Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ4
This isn't very old camera, its successor arrived only recently in a form of a FZ7. As with Fuji 2600, I had this camera for almost a year, and made some photos you see in my gallery.
Ever had a sneaking suspicion that something isn't exactly right, but wasn't able to pinpoint what it is? Well, I had it with this thingy, and realized only until I sold it to some other lucky guy, and bought another camera. FZ4 is well implemented photographing device, works decently under most circumstances, and I was satisfied with it, but constantly wondering "What's missing? Why I'm not happy?", especially since prevailing tone of most forums and digicam sites was that you should be happy.
As it turns out, combination of a indirect sponsorship of a most
digicam sites by major camera labels, bunch of a forum techies who never produced decent portfolio,
but knows and argues to death every minuscule detail of any camera in existance, and need of most
adult geeks ( who sometimes are more kids, then their kindergarten counterparts ) to persuade
themselves that toy seen with others, was really wanted, was really it, had such a devastating effect.
There is another moment related to this, I call it "web gallery theorem", which states that every picture, no matter how awfull, is suited for the web, only if downsized enough. And another one, which states that pictures on the web, hanged in a popular digicam site's gallery, will inevitably present camera in most favorable way. Corollary to this is that you can never trust samples on the web, no matter what, except if you put them there.
Moral of the story, never ever trust anybody, but yourself. Not any other semi-sponsored site, nor any bunch of a trolls in any forum, and before you ask, no, not even me. Trouble with this path is that you'll have to decide based on a your own experiences, and you can't have ones, if you don't buy a damn camera, even if it is a wrong one, and get out, and shoot. This is also expensive, you'll buy a camera, and unless really lucky, you'll be unhappy with it, or want to experiment, and you'll buy another one. And then another one. And another one. And then you'll know. This is why I'm writing this, so you may read about my experiences, and decide what of them is usefull to you. But mind you, you'll ( have to ) have your own, and no mine can substitute.
By now, I think I can hear you screaming "Ok, what was so wrong with this camera!?". Combination of things, but first and foremost, it's noise. No, not just ordinary noise, but a truck load of if, helped by absence of any serious attempt to get rid of it, and whatever applied by camera just push noise under the carpet, together with significant amount of details.
I bet you wouldn't dare to just pick up duster, and evenly spread all the grease on the floor after quite a wild 4th birthday party of your kid with quite a bunch of his friends and their pets and vast amounts of chips, chocolates, juices, and what not. But, that is exactly what Panasonic does with their attempt to handle noise. And that is how picture taken by their camera get its unique WaterColor™ look Panasonic is famous for. Given the megapixel race, which still rages on, things are going to be worse, with each new camera generation ( in fact they already are, proven by a recent FZ7 ).
Another factor to this is a much hyped image-stabilization, which is a kind of a mixed blessing to me. Given the perceived huge benefit, regardless of a circumstances, and no negative effects of a optical stabilization, most people will have it switched on all the time, especially because they're doing hand-held photography exclusively. Sure it does help you shot hand-held photos which otherwise would be just plain impossible, but as a result you'll also get a huge pile of a photos that aren't nearly half as sharp as you'll expect them to be ( if you know what to expect, that is! ), but are neither blurry enough to be deleted without second thought, so in a effect you'll got soft, very soft images most of the time.
And overrelaying on image-stabilization is in fact a self-induced counter-effect, the more you relay on a
stabilization to save your images, the more soft photos you'll have. That's because people aided with it
tend to forget how to properly take images, hold camera securely ( with both hands! ) and firmly, but not
rigidly, hold your breath while pressing shutter, make as little movement as possible. In fact, it should be
considered first-aid kit, and only switched on when really needed to save the day. It takes you to start
shooting from a tripod and with optical stabilization switched off, to find out how much more your camera
is capable of.
But, as they say in commercials, wait, there is more! Buttons are rather smallish, and quite stiff. Another problem is unergonomical design, while clean and logical at first sight, buttons have miserably choosen its functions, and are also located on an ilogical places, and are unaccessible with both hands holding a camera. For instance, EVF/LCD button would do better service when placed on top plate, left to the flash, where are now "Panasonic" and "DMC-FZ4" labels, and there is also enough space for another button, or two. Since I always shoot with both hands, this slows me down considerably, because I have to take left hand from the camera, and while still holding it with right one ( now rigidly, to give a proper support! ), find choosen button, and then push it with considerable force, to make it do its magic.
