 invested, I am not in too deep if I switch to C or N in the future. That said, I think Pentax is really giving C&N a run for their money at the two bottom tiers. Hopefully they will respond with more/better features for less $. Competition is great for us consumers.

Also, there is new and improved Pentax glass ready to come out.

Kevin

 

[jann1033]

really Kevin i didn't see your post before i added the pentax paragraph...i was to busy checking out pentax lenses since i have never priced them and wanted to correct groucho's obviously wrong thinking ( ) just teasing groucho

 

[Groucho]

Ouch, looks like we hit a raw spot with Jann. I promise that it wasn't intentional! We can still cure you of that nasty "C***n" infection that you're stricken with.

Pentax has some "Limited" lenses which are their top-line ones, comparable or better to the Canon "L" glass. Nearly all their primes are generally considered some of the finest optically out there, and Pentax does make a professional camera - a medium-format film one. (What "true" pro would be caught dead with a mere 35mm or small-sensor DSLR? ) Their medium-format DSLR is announced and coming - but of course, that's going for a different market than the $1,500-2,000 "pro" DSLRs.

You can also find any number of superb older Pentax-mount lenses for sale on eBay - but you'll pay a lot more today than you would have two years ago!

My point was IS in the body vs IS in the lens. You'll probably pay at least 2x as much for an IS lens vs the same lens without IS and I'm not convinced that in the real world, one system has got any real big advantage over the other in terms of functionality. (On paper, in-lens wins at long zooms - but in the real world, they both seem to work pretty well from what I've read.) I think IS in the body is a much better option for the average consumer.

I have also said that I think it's only a matter of time until Canon and Nikon begin offering IS in the body, especially as they implement dust-removal - shaking the lens to remove dust is one step closer to shaking the lens to stabilize it. When they do, the player field will be leveled... until then, I think the average photographer who spends $1,000-$1,500 on a system with body and lenses will have a system with more functionality with Pentax than with the competition. Heck, for somewhere around $700-750, you could have a K100D and two lenses (18-55mm and 50-200mm), both image stabilized. For less than $1,000, you can add a 50mm 1.4 - also image stabilized, not even an option on the C/N line-up.

Once C/N add IS to the body, all bets are off again - since they are all great cameras and can produce superb image quality. I think Pentax will continue to do well due to "trying harder", look at all the new things in the K10D, versus what's been new in most of the competitor's latest introductions.

One last word on "pros", plenty of "pros" use Pentax. Just recently, a newspaper reporter posted on Steve's about one of his photos (taken with the lowly *ist DL like mine) being published in the New York Times, to accompany a story that happened in his town. "Pro" just means being paid, and not all "pros" need 5fps capture, 22mp, or weathersealing. A food photographer will have different needs than a sports photographer, who'll have different needs than a wildlife photographer, who'll have different needs than a landscape photographer, etc, etc.

 

[jann1033]

I have also said that I think it's only a matter of time until Canon and Nikon begin offering IS in the body, what's been new in most of the competitor's latest introductions.

.

edited to save space...i am guessing that time will come after they deplete their supply of $$$$$L is lenses

 

[Groucho]

Actually, I think they'll continue to offer IS lenses, sticking to their guns about IS in the lens being superior. I would guess that they (and Nikon) will initially put IS in the body in their entry-level cameras, with the idea that professional photographers will get the higher-end cameras and use IS in the lens. Of course, over time, it'll probably make its way into the high-end cameras, and the camera will just disable in-body IS when a lens with IS is connected.

Time will tell...

 

[ukcatfan]

Actually, I think they'll continue to offer IS lenses, sticking to their guns about IS in the lens being superior. I would guess that they (and Nikon) will initially put IS in the body in their entry-level cameras, with the idea that professional photographers will get the higher-end cameras and use IS in the lens. Of course, over time, it'll probably make its way into the high-end cameras, and the camera will just disable in-body IS when a lens with IS is connected.

Time will tell...

I am sure that it would involve some advances in the firmware, but I see no reason that the two systems could not work together for even better results with communication between them.

Kevin