If you've been waiting for SLR quality pics out of a camera you can slip into your pocket (and we're not talking cargo pants here), Panasonic's 14 megapixel Lumix DMC-FX150 is sadly not your product. However, if you've been looking for something that can take shots approaching the quality of something like a Canon
G10 but do so in a more slender form factor, keep reading.
PhotographyBLOG's review of this higher-end of the point 'n shoot range finds it to be quite good, capturing great images in bright light with very few chromatic aberrations. However, darker shots (bane of the pocket cam market) are still somewhat problematic, as the built-in optical IS fails to keep images sharp and noise appears at ISO 800 and above. Despite those annoyances the $399 camera (yours for about $100 less if you don't mind bargain hunting) scored overall high marks, becoming one of the best quality shooters you can buy and have a hope of fitting in your skinny jeans.
posted January 16th 2009 10:07AM
24 mm? 18 or bust.
24mm *equivalent* is already pretty wide for a standard zoom lens. Yeah most dSLRs come kitted with 18-## lenses, however on an APS-C/crop frame body that's actually only about 27 to 30mm equivalent.
The Panasonic DMC-LX3 is the one you want. It's better than the G10. A very good SLR-Like substitute for your pocket. Rated higher than the G10.
+1 for the LX3. Excellent camera. Noise is clean and well under control at ISO 800. The only thing against it is the poor auto white balance, and maybe the lack of +2/0/-2 bracketing. But I'm just nitpicking. It won't necessarily produce better pictures than my aging D70, but it sure does its best at making the best compact SLR-substitute on the run.
My FX-150 had terrible infectious chroma noise in each one of the ISO 400+ jpegs or raws it spat out. A trip to any doctor (or noise reduction software) could not fix it. You could see the in-camera noise reduction working overtime on the shadows in daytime pictures even at ISO 100, leaving a blotchy, water-color mess. Speaking of raws, the raws from the FX-150 are almost useless, and extracting any dynamic range out of the photos seemed to be close to impossible. I would say this is all due to the ultra-dense sensor that they placed into the camera, but Ricoh's R10 and Canon's SD880 IS cameras are nearly just as dense and produce a very clean film like noise at higher ISOs, albeit they only produce jpegs.
I definitely would not call the FX-150 a perfect casual camera for any spectrum of the market. Rather, I would give the high end casual crown to the SD880 IS. The SD880 IS may lack HD video, raw capability, and the extra pixels, but its image quality is better than the FX-150. It also has better macro capability, a bigger LCD, and a cheaper price tag.
Sorry, Jeff. But the LCD screen on the Canon SD800IS is 2.5 inches. The screen on the Panasonic FX150 is 2.7 inches.
I have an SD800IS and agree it's a great little camera. I've gotten many great shots with it. Also, it will shoot video until the card fills up. I shot a whole wedding with it (really).
But I just bought a Panasonic FX37. Haven't had much of a chance to play with it yet, but it's loaded with features, most notably a live histogram and HD video capability. When I get a chance I will compare its pictures with my Canon's.
Whoops. You were talking about the SD880IS, Jeff. My bad. :-(
Sorry engadget but, "SLR quality pics" and "noise appears at ISO 800" are totally contradictory affirmations.
Read the post? It says this is not your product if you want SLR quality pics.
They didn't say SLR quality pictures at ISO800< did they?
@ Lindomar
RTFA. It states, "If you've been waiting for SLR quality pics out of a camera you can slip into your pocket (and we're not talking cargo pants here), Panasonic's 14 megapixel Lumix DMC-FX150 is sadly not your product."
They didn't state that it had SLR quality pics.
Engadget gets points for mentioning skinny jeans.
"can't wear skinny jeans cuz my nuts don't fit"
I have had nothing but awesome from these Lumix cameras. My wife and I each have one. The main point of this is that you get a very respectable picture from a camera you can have with you all the time. Mine is always on me, and they have very fast warm-up and shot-to-shot times. They also suffer less from the limitations of such small cameras than other makes do. I hereby ratify the post.