And on a four-way controler you have equally important self-timer on left arrow, flash modes switcher on right, and shifted via EXPOSURE button the Exposure Compensation, Auto Exposure Bracketing, Flash Exposure Compensation, and White Balance Adjustment tools ( I kid you not! ) on up arrow. Talkin' 'bout design, useability, yeah, right! Not to mention that menu is stuffed with photographic controls ( white balance, sensitivity et al. ), and everything else, clumped together in an intangible way. What's worse, Panasonic forfeited its ergonomically placed shutter on FZ3, because some forum trolls, who can think only in horizontals and verticals, demanded so, accompanied with Phil Askey congratulating move. Take a camera in a right hand, your index finger, when completely relaxed, will naturally fall to their initial shutter position.
While camera is very small, even too much so, given, for instance, small right hand grip, which is also too close to lens barrel, camera isn't that much portable. Lens barrel is huge compared to the rest of a camera, but main thing is that it's protruding so much from a body of a camera, preventing putting it into a large pocket, or a purse. You'll need much larger bag than you think by just looking at its deceivengly diminutive dimensions.
Camera is slow to power up, three seconds doesn't appear to be long, until you wish to capture neighbour's dog trying to climb on a tree, because she saw a cat up there, and a neighbour embarrased by so much attention drawn, trying to stop her. Yeah, I missed that entirelly, thank you very much.
Camera isn't there for a night time shooting. Forget what others say, their
low light tests made in a lab
proves exactly nothing when used in a real life. You, most likely, won't want to crank up sensitivity, you
just read my complaints about a noise, didn't you? Combine that with a teenie wee little sensor ( = really
miserable dynamic range + as an additional bonus, contrast curve is really steep ), and a need to remain
at full aperture, otherwise even less light would be captured, at the expense of a lights really looking
as a patches spilled up, and not, as in a professional photos, as such a beautifull colorfull stars.
If it's not enough, should you raise sensitivity regardless, know that you also shrink already limited dynamic range. And so, 8 secs at ISO 64 isn't that cogent any more, isn't it? Results will rarely exceed almost black buildings, surrounded with very bright street lights, even though in reality buildings are just dimly lit, not directly, but still perfectly visible, and streets are no more lighted than during daylight, when photos taken looks ok. Of course, you could employ "Dynamic Range Increase" technique, should you be able to capture overly brighter image in the first place, needed by said technique.
You're probably wondering is there anything positively I can tell you about this camera. Sure, I'd get rid of it ;-)! But, seriously, there is quite a lot to love about it, otherwise I wouldn't made almost a year with it. It is solidly built, seems to me like it's from a time now long gone, when in its own leisurely way, things were kept going, and going, and going, ..., like, forever. So much different to this age, when devices have projected life span a bit longer then their warranty period, and warranty means replacing it with new unit, and customers ended up being turned to consumers.
Another praise was deserved by a battery. You can, based on a number of already taken pictures, calculate how much more you can take before it needs recharging, even after a weeks of a suspended life on a shelf.
Viewfinder is superbly placed, right on top left spot on the back of a camera. This way you won't put nose grease on a LCD, you'll only leave fingertips. Since its also protruding slightly from the back, you'll be able to place EVF closer to your eye. On top of that, there is a diopter correction with such a huge range.
Lens cover, while some found it to be a major hinderance, and longs for a cover build into lens, or, at least, a slider, I found it to be a nice place to put double layer of a completely white stickers. Why? Simply, lens cover is always with you, and so it is your custom white balance card. It's not as high-tech as Expodisc, but is almost as convenient, and is much cheaper still. It seems that they're out of bussiness. So much for a white balance card for very lazy and very rich people.
Once powered up, camera does offer "High speed AF", you would be fool not to take advantage of it, since only time when it might hunt ( in a low light ) camera is already half useable, as I already explained. Not only that, camera has very low shutter lag, and decent write speed, even at highest size and quality settings.
Both doors are hinged, sturdy built, plastic, no rubber. Both does open and close cleanly, without any use of a force, thus they'll last forever.
It just came to me that this camera, as almost all from Panasonic, is meant for an elderly people ( not neccesary by their age! ) who have their own pace, no urge to learn and experiment with something new, and have a need for a perpetual performance at the same level, whichever it is, just it must stay the same. If you can't find yourself among them, my best suggestion is simple, find yourself more suitable toy.
Read specifications at Digital Photography Review, DCRP Review and description at Imaging-Resource.
Read descriptions about sibling FZ5 ( which features slightly larger CCD, 5 vs 4 megapixels, larger LCD, 1.8" vs 1.5", and saves movies with sound ) at Digital Photography Review, DCRP Review, Imaging-Resource and at megapixel.net, view photos at flickr.
