Is this a good camera to purchase...

[SerusMournstar]

I have been looking for a good camera to buy and I think I have settled on the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20K. I want a camera that can zoom in enough to take good nature shots. I also want it to be able to take good macro shots of my reef. I believe the minimum distance for macro is 5cm, can I get good macro shots with a distance of this far? Thanks you in advance for the help and suggestions!

[melev]

You might take a look at this review. It is 10 pages long, but gives you specific answers about every aspect of that camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz20/

It got great grades from dpreview on the Conclusion page.

[gho]

Even though Panasonic is more of an electronics company than an optics company I really like the Lumix series. They look like sweet cameras. The fact that they use Leica lenses puts them way up there with the big boys.

[JDT]

Marc & Gregory, will the fact that this particular camera does not have RAW format, but does have TIFF format make much of a difference.
Jack

[melev]

I've never shot in RAW, and as a matter of fact I was looking for the file formats when I scanned the review briefly and never found them.

As GHO and Travis will tell you, RAW allows you to really edit an image well in Photoshop, as you have the opportunity to fix in software what the camera didn't shoot. However, reading your occupation, I'm thinking you want to point & shoot and hopefully have a nice shot that you can share, right? All my own images that I take are taken in .jpg format, with each file being 300k vs an 18meg RAW file.

I still run my images through Photoshop to resize, and clean them up, usually resulting in images that range from 60k to 150k depending on content.

The review did point out the the video mode was lacking, in case you hope to shoot some brief movies.

[JDT]

Marc,
I am aware that you are still using the S602 which as I have mentioned to you in the past by PM you get some fantastic shots.

Which ever camera I purchase I do want RAW format, but I think, you guys correct me if I am wrong, that the TIFF format will give me the same results. Most of the pictures that I will be taking would be more for my personal use and not for the website so the movies would not be for work but for play or for posting here. All the images that are on the website now I have run through Photoshop, even with RAW or TIFF I would still do the same.
Jack

[melev]

Travis, GHO, and Greg will surely have thoughts about RAW. I've never owned a camera with that feature, so I've not nothing to base any opinions on it - either for or against it.

Travis says RAW is the best you can get, and only shoots in that format. If that is what he thinks is needed, then you are on the right path.

I'll go rally the troops for ya.

[gregr]

i too am a big fan of the raw format. all the aquarium pics i take are in raw mode.
in raw mode you are getting what comes off the image sensor without any processing by the camera (compression, color adjustments, sharpening, noise reduction etc.)- you do all that on the computer. the big advantage is that you can adjust the white balance on the computer- you're not stuck with what you got when you shot it. for aquarium photos this is a huge benefit because of the challenges that the extreme blue lights present.
tiff mode does not have the same benefit. the benefit of shooting in tiff mode is there is no compression of the file- all the data is preserved. however, whatever white balance, color parameters etc. you have selected in-camera become part of the image file. sure you can make adjustments in photoshop, but not color temperature adjustments and once the image is sharpened or had noise reduction applied to it you can't remove it. you can make adjustments but you can't reverse things completely.
for many people the only time they shoot in raw or tiff mode is when they plan on making a big print from the image file. if they are just going to post the image on the web the large file size isn't critical and most of that data/size will be discarded anyhow. but with aquarium photography and the color balance challenges presented by our tank lights, the raw mode is our saving grace.
off the stump now

[melev]

Thanks Greg! I knew there was some reason others loved it. I print about 5 pictures a year, and never like 'em.

[gregr]

there is probably more to learn about printing than there is about photography... a very complicated subject indeed.

[melev]

Yeah, when will that be Thread of the Week?

Travis showed me how I could reduce a huge image to a smaller size, and increase the DPI in the process.

I tried to scan in my son's graduation proofs into my computer at the highest resolution my scanner would save, and each file was over 800 megs in size. Well, my PC has 512 megs of RAM, and Photoshop couldn't load that image. HAH! I rescanned them all again, and have some 'soft' prints from those proofs. Still, it is better than paying SEVEN HUNDRED DOLLARS for a one large print, 1 matted 8x10, 1 8x10, 2 5x7s, and a bunch of wallets. That was absolutely insane.

My ex-wife paid them $250 for the 19 proofs. TSK! According to my son, they took exactly 19 pictures, never once having a problem with him blinking or a need to reshoot. They are true highway robbers.