Not surprising. Those that pay attention the the P&S world have noticed that Panasonic has dominated for a couple years now. When I was looking for a near-dSLR super-zoom, nothing came close to the FZ28 or FZ50, nd as mentioned above, the LX3 is perhaps the nicest compact P&S on the market. Give credit to the stunning work that the big camera names have done with dSLRs, but Panasonic owns the non-dSLR markets right now.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 - This is the one that should be getting your attention.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/
P.S. - I don't know if PhotographyBlog is paying you to post their reviews but dpreview.com is WAY more comprehensive with side-by-side pictures from competing models, proper measurement of barrel distortion, pictures at various ISOs, etc. They provide actual samples and numbers, not just subjective experience.
What is a good point and shoot for low light? I know it's not a strength for any of them but most the pictures I take are at concerts where flashes wont work (and are obnoxious) and I don't want to lug a DSRL around.
Maybe I am missing the point but why would you get this at $399 when you can get dslr's for $450 ?
The point is that a DSLR will not fit your pocket. A compact does, and a quality compact makes it worthy to actually put it in that pocket and take it with you. I'd rather have the LX-3 though.
So you don't have to buy more lenses and carry around a big heavy camera and there are some places you just can't bring an SLR? (Note I use an SLR most of the time.)
Hey, come on, I got this camera 3 and half months ago. It's just a point and shot, it definitely gets you larger prints, but SLR picutre quality??? this is obviously not ture.
who wants awesome pictures, Go for a 5D MarkII
Make that 'who wants awesome pictures ...and has a 3 or 4 grand he doesn't know what to do with'
Not bad for a company that is mainly known for its electric shavers.
Just kidding...
Anyhow, in spite of Panasonic being a good camera maker, this is still a P&S, a relatively good P&S, but by no means close to an SLR in terms of photographic qualities.
There are other reviews out there BTW
Try http://dprdb.herokugarden.com/public/products/19
The small cameras to get are the Fujifilm F series. They have bigger sensors and can take very good low light (up to ISO 1600 decently, can take ISO 12,800 with noise). They are the most overlooked cameras on the market. The only small cameras that can take indoor pictures without flash.
The F31fd was the benchmark, but the new F100fd is a good successor. Read DPReview's conclusion on a comparison of the good non-SLR cameras: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q408premiumgroup/page12.asp
I won't argue that, bingojed.
The F100fd is nice, agree. Perhaps it's just me, whenever I hold a camera that isn't SLR (I use compacts and SLRs on and off), I just give up any exposure creativity attempts (aperture/shutter shifts, and quite often also attempts for low light photography), leaving those to times when I do use my DSLR.
"If you like to shoot movies with your still camera, the main attraction of the Panasonic FX150 will be the 720p, 16:9 ratio HD video mode, which can record 1280x720 pixel video at 30fps."
This is where I stopped reading. This camera can NOT do 30fps while in 720p mode. It's only 24fps in HD. It even says so in their specs right on the very same review.
Get it right.
Why would you want this? For $200 you can get an iPhone with a built-in 2 Megapixel camera that you could take with you everywhere.
I recommend you do some endoscopy with your iPhone.
Cameraphones are horrible substitutes for the real thing. High noise, poor dynamic range, and usually no optical zoom. The iPhone is NOT an exception.
For almost the same price, get the Lumix LX3.
I have one of these and was so impressed that I have sold my Canon EOS 400D SLR - seriously.
Photos in auto mode are very good, and better if you use the manual mode, although it is a bit fiddling using the manual settings as they didn't include any additional buttons for this funtionality.
Overall, this is a brilliant camera which not only take great photos, but feels very solid and looks great.
I reviewed the camera on my blllllaaaaagh recently as well, after picking one up ( http://www.the-photoguru.blogspot.com/ ) - Mr Engadget Dude, you are dead on- I'm a 20-year pro travel shooter who wanted to upgrade my 8MP to something I'd dig, with enough megapixel punch.
Love the camera- Panasonic did a nice job- in fact their line is starting to look mighty dope.
Mr PhotoGuru