Send a comment
This isn't very old camera, its successor arrived only recently in a form of a FZ7. As with Fuji 2600, I had this camera for almost a year, and made some photos you see in my gallery.
Ever had a sneaking suspicion that something isn't exactly right, but wasn't able to pinpoint what it is? Well, I had it with this thingy, and realized only until I sold it to some other lucky guy, and bought another camera. FZ4 is well implemented photographing device, works decently under most circumstances, and I was satisfied with it, but constantly wondering "What's missing? Why I'm not happy?", especially since prevailing tone of most forums and digicam sites was that you should be happy.
As it turns out, combination of a indirect sponsorship of a most
digicam sites by major camera labels, bunch of a forum techies who never produced decent portfolio,
but knows and argues to death every minuscule detail of any camera in existance, and need of most
adult geeks ( who sometimes are more kids, then their kindergarten counterparts ) to persuade
themselves that toy seen with others, was really wanted, was really it, had such a devastating effect. There is another moment related to this, I call it "web gallery theorem", which states that every picture, no matter how awfull, is suited for the web, only if downsized enough. And another one, which states that pictures on the web, hanged in a popular digicam site's gallery, will inevitably present camera in most favorable way. Corollary to this is that you can never trust samples on the web, no matter what, except if you put them there.
Moral of the story, never ever trust anybody, but yourself. Not any other semi-sponsored site, nor any bunch of a trolls in any forum, and before you ask, no, not even me. Trouble with this path is that you'll have to decide based on a your own experiences, and you can't have ones, if you don't buy a damn camera, even if it is a wrong one, and get out, and shoot. This is also expensive, you'll buy a camera, and unless really lucky, you'll be unhappy with it, or want to experiment, and you'll buy another one. And then another one. And another one. And then you'll know. This is why I'm writing this, so you may read about my experiences, and decide what of them is usefull to you. But mind you, you'll ( have to ) have your own, and no mine can substitute.
By now, I think I can hear you screaming "Ok, what was so wrong with this camera!?". Combination of things, but first and foremost, it's noise. No, not just ordinary noise, but a truck load of if, helped by absence of any serious attempt to get rid of it, and whatever applied by camera just push noise under the carpet, together with significant amount of details.
I bet you wouldn't dare to just pick up duster, and evenly spread all the grease on the floor after quite a wild 4th birthday party of your kid with quite a bunch of his friends and their pets and vast amounts of chips, chocolates, juices, and what not. But, that is exactly what Panasonic does with their attempt to handle noise. And that is how picture taken by their camera get its unique WaterColor™ look Panasonic is famous for. Given the megapixel race, which still rages on, things are going to be worse, with each new camera generation ( in fact they already are, proven by a recent FZ7 ).
Another factor to this is a much hyped image-stabilization, which is a kind of a mixed blessing to me. Given the perceived huge benefit, regardless of a circumstances, and no negative effects of a optical stabilization, most people will have it switched on all the time, especially because they're doing hand-held photography exclusively. Sure it does help you shot hand-held photos which otherwise would be just plain impossible, but as a result you'll also get a huge pile of a photos that aren't nearly half as sharp as you'll expect them to be ( if you know what to expect, that is! ), but are neither blurry enough to be deleted without second thought, so in a effect you'll got soft, very soft images most of the time.
And overrelaying on image-stabilization is in fact a self-induced counter-effect, the more you relay on a
stabilization to save your images, the more soft photos you'll have. That's because people aided with it
tend to forget how to properly take images, hold camera securely ( with both hands! ) and firmly, but not
rigidly, hold your breath while pressing shutter, make as little movement as possible. In fact, it should be
considered first-aid kit, and only switched on when really needed to save the day. It takes you to start
shooting from a tripod and with optical stabilization switched off, to find out how much more your camera
is capable of. But, as they say in commercials, wait, there is more! Buttons are rather smallish, and quite stiff. Another problem is unergonomical design, while clean and logical at first sight, buttons have miserably choosen its functions, and are also located on an ilogical places, and are unaccessible with both hands holding a camera. For instance, EVF/LCD button would do better service when placed on top plate, left to the flash, where are now "Panasonic" and "DMC-FZ4" labels, and there is also enough space for another button, or two. Since I always shoot with both hands, this slows me down considerably, because I have to take left hand from the camera, and while still holding it with right one ( now rigidly, to give a proper support! ), find choosen button, and then push it with considerable force, to make it do its magic.
