Panasonic's Lumix DMC-FZ50 10 megapixel shooter

We're not done with Panasonic's new additions to the Lumix lineup just yet; in addition to the four compact shooters we just saw, the company also unveiled a prosumer model called the DMC-FZ50, which packs a 10.3 megapixel CCD and 12x optical zoom into a DSLR-like body. Besides improving upon the resolution of its 8 megapixel predecessor, the FZ30, the FZ50 also throws down a new feature called Intelligent ISO Control, which adjusts the ISO setting (max. 1600) and shutter speed based on subject movement -- promising to minimize image blur without forcing the user to adjust the manual controls. Further enhancing ease-of-use are a new Function button that delivers quick access to frequently-used settings and a longer-life battery that claims to deliver around 360 shots before recharging becomes an issue. Other differences between the FZ30 and FZ50 include the addition of SDHC card support, a TTL Flash hot-shoe, 16:9 shooting mode, and the so-called Venus Engine III image processor, but the elimination of TIFF file support and several thousand pixels from the 2.0-inch LCD. Luckily the higher resolution and new features don't mean that you'll pay too much more for this updated model than you did for the old one, as it's expected to cost just $650 when it hits stores in September.

[Ben @ Jul 19th 2006 12:53PM]

I'm sure they are good cameras, I bought the DMC-FZ5 last year for $450 and it has been a great camera. 12x zoom :)

Only complaint I have about mine is that the screen is 1.8". Wish it was a 2.5".

[Elliot @ Jul 19th 2006 1:17PM]

Crabs, at $650, why wouldn't you just buy a real DSLR (and don't say cause this comes with a 12x zoom)? You can get a Nikon D50 with a 17-55mm for around $550 these days. Spend the extra $100 on a 50mm 1.8, and you've got yourself a real camera system.

[Gerald Mitchell @ Sep 24th 2006 8:52AM]

Real camera... Don't kid yourself. This is an amazing piece of equipment. When was the last time you bent over carying a camera and a bank of lenses through a low tunnel or tried to scale a wall carying the same. If I have one complaint about this camera it is that the wide end of the scale is a little shy 35MM. As a result I will be carying one accessory lens, But that lens will not require that I open the camera and subject the CCD to dust.
I love it.

[TIMMAH! @ Jul 19th 2006 1:25PM]

How big is the sensor on this thing? If they're cramming that kind of res onto an APS-sized sensor, the noise at higher ASA is going to be bad. For example, the Nikon 8700 had 8MP, and was pretty much useless above ASA 200 due to the amount of noise introduced by the sensor (and when I say 'useless' I mean compared to the image quality that you'd get from say a Rebel XT at the same ASA.)

[Ian Jardine @ Jul 19th 2006 1:41PM]

Sensor: CCD 1 1/8 inch

[Jake @ Jul 19th 2006 4:03PM]

This is cool. I have the Lumix DMC-LX1 as a "pocket" camera and it is excellent!

The big news here, I think, is the Venus III engine which supposedly addresses the complaints (overblown in my experience) about excessive noise levels.

Elliot, $650 is the MSRP. It will sell for less. You will not get anywhere near the flexibility and quality of lens that you get on this camera on a DSLR for less than around $2000. You need to remember that this lens has integrated optical image stabilization throughout its focal length. Suggesting that you can buy a telephoto lens for $100 stick it on a $550 DSLR will NOT get you the same capabilities. You will not get a high quality lens with image stabilization for $100. I'm not trying to argue with you. If you want a DSLR, go for it. But I've looked at this stuff pretty closely and I'm convinced this camera is an amazing value (or at least the FZ30 was and this sounds better with the new Venus III engine).

The Lumix line with its Leica lenses has so far remained a real bargain and the quality, in my experience, is fantastic. I really love my DMC-LX1.

[yuppicide @ Jul 19th 2006 4:12PM]

That is one of the factors of buying this over a DSLR.. 12x zoom. I paid $650 for my Digital Rebel XT and that came with 17-55, which equals 3x zoom roughly. That's crap. Then I'd have to spend another $175-$300 on a nice Sigma 12-200 lens.

