which Lumix??
My dad gifted me with a Panasonic Lumix point-and-shoot camera for my birthday in March. I had chosen a specific model, and had thought that was the one that I wanted, but my dad informed me that a new model was coming out in late March that had more cool features than the one I wanted. So we decided to wait to get the camera. My task was to research the different models (including the new model) and decide which one I wanted to go with.
Well, as my blog followers know, I've been a little busy, and although I have been super excited to finally get a digital point-and-shoot (I've never owned one that fits in a pocket), I haven't had time to do the research since my birthday in mid-March.
So last night I finally spent some time looking at the different models online, and think I have it narrowed down. I know for sure I want one of the wide-angle models, because I don't think I can live without wide-angle, even in a pocket camera, and now I just have to decide between super high-tech or medium-tech.
So the two I have it narrowed down to are:
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35 (came out in January 2008)
and the
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX500 (the brand new one released late March)
They both have some truly amazing features, and even though I shoot professionally, I think it will take me awhile to learn all of the cool things the camera can do. Things like Intelligent ISO, Face Detection, Intelligent Exposure, High-Def video and so much more.
They both have the 25mm ultra-wide-angle lens that I want, and both have fully manual capabilities.
One key (and very big difference- aside from the $115 price difference between the black models), is that the new Lumix- the FX500, has a super fancy touch-screen LCD. It also opens to f/2.8 and the FX35 only opens up to f/3.3. The FX500 is also a teensy bit bigger, which is actually preferable to me. I don't need a camera I can stick in my bra, ya know? The FX500 also has a slightly larger LCD screen.
Here is a side-by-side comparison on dpreview, for all of my techy friends.
Unfortunately there are zero reviews on the FX500 online, only the standard press release. I don't think I have ever bought an electronic item without reading at least one review on it first, so it gives me a little bit of pause.
Having said that, I like the idea of the super fancy camera, because, really, who doesn't want a super fancy camera? But in reality, I fear that I may not like the touch-screen feature. Has anyone used a camera like this before? Or even an iphone or pda like this? Does the screen get greasy fingerprints on it? Is it easy enough to train your brain to navigate with your fingers and not buttons? Do you like using the touch-screen more than regular button controls? Does the supplied stylus help or hinder?
I'm itching to get my new camera soon but don't want to make the mistake of choosing something I don't like, or something that is so much more than what I really need. Yes, I know I can send it back, but I know me, and my life is busy enough it would get put on the back burner until the return grace period ran out.
Any suggestions or input for me on which I should get?
Any advice is sincerely appreciated! Thank you! :-)
Stumble It!
Well, as my blog followers know, I've been a little busy, and although I have been super excited to finally get a digital point-and-shoot (I've never owned one that fits in a pocket), I haven't had time to do the research since my birthday in mid-March.
So last night I finally spent some time looking at the different models online, and think I have it narrowed down. I know for sure I want one of the wide-angle models, because I don't think I can live without wide-angle, even in a pocket camera, and now I just have to decide between super high-tech or medium-tech.
So the two I have it narrowed down to are:
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35 (came out in January 2008)
and the
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX500 (the brand new one released late March)
They both have some truly amazing features, and even though I shoot professionally, I think it will take me awhile to learn all of the cool things the camera can do. Things like Intelligent ISO, Face Detection, Intelligent Exposure, High-Def video and so much more.
They both have the 25mm ultra-wide-angle lens that I want, and both have fully manual capabilities.
One key (and very big difference- aside from the $115 price difference between the black models), is that the new Lumix- the FX500, has a super fancy touch-screen LCD. It also opens to f/2.8 and the FX35 only opens up to f/3.3. The FX500 is also a teensy bit bigger, which is actually preferable to me. I don't need a camera I can stick in my bra, ya know? The FX500 also has a slightly larger LCD screen.
Here is a side-by-side comparison on dpreview, for all of my techy friends.
Unfortunately there are zero reviews on the FX500 online, only the standard press release. I don't think I have ever bought an electronic item without reading at least one review on it first, so it gives me a little bit of pause.
Having said that, I like the idea of the super fancy camera, because, really, who doesn't want a super fancy camera? But in reality, I fear that I may not like the touch-screen feature. Has anyone used a camera like this before? Or even an iphone or pda like this? Does the screen get greasy fingerprints on it? Is it easy enough to train your brain to navigate with your fingers and not buttons? Do you like using the touch-screen more than regular button controls? Does the supplied stylus help or hinder?
I'm itching to get my new camera soon but don't want to make the mistake of choosing something I don't like, or something that is so much more than what I really need. Yes, I know I can send it back, but I know me, and my life is busy enough it would get put on the back burner until the return grace period ran out.
Any suggestions or input for me on which I should get?
Any advice is sincerely appreciated! Thank you! :-)
Labels: jamie's first compact digital, panasonic cameras, which lumix
Stumble It!
4 Comments:
hey jamie,
i too am choosing between the fx35 and the fx500.
when checking the properties (exif) of some of the images shot with an fx35 posted on flickr, it seems as if that camera actually can open up to 2.8 at the widest angle. maybe the figures used by dpreview.com aren't correct?
in my book, the touch screen of the fx500 is not necessarily a positive feature. i haven't actually used one, but i suspect it can get as greasy as, say, an ipod touch (which i use daily). i don't like the idea of judging image quality on a screen smeared with finger prints...
the pricing is another issue. over here (sweden) the difference between the two cameras is currently closer to $250 than $100.
other than that, the specs of the fx35 appear to be subsumed by those of the fx500, so the latter is probably a better camera.
i'll probably get me an fx35...
cheers,
f - smudo.org
Thank you so much for this f! I think you have talked me into the fx35! I read your comment and it was if you were reading my mind. Given the fact that I am constantly wiping off my lcd screen on my canon, I can't imagine I would be any happier doing that with a compact camera.
I plan to travel one of these days and I can just see me in a taxi in Morocco, trying to clean off my greasy lcd with a dusty shirt hem, ha!
Thanks again for your input! I'll let you know what I decide (my prediction: fx35).
Oh, and I'll go check out some sample images on flickr!
one more thing.
You are right about the f-stop. the fx35 does go to 2.8, so it's a misprint on dpreview.
I just looked at a HDR shot composed from 3 shots from the fx35 and was blown away. I think I'm sold!
and stunning macro too! I'm getting it!! Woohoo!
Post a Comment
<< Home