And on a four-way controler you have equally important self-timer on left arrow, flash modes switcher on right, and shifted via EXPOSURE button the Exposure Compensation, Auto Exposure Bracketing, Flash Exposure Compensation, and White Balance Adjustment tools ( I kid you not! ) on up arrow. Talkin' 'bout design, useability, yeah, right! Not to mention that menu is stuffed with photographic controls ( white balance, sensitivity et al. ), and everything else, clumped together in an intangible way. What's worse, Panasonic forfeited its ergonomically placed shutter on FZ3, because some forum trolls, who can think only in horizontals and verticals, demanded so, accompanied with Phil Askey congratulating move. Take a camera in a right hand, your index finger, when completely relaxed, will naturally fall to their initial shutter position.
While camera is very small, even too much so, given, for instance, small right hand grip, which is also too close to lens barrel, camera isn't that much portable. Lens barrel is huge compared to the rest of a camera, but main thing is that it's protruding so much from a body of a camera, preventing putting it into a large pocket, or a purse. You'll need much larger bag than you think by just looking at its deceivengly diminutive dimensions.
Camera is slow to power up, three seconds doesn't appear to be long, until you wish to capture neighbour's dog trying to climb on a tree, because she saw a cat up there, and a neighbour embarrased by so much attention drawn, trying to stop her. Yeah, I missed that entirelly, thank you very much.
Camera isn't there for a night time shooting. Forget what others say, their
low light tests made in a lab
proves exactly nothing when used in a real life. You, most likely, won't want to crank up sensitivity, you
just read my complaints about a noise, didn't you? Combine that with a teenie wee little sensor ( = really
miserable dynamic range + as an additional bonus, contrast curve is really steep ), and a need to remain
at full aperture, otherwise even less light would be captured, at the expense of a lights really looking
as a patches spilled up, and not, as in a professional photos, as such a beautifull colorfull stars. If it's not enough, should you raise sensitivity regardless, know that you also shrink already limited dynamic range. And so, 8 secs at ISO 64 isn't that cogent any more, isn't it? Results will rarely exceed almost black buildings, surrounded with very bright street lights, even though in reality buildings are just dimly lit, not directly, but still perfectly visible, and streets are no more lighted than during daylight, when photos taken looks ok. Of course, you could employ "Dynamic Range Increase" technique, should you be able to capture overly brighter image in the first place, needed by said technique.
You're probably wondering is there anything positively I can tell you about this camera. Sure, I'd get rid of it ;-)! But, seriously, there is quite a lot to love about it, otherwise I wouldn't made almost a year with it. It is solidly built, seems to me like it's from a time now long gone, when in its own leisurely way, things were kept going, and going, and going, ..., like, forever. So much different to this age, when devices have projected life span a bit longer then their warranty period, and warranty means replacing it with new unit, and customers ended up being turned to consumers.
Another praise was deserved by a battery. You can, based on a number of already taken pictures, calculate how much more you can take before it needs recharging, even after a weeks of a suspended life on a shelf.
Viewfinder is superbly placed, right on top left spot on the back of a camera. This way you won't put nose grease on a LCD, you'll only leave fingertips. Since its also protruding slightly from the back, you'll be able to place EVF closer to your eye. On top of that, there is a diopter correction with such a huge range.
Lens cover, while some found it to be a major hinderance, and longs for a cover build into lens, or, at least, a slider, I found it to be a nice place to put double layer of a completely white stickers. Why? Simply, lens cover is always with you, and so it is your custom white balance card. It's not as high-tech as Expodisc, but is almost as convenient, and is much cheaper still. It seems that they're out of bussiness. So much for a white balance card for very lazy and very rich people.
Once powered up, camera does offer "High speed AF", you would be fool not to take advantage of it, since only time when it might hunt ( in a low light ) camera is already half useable, as I already explained. Not only that, camera has very low shutter lag, and decent write speed, even at highest size and quality settings.
Both doors are hinged, sturdy built, plastic, no rubber. Both does open and close cleanly, without any use of a force, thus they'll last forever.
It just came to me that this camera, as almost all from Panasonic, is meant for an elderly people ( not neccesary by their age! ) who have their own pace, no urge to learn and experiment with something new, and have a need for a perpetual performance at the same level, whichever it is, just it must stay the same. If you can't find yourself among them, my best suggestion is simple, find yourself more suitable toy.
Read specifications at Digital Photography Review, DCRP Review and description at Imaging-Resource.
Read descriptions about sibling FZ5 ( which features slightly larger CCD, 5 vs 4 megapixels, larger LCD, 1.8" vs 1.5", and saves movies with sound ) at Digital Photography Review, DCRP Review, Imaging-Resource and at megapixel.net, view photos at flickr.
Send a comment