Plus, this thing will do movies. I think it's a very nice camera, too bad I'm really a Canon man. The reason I wouldn't keep my S3 IS is it didn't have a hotshoe and this has one. The S3 IS was 6MP with 12x zoom, super macro mode, movie mode, but no hot shoe ruined it for me.

[Joey @ Jul 19th 2006 4:37PM]

@yuppicide

you dont buy an slr system for movies, thats what video cameras are for.

[Rodimus Prime @ Jul 19th 2006 4:52PM]

Jake,

the new Sonly Alpha DSLR has built in image stabiliation -- that should create some interesting competition.

[Rob @ Jul 19th 2006 5:15PM]

Hey, stop telling people to get SLRs! Of course SLRs take better photos, but many people just don't need SLR quality. With one of these big-zoom consumer cameras, you carry one piece of equipment, don't have to shell out lots of additional money for decent lenses, can shoot video, and can shoot at weird angles using the articulated LCD. Some people would rather have all these features in a single compact camera then buy a SLR, plus pay a lot more for lenses, plus have to carry all that around in a big camera bag (not to mention buy and lug around a video camera to shoot video!). I am fortunate enough to have a SLR and a big-zoom, do-all consumer cameras (shoots pretty nice video with stereo audio), and each camera is perfect for different situations.

[Jake @ Jul 19th 2006 6:09PM]

Rodimus, lots of (most?) DSLRs have image stabilization. The issue is that in order for it to work with the add-on lenses, the lenses have to be specifically designed for it and that makes them cost more.

For example, the Canon EOS 30D (or whatever the current model is) has great image stabilization and you can get fantastic lenses that work with the image stabilization. But those lenses are VERY expensive. If you bought the Canon 30D and two canon lenses that work with the image stabilizer, you would arguably have a better set up for still photos than you have with the FZ50 but the Canon set up would cost you around $2000. You would gain a bit in pure specs on the Canon but you would also give up the video feature that you get with the FZ50 plus you'd have to carry two lenses and change them (and keep them clean, and keep dust from getting inside your dslr).

Don't get me wrong, DSLRs are great but the advantage in picture quality for even demanding consumers is almost non-existant in most situations and price differential to really duplicate the flexibility of the super zoom lenses on the all-in-ones is very substantial.

One more thing on the video capabilities of the newer cameras -- it's REALLY good. If you're thinking of the older digital cameras that took choppy, crappy videos, that is not the case any more. With my Lumix DMC-LX1 it will shoot video at 720x480 (DVD resolution) at 30 frames per second. Played back on a full size TV, it looks amazingly good. Yes, you would still rather have a dedicated video camera for shooting videos in a lot of circumstances but the video features on the newer cameras is totally usable (and in fact it's much better than the still photo capabilities on video cameras, so if you're only gonna carry one I'd choose my LX1 every time and it's a bunch smaller than my video camera).

[Paqza @ Jul 19th 2006 6:42PM]

Jake, actually, most manufacturers will only have image stabilization in their lenses, and not the body. Konica Minolta, and by extension, Sony, are the only manufacturers I know that have in-body stabilization. This turns all accessory lenses into IS lenses for Maxxums and the Alpha line.

[Jake @ Jul 19th 2006 7:01PM]

Thanks, Paqza.

I don't think I'd be looking to Konica Minolta/Sony for a DSLR anyway.

If I go that route, I'm gonna choose Canon or Nikon (probably Canon).

I'll be interested to hear more about the Lumix SLR, though.

Panasonic is very under-rated by many when it comes to their imaging tools. They make great video cameras (a bit behind Sony now on the HD front) and their Lumix still camera line is pretty awesome.

Not sure why, but I'm biased agains Sony on still cameras. Partly because they always stick you with that stupid memory stick.

