Superzoom shootout

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Location
Troy, NY
I am currently evaluating two cameras.

Here are two sets of pictures, taken under identical conditions. Do you see any reason to prefer one camera over another? If so, why?

Cheers, Jock

Camera A:

Camera_A_001_Medium_.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Camera B:

Camera_B_001_Medium_.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Camera A:

Camera_A_002_Medium_.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Camera B:

Camera_B_002_Medium_.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Camera A:

Camera_A_003_Medium_.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Camera B:

Camera_B_003_Medium_.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Camera A:

Camera_A_006_Medium_.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Camera B:

Camera_B_005_Medium_.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
I would say too close to call. Are there any important differences besides IQ? Does one have faster lens or more reach? They are so similar it makes me think they are the same maker. Are you comparing the FZ200 against your FZ150?
 
I would say too close to call. Are there any important differences besides IQ? Does one have faster lens or more reach? They are so similar it makes me think they are the same maker. Are you comparing the FZ200 against your FZ150?[/QUOT

Luke,

You got it right. I'm comparing the FZ150 with the FZ200. The FZ200 definitely has a faster lens that "saves" some ISO. The reach is no greater,and the user interface is slightly changed. The FZ200 also seems to autofocus faster in low light conditions, which makes sense because of the faster lens.

I have tried -- really tried -- to like system cameras, but I've gotten of trying to photograph wildlife while taking walks with wife. There is nothing that I have found that matches the reach and convenience of a superzoom. But the trade-offs, of course, are the limitations of a tiny sensor. (But a tiny sensor also means small glass which is easy to carry, etc.)

Cheers, Jock
 
Jock, have you considered an m43 camera with the Panny 100-300 lens? More expensive than a superzoom, but you'll get the 600mm FOV like on the FZ150/200 plus the image quality benefits of a larger sensor.
 
A seems to have better IQ, and B seems to be more saturated and contrasty. B's images pop more because of it, but A's seem to have better info in the darker areas. Harsher tones in B make for more dynamic images, but that isn't always the look you want. The last shot especially, there's so much more detail on that lamp switch with A. B might have the detail in it, but it's so tarted up that you'd never know. -shrug-
 
Revealed . . .

Okay, Jock... are you ready to identify the two cameras?

Camera A is the FZ150; Camera B is the FZ200. I tried to make sure that the setting were identical on both cameras when taking the shots (ie, no Vivid, no boosted sharpness, etc.f)

Thanks to everyone for your help!

cheers, Jock
 
Camera A is the FZ150; Camera B is the FZ200. I tried to make sure that the setting were identical on both cameras when taking the shots (ie, no Vivid, no boosted sharpness, etc.f)

Thanks to everyone for your help!

cheers, Jock

Then you can tell Fuji changed things behind the scenes, because the newer version renders VERY differently.
 
Back
Top