Panasonic FZ20 vs. Digital Rebel XT (or other DSLR)

[stevetheoldman]

<p> Of course I know which is the "better" camera. Sure, I'd love a

digital SLR. But getting the lenses to match what I have with my ol'

FZ20 would take awhile. I feel like I'd be losing a lot of

capabilities. I could live without the zoom, but man, that f2.8 in a

small, light package is really useful. I'm sure it's

not "professional quality", but I'm not a professional!</p>

<p> What I wish the Panasonic had was more depth of field (f8.0 is

it) and more of a "wide-angle." What I like about the Rebel is that:

a) it's small (I have small hands), b) a lot of features, and c)

great choice of lenses (though that's not going to be a factor for

awhile)</p>

<p> Also, any advice about alternative, digital SLRs that might fit

the budget are welcome.</p>

Thanks!

[ben_kriete]

The Panasonic actually probably has *more* depth of field at f8 than the Digital Rebel does at f32 because of the much smaller sensor and hence shorter focal length lens used. Depth of field is dependent on focal length, not "focal length equivalent." So the 12x (or whatever it is) zoom on the FZ20 is probably something like a 6-72 mm lens which gives you a field of view equivalent to a 36-480 mm lens on a 35mm camera. Depth of field at 6mm and f8 is pretty extreme. If that's not getting it done for you, I don't know what would.

[stevetheoldman]

Yeah, I just hate ignorance...especially my own!

[jimstrutz]

Ben's right about the DOF with small sensors. The FZ20 has it in spades.

 

The other things the DRebel XT has going for it is the much larger sensor, that provides greatly reduced DOF when you want it, faster operation, better autofocus, and greatly reduced digital noise. The FZ20 is a marvelous camera, but 400 ISO is just about unusable, and 200 ISO is not so good either. The Rebel XT looks better at 1600 ISO than the FZ20/30 does at 200 ISO.

 

Still, it is a marvelous camera. It's very fast aperture lens with very good Image Stabilization built in make using 100 ISO an easy thing to do. Image quality is surprisingly good, but it is limited in it's low light abilities. The newer FZ30 has the same limitatiions, but is a substantially better camera. Faster more accurate autofocus, better zoom control, better handling, faster operation, more resolution, etc. All it takes is more money :^)

 

If you think you might get more lenses, and be willing to pack them around, the DRebel XT is a superior camera for sure. But if you want, or can only afford, a one lens system, it's hard to beat a FZ20/30.

[ben_kriete]

Two thoughts - my last sentence wasn't meant to sound rude, more like jovial. The other thought is that I frankly couldn't stand to use anything other than a DSLR. Not because I'm a photo snob, but I haven't yet seen a p&s that was as pleasant to control and shoot with. You will definitely spend, eventually, as much on a single lens for the Rebel as you paid for the FZ20 and that lens will be much more limited...but the system as a whole is so incredibly versatile and much more fun to use if the purpose of owning it is "photography" and not "snapshots."

[stevetheoldman]

<p>Thanks for the input! On the one hand, I've had experience with a film SLR (FM-2) but probably never really understood what the potential of the camera could be. My "system" consisted of a few zoom lenses.</p>

<p>I don't know, maybe the best course of action is at some point to get the camera & 18-55mm lens first, then proceed as funds allow. I've been more or less away from photography for years. Back then (for SLRs) it seemed that Nikon was 'the' camera, but Canon, Pentax, Minolta, Olympus, and I'm sure I'm forgetting 1 or 2 others were worthy choices also. Now (for DSLRs) it's pretty much Nikon or Canon, with the others just beginning to get their acts together.</p>

<p> Again, thanks for your thoughts!</p>

[andrew_bignall]

I recently sold my Fuji s9000 kept a Panasonic FZ20 and an EOS 300D.

 

The FZ20 , in my opinion, is very sharp, has great anti shake, a first class sensor and my

A3+ prints are very nice indeed. I do , if necessary use Neat Image for noise issues.

 

The EOS 300D is great too, light, which I like, has a great sensor and I mostly use it with a

28 135 zoom EF USM I.S. (multiply x 1.6) . Recently bought a 50mm 1.8 for it which is

razor sharp for upper body portraits and my original kit lens (18-55 S ) is sharp and very

useable especially 28mm ..50mm ish.

 

I think there are two issues for me

 

a.Good image capturing performance at a sensible cost. Low noise and flexibility hence

EOS300D. Used mostly for objective photography.

 

b. Flexibility and lightness for walking around with, like a tourist. Hence FZ20.

 

For my money, I keep it tight ish, the FZ20 is a first class photographic tool for advanced

amateurs. It's a better compromise than the FZ30 which is alot heavier and noisier.

 

Frankly you should consider buying a second hand mint version of both of the above, a

few second hand lenses for the EOS300D and enjoy the best of both worlds. I do.

 

Oh yes, If money was no object I'd buy top of the line canon slr, a full suite of L lenses, etc

etc and still keep the FZ20. It's astonishing image stabilised lens is probably "L" standard !