[kitman @ Jul 19th 2006 8:52PM]

Jake, you should really check out the new kid sony alpha. basically a revamp on the konicaminolta 5d. it features on body image stabilizer, dust shaker, 10mp, a nice range of lenses, uses CF instead of MS etc. the first review available have been impressive and pip it above the canon 350d.

pana's dslr also on the way but it's more expensive.

[Sacramento Photographer @ Jul 19th 2006 11:06PM]

It's still a point and shoot camera, no matter how much data it has. So the question that should be on most people's minds is "Exactly how much data is too much for the average Soccer Mom?". Sure, there's other users, but even for them, what are people doing with all that data when you can get a perfectly good 8x10 or 11x14 out of 4-6 MP? Don't most photos from consumer cameras simply get resized for the web anyway?

[Mario @ Jul 20th 2006 12:07AM]

The best word to describe this camera over any DSLR is "Convenience"...

I chose the Lumix DMC-FZ20 a year ago over the Nikon D70 and I definitively don't regret about it.
The pictures I may have taken with the D70 sure would have had a better quality, but the convenience of a 36-432mm f2.8 stabilized lens in a single small package is more valuable for me.

I thought about buying a DSLR this year, but now I think a Lumix will win again.

[Rodimus Prime @ Jul 20th 2006 11:05AM]

Jake,

I don't think I explained myself very clearly -- I meant to explain that yes there few DSLRs that offer in-camera image stabilization...I was just pointing out the new low end Sony Alpha as a viable entry level camera w/ in-camera image stabilization.

Ultimately, the FZ50 has a ton to offer...I think the decision is tough for some one who wants the convenience of the FZ50.

Anyways, just wanted to clarify that I was not disagreeing with you.

Enjoy.

[Mike @ Jul 20th 2006 11:55AM]

I'll be waiting to see how the reviews of this turn out since I've been seriously considering getting an S3IS but I'm willing to wait. The key for me is the RAW file, which the the S3 does not have.

As for those saying just get a dslr, well frankly, it depends alot on what kind of photography you do and how much you shoot. Most of my stuff is done with a Canon EOS-1D Mk II and a Lecia R5. I also use an oly C4040 that I absolutely love. The benefits of the 4040 are the fact that I can go anywhere and keep it in my pocket and still get shots that print out absolutely beautiful. With an S3 or any other 12x zoom, you're looking for Convience as well. Price out how much it will cost to get a DSLR with IS lenses that cover the full 12x range and 2.8-3.7 aperture. Heck most 400mm/500mm lenses can't be found under F5.6 at the long end. Also throw in a zigview or Angle viewfinder to compensate for the moveable LCD screen which is a great feature.

Every camera has its niche, and every photographer has their style, and more often then not, an SLR is still alot of gear to carry when you can get a good quality picture with less. The thing is to use the right equipment at the right time and not just be a gear-snob who thinks the world revolves around a brand name or label or type of gear. A camera is just a light tight box and nothing more, its what you do with it that matters. SLR, Twin lens Reflex, Medium format or point and shoot... bah... just go out and shoot!

[Jake @ Jul 20th 2006 2:00PM]

Great comment, Mike. I totally agree. I think the FZ50 has the S3IS beat on just about every front. Actually, I think the FZ30 had the S3 beat on just about every front. The constant harping by reviewers on the Noise issue about the FZ30 was an issue but I honestly believe that has likely been addressed with the FZ50. The press releases trumpets "dramatic" improvements in noise reduction, which to me means they at least have made "some" improvement and I never found it to be a real world issue with my LX1 anyway.

By the way, Mike, since you seem to like lots of different form factors, I really recommend you check out the LX1 (probably worth waiting for the LX2 at this point). I rarely take the time to rave about a product and the LX1 is just a killer little camera. The combination of wide angle lens and 16:9 native resolution (full 8.1 megs in 16:9 format) makes for some really cool panoramic shots. I've been playing around with using that format for portrait perspective as well and you can do some pretty cool things with it.

You can check out some of my photos here if you want: http://www.gather.com/viewImages.jsp?memberId=48422

They're nothing fancy, believe me. But it might give you an idea of the LX1 (check out some of the Macro flower shots as well as the panoramic). They don't show up perfectly at that link but you'll get the idea.