[TS]

I'm in agreement with Greg on the benefits of RAW. Another big plus is that, with RAW format, you can actually adjust the exposure (to a degree). So if it was slightly under-or-overexposed, you can fix it. Try that with a JPEG or TIFF.

As a side note, since I got the 20D I have been shooting more JPEG than RAW. The auto white balance and metering on that camera are leaps and bounds above anything I've ever used. It really nails the white balance 90% of the time.

T

[gho]

TIFF is absolutely worthless - takes up 3x more space than RAW, and provides no visible benefit over a high quality JPEG.

There's some details on RAW vs JPEG vs TIFF in this link.

You don't need RAW to get proper white balance. In fact its easier to get the WB correct in the camera to start with than try and muck with it after the capture (well, at least for me it is).

I shoot exclusively RAW for the many benefits listed, but the key is to try and get things like WB and exposure correct in the camera. This way you can use RAW to fine tune the image.

Usually if the image doesn't look good coming out of the camera, I don't even bother to post process it.

[gregr]

its easier to get the WB correct in the camera to start with than try and muck with it after the capture (well, at least for me it is).

have to disagree with you here-- with 20k lights and no flash it's much easier and quicker for me to deal with the adjustments on the computer rather than setting a wb manually- it takes about 5 seconds in the raw software [ps cs or capture one] to make things look good. i slide the color temp slider over to 10000k and then move the green/magenta slider to where it looks good- no problemo.
Greg

[gho]

Greg - Well I did say, for me it is. I have a really tough time with color balance, and would rather get it right in the camera - for me, it also makes less work in post - I'd rather be behind the camera than in front of the computer. My 20 K shots were all balanced in the camera.

Usually, for me, if I try to fix color after the fact, it ends up looking horrible and I end up beating my head on the monitor. But that's just me. Even when I fine tune WB, its painful and takes me forever. For most of my shots, I don't touch WB after it comes out of the camera.

But, hey, if works for you, stick with it! Your pics are awsome, so maybe that's the way to go. If you notice a color cast in my photos, let me know, and I'll try to fix 'em.

[mkocab]

SerusMournstar,
I just got the FZ20K for Christmas. I bought it primarily for shooting pictures of my tank. I will warn you about some things. This camera can not focus at full zoom at 5cm away. Here's how the manual reads. Macro mode 200cm (6.56 ft) at full zoom and 5cm (.16 ft) with no zoom. When I bought this camera, I was under the impression I would be able to walk right up to the glass zoom in 12X and snap some wonderfull close ups... not gonna happen UNLESS you also buy close-up lenses. I bought the Nikon 5T and 6T lenses for this camera because I wasn't able to get close enough to the tank and still zoom. These lenses allow you to take close-up shots with a telephoto lens (and that's what this camera has). It is a great camera and takes some remarkable shots but just be aware before you buy this camera, you will be standing about 4-5 feet away from your tank at full zoom without a close-up lens.

Check out http://www.stevesforums.com and http://www.dpreview.com for a bunch of info about this camera. Just go to the Panasonic forum at each site. Almost all the talk there is about this camera.

[SerusMournstar]

Thanks Mko you pretty much answered all the questions i had. I like to take pictures but I am not far enough along that I understand all of the file formats yet. I do however want to take macro shots, as well as shots at a distance of nature things. Where did you get these lenses? How much do they run and how close can they get. Thanks a lot!

[gho]

Serus,

Actually, what Mko commented about the zoom and macro mode holds true for every digicam on the market, not just the Lumix. Also close-up attachments are commonly available too. They cost anywhere from 20-50 USD, depending on the quality. Keep in mind, anything you add in front of the lense will degrade image quality.

Check out this link under "techniques" for some of the things to look for in photographing tanks, and check out "Which Camera to Buy" for some things to look for in various cameras. For more info on file formats, check out the "Workspace" section - this will tell you the difference between JPEG, TIFF and RAW and what to use.

www.ximinasphotography.com/lessons

Hope this helps some.

[melev]

MKO, while shooting in Macro mode, you may or may not need to zoom in fully. It depends on the angle you are shooting, and the thickness of the glass of your tank.

There are some shots I can't get through my 1/2" glass on my tank, unless I back up from the tank and use a tripod. At that point, I'm able to zoom in sometimes. It really does vary.