Lumix dmc fz200
Nov 12, 2023 12:36:07 #
jimpitt wrote:
Lumix is a product of Panasonic. Not worth it. Keep away. Poor quality.
There are many shirt pocket compact cameras reasonably priced that are better. Sony and Nikon come to mind.
There are many shirt pocket compact cameras reasonably priced that are better. Sony and Nikon come to mind.
Remember, Panasonic makes Leica cameras.
Nov 12, 2023 14:24:47 #
whatdat wrote:
Thought I might look for a lumix d200 for a light weight carry camera with a good reach instead of always carrying one of my heavier Nikon DSLR’s all the time. Comments?
That is a bridge camera. I figure if I were to carry that size camera, I might as well take my regular mirrorless camera and lens. However, last summer I bought a Lumix ZS200, which is a point and shoot camera with a 1" sensor. I like Lumix cameras, which use Leica lenses. I took this camera on Rhine River cruise and got beautiful photos and video clips.
Nov 12, 2023 15:32:48 #
The FZ200 is an 11 year old model, now replaced by the FZ300. Both are 12 MP 1/2.3" sensor 24X lens models. 12MP is rather low by today's standards, but the f/2.8 lens is unusually wide open, a good thing.
I have both a ZS100 (1", 20 MP, 10X lens) and the ZS80 (1/2.3", 20MP, 30X). I like them both and use them almost interchangeably. The ZS80 has more "reach", the ZS100 is better in low light.
I have both a ZS100 (1", 20 MP, 10X lens) and the ZS80 (1/2.3", 20MP, 30X). I like them both and use them almost interchangeably. The ZS80 has more "reach", the ZS100 is better in low light.
Nov 12, 2023 18:08:28 #
timbuktutraveler wrote:
I second the SONY RX100 VII. The best bridge camera. Have taken it from Antarctica to Namibia
with great results. 24-200 lens. If purchasing also get Alexander White's book on the camera.
Very well written and it covers everything!
with great results. 24-200 lens. If purchasing also get Alexander White's book on the camera.
Very well written and it covers everything!
Very good camera. And a lot more expensive! The lumix 200 is not the same camera, yes, but has a longer range & constant 2.8 for much less money used. I have a Nikon p900 that does well but is heavier to carry around all the time. Thought the fz200 would fill that niche when I wanted to carry something lighter with the decent range of 24-600. If I am concerned about really good quality I would also have my Nikon d7500 or d7000 with me, both with really good lenses. The lumix 300 is good but does not have the constant 2.8 aperture. The tx 200 can also be bought for under $200 used. I think there are a couple of others on the forum that have the fz200.
Nov 13, 2023 08:15:36 #
I had the FZ 200, and did not care for it. The picture quality on mine was straight up terrible. My favorite inexpensive, long range, easy camera is the Sony HX 80. 30x zoom. I bought an ugly used one on Ebay for 99 dollars! And the photo quality is amazing for a 1/2.3 sensor camera.
Nov 13, 2023 09:10:53 #
LXK0930
Loc: Souh Jersey
I was in the same situation. I ended up with a Lumix FZ200 (about $75 in LN condition) for a river cruise down the Rhine. It was the perfect camera for shooting from the boat, especially on overcast or drizzly days. I used the "happy" mode to make things "pop" a little. Note that I am 83 yo, with really bad legs, so it was a little too heavy for shore excursions, where I used a Canon s110. Someone in better shape could probably use the fz200 more.
As indicated by other readers, cameras with larger sensors will probably give somewhat better results, but with many trade-offs (cost, weight, constant f2.8 aperature, zoom reach, and versatility). I found the results from the fz200 more than adequate.
Note that the fz300 is basically the same as the fz200, but with weather sealing, heavier weight, and higher cost.
Hope that this helps.
As indicated by other readers, cameras with larger sensors will probably give somewhat better results, but with many trade-offs (cost, weight, constant f2.8 aperature, zoom reach, and versatility). I found the results from the fz200 more than adequate.
Note that the fz300 is basically the same as the fz200, but with weather sealing, heavier weight, and higher cost.
Hope that this helps.
Nov 13, 2023 10:22:50 #
LXK0930 wrote:
I was in the same situation. I ended up with a Lum... (show quote)
If I remember correctly, the fz300 does not have the constant aperture. $75 on the fz200. That was a bargain. I guess you’re not selling it.
Nov 13, 2023 17:41:31 #
hj
Loc: Florida
jimpitt wrote:
Lumix is a product of Panasonic. Not worth it. Keep away. Poor quality.
There are many shirt pocket compact cameras reasonably priced that are better. Sony and Nikon come to mind.
There are many shirt pocket compact cameras reasonably priced that are better. Sony and Nikon come to mind.
PLEASE.... Panasonic Lumix is one of the better non-dslr cameras reasonably priced. Please document your assertion they are poor quality.
Nov 13, 2023 21:34:24 #
Nov 13, 2023 21:46:09 #
R.G. wrote:
My comment was aimed at User ID who thought it might have a 1" sensor. He may have been thinking about the TZ 100 (ZS 100 in the US).
Yes, I actually have one. And the 100 has been superceded by a 200 for a longer zoom and no other difference. Since the 100 zux at max zoom, a 200 should be more worser :-(
Its otherwise a real good camera, but no one should think of it as a superzoom. On the 100 the aperture choice at max zoom is only f/6.8 or f/8.0. Cant imagine how that will translate onto a 200. I think of mine as (about) a "75" rather than a "100".
Did I mention the lens is marked "Leica" ? Who says Germans have no sense of humor ?
Nov 14, 2023 04:58:11 #
User ID wrote:
....Did I mention the lens is marked "Leica" ? Who says Germans have no sense of humor ?
They also have a thriving economy.......
Nov 14, 2023 21:33:58 #
whatdat wrote:
If I remember correctly, the fz300 does not have the constant aperture. $75 on the fz200. That was a bargain. I guess you’re not selling it.
It does.
Nov 14, 2023 23:28:10 #
Wingpilot wrote:
It does.
Your right. I don’t remember where I saw a comparison review that said the fz300 did not have the 2.8 constant aperture.
Nov 15, 2023 00:39:56 #
whatdat wrote:
Your right. I don’t remember where I saw a comparison review that said the fz300 did not have the 2.8 constant aperture.
Essentially is the FZ200, updated with a better EVF and rear screen, better AF, and allowing image stabilization to work in the digital zoom mode. I was frustrated with my FZ200 because IS stopped working when I would enter digital zoom. I believer there were some changes with the controls. And it retained the f.2.8 aperture throughout the zoom range.
Nov 15, 2023 02:39:31 #
User ID wrote:
....Since the 100 zux at max zoom, a 200 should be more worser :-( .....
It's never a good sign when you see things going from worse to worser
.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.