Peace

[Mort Ostfeld @ Oct 15th 2006 4:52PM]

Fantastic images, Jake and a beautiful family. Do you think it's possible to get a decent 16x20 or 24x36 from the FZ50 - I'm thinking of buying it but I see reviews saying the best I'm going to get would be maybe 8x10. Any suggestions please.
Be well.

[Shane Munroe @ Jul 20th 2006 7:47PM]

I have a FZ20 and I have done prints that were published in newspapers and the web. It's a great package to have 5MP,12X,video in one camera at a great price. Day shots rival most cameras out there, inc. DSLR (If you are a good photographer). The only weakness was noise at higher ISOs.

The real problem is night shots, so if the FZ50 can do a 10MP shot at ISO 800 with low noise. I'm buying it! There really would be no need for me to buy a DSLR after that.

[Sue Madge @ Jul 25th 2006 7:45PM]

I will be buying an FZ50. After 30+ years of using SLRs, I was quite disturbed to hear about the 'dust on the sensor' problems with digital SLRs. I just don't need to have my camera become unusable in the middle of the Rocky Mountains, Barrier Reef or where ever I may be. My FZ10 and FZ30 have both been great, so the FZ50 is a must.
And by the way, the only Canon I have ever owned NEVER worked. So I will never buy another.

[Mort Ostfeld @ Oct 15th 2006 4:50PM]

Do you think it's possible to get a decent 16x20 or 24x36 from the FZ50 - I'm thinking of buying it but I see reviews saying the best I'm going to get would be maybe 8x10. Any suggestions please.
Be well.

[Sandhill @ Aug 1st 2006 4:42PM]

I'm using FZ30 right now and looking for a DSLR such as, D50, D70s, 350D, A-100, 30D, E-330, etc. I think each system has its own pros and cons. My FZ30, which will be replaced with FZ50 here, is an excellent camera. Use it along with a wide angle converter and a close up lenses and I can shoot pretty much every kind of photo I want. However, noise level at high ISO is very annoying and that makes me looking at a DSLR. Other than that, I almost have no reason to replace my FZ30 with a DSLR at all.

Here's what I like about my FZ30 (and perhaps FZ50 too):
- long 12X zoom, that's 35-420 eqiv. If you want to get a lens for a DSLR with that kind of range, you'll have to spend a fortune. 70-300mm (which roughly equiv to 105-450mm in most DSLR) will cost around $300-600...almost enough to buy another entry level DSLR body... and you'll have to switch lens every time you need to use it!!

- live view LCD, I know a lot of people said there's no way an LCD will be as good as optical viewfinder. However, the covenience of using LCD in some situations can't be compared. I was recently took a photo of a dam by hang the camera off the cliff so I can get a panorama shot straight down toward the bottom of the dam. Couldn't have done it without the free rotation LCD because there's no way I can reach that far to put my eye behind the viewfinder (I can barely reach my camera with my hand to release the shutter) let alone try to compose in a way that I can create a panorama shot later. Without a realy realy good tripod and the LCD, that shot wil never happen!!! Can't compose a shot like that on a DSLR unless you're using E-330

- Fix lens, sure, interchangeable lens is an advantage of a DSLR over an EVF camera. But at the same time, it's also a weakness. Everybody knows by now how hassle it is to keep the sensor clean and only Olympus, Panasonic and Sony that were actually doing something about it. So far, the top players in DSLR market like Canon and Nikon still doing nothing to address the dust on the sensor problem....may be they want it that way so people have to keep fixing the cameras or buy a new one, who knows. My point is with a fix lens, although you sacrifice some of the image quality, at least you get a picture without worry about dust on the sensor...ever (sure, you'll have to keep the lens clean too....but so is a DSLR lens).

- Video capability, I think lots of people talk about this earlier and some of the DSLR fans don't think it's important. Well, I'm not a video fan myself. Shoot one clip every five years may be. But it's still nice to know I can take a video clip when I need too without carrying 2 pieces of device. Recently, I went to my niece's school play and brought only my FZ30. I took both still pictures and video clip of her on the stage, how cool is that!!!

Now, what I don't like about my FZ30 (and wish that FZ50 will fix it):
- Noise level at high ISO, everybody knows, cramping high resolution on a 1-1/8 sensor will create more noise at high ISO and that's why some of us are looking for a camera with at least APS-C sensor (well, full frame would be nicer but most of us can't afford it!). And that raise a question in my mind too.....how will FZ50 get rid of the noise if they're using the same sensor with even higher resolution? Frankly, I wouldn't be interested now in any EVF (or DSLR for that matter)that can have a good noise level control for as long as you're not exceed ISO 400 which, unfortunately, pretty much all DSLR in the market except Canon and Nikon. My FZ30 have a lot of noise problem but it's an older model so if anyone is looking for a new camera, EVF or DSLR, should do some research and make sure they can handle noise at iso 800 and above. Otherwise, don't bother (might as well get a digital compact with manual mode would do the same trick).
- Fix lens (again), I know I said I love the fix lens because I don't have to worry about the dust. But I also don't like it simply for the fact that sometime I do want to put a nice lens on my camera but I couldn't!! This morning, I tried to take a good close up shot of a flower in a park. Just wish I had a good DSLR with a 150mm macro attach to it so I didn't have to try so hard to take that shot!!!

So, these are pretty much pros and cons of EVF (and some for DSLR). Please don't fight anymore for who's better because they're both good and bad depend on situation. I'm planning to get a DSLR soon but that doesn't mean I'll get rid of my EVF. In the end, I might have to travel around with both so I'll have more than one choice for what camera should I be using!!!

[joe simonis @ Aug 27th 2006 5:18AM]

I just got the fz50, I think it is just great. I have used slr's since the 70's and both have their place. my first impressions are that the Lumix is well made with a great lens. I took a shot in the woods early in the morning of a deer not thinking it would be any good but wanted to see just what the camera would do. ISO was 400, on auto shutter speed I later found was only 1/15th, used stabilizer mode 2. Was I ever shocked with the 8x12 I got back. opps, forgot to say the lens was cranked out to about 400mm setting. while not tack sharp, I would rate it as very ,very good considering the conditions. WHAT A CAMERA, The people who condemn this type of camera don't know what they are talking about and never used one. ISO 400 8x12 showed me low noise lever, barely there if you look hard. 800 not so good. can't have everything, not yet at least. what it does well is just amazing to me and try to get a lens like that for a DSLR, you can't, not for any money!

[Matt @ Oct 18th 2006 2:07AM]

I have Had a FZ-20 for 2 years. it has been a great camera. if you shoot alot of action it works great. I have thought about the dslr but i want a camera that has the auto if I want i and price was an issue with it. I shoot tons of pics for our web site for our rugby team that is why I went with the 20 at the time it was the only 12x on the market. I want a second camera for wedding photos that i have started. I am going to go with the fz50 beause i have had great luck with my fz20. I am not sure why the panasonic cameras are not more popular thery are great

[algi @ Apr 9th 2007 3:42AM]

zer gut

[algi @ Apr 10th 2007 3:34AM]

zr gut

[Thomas Ferko @ Jul 15th 2007 9:44PM]

Hi All,

I am looking for a small carry shoulder/hand bag to put this camera in with its battery charger, 2 spare batterys, and instructions.

It must be small and well padded to carry on trips. Who can recommend a smaller bag to use? I have looked at the Lowe Pro Nova Mini and Micro bag. Any other recommendations?

[Thomas Ferko @ Jul 15th 2007 9:49PM]

The small camera bag I need is for the FZ50. Forgot to mention that.

[drarmstr @ Jul 18th 2007 8:45PM]

I'm thinking about purchasing the FZ50. What concerns me is that the auto-braketing apparantly is only +/- 1. When trying to do dramatic HDR work I would much prefer a wider range. It's been almost a year since the FZ50 release, I have to wonder when something new is coming out?