New Lumix 14mp Digi Cams. Any Roumors?

[Judaeus Apella]

Edit: I see know that I cannot get the kind of quality I want in 12 to 14 megapixels in a compact point and shoot. So I'm exploring other options, but I don't want a DSLR.... well maybe if it was really compact and the lens it came with was good with macro.

Needs:
Great at macro
True 12-14mp
I don't want issues with detail softening/smudging
Good with shadows and low light, doesn't need to be spectacular but at least good or above average.
I don't want a battery eater. I prefer Lithium if I have the choice.
Price limit = $450


//////////////////////////////////
So I've been reading about these new lumix's that are coming out soon, and I just happen to be shopping for a larger MP camera!.

(Click Links For Specs)
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH20
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH3

Has anyone heard anything about what these models will cost? I'm hoping </= $400. But I doubt they'll be that low, at least for a while.

I'd love to get a 14mp, but I'm looking for something that can handle darker shades and lower light situations better than average. Anyone know anything about these models? I've been checking each week, but I can't seem to find anything out and they're still not available yet. No reviews either.

The only thing I don't like is the fact that the video is in quicktime format. So if I own this camera I'll need a video format converter.

[Lestat]

it'll be under $400.... none of their point and shoot tiny models are that expensive, that is one thing that makes them attractive, along with superb image stabilization.
piss poor zoom though,

problem is that the p-n-s models have such a massive crop factor, and they shove so many pixels into such a small sensor (ala T1i and 50D) you get noise issues.

14 vs 12mp.... go with a more established 12mp maybe the canon SX20 IS ? (i think thats the model).

small models like that NEVER handle darker shades and low light... your looking in a completely different class of cameras bud.... none of those tiny cameras are worth a sh|t in low light.

[Judaeus Apella]

Its been a while since I've been through my photography class.... so bare with me here. That canon is 36 - 360mm. Doesn't the minimum mm have to do with how close you can get to a subject?

[Mescalamba]

Lolz.. 14mpix on 1/2.33" CCD sensor? That will be plagued by noise even at lowest ISO.

I would rather buy used Minolta 5D or Canon 20D or something like that..

Even Canon had some common sense when they decreased mpix in G11 (G10 had 15mpix, G11 has 10mpix).

[Mescalamba]

Its been a while since I've been through my photography class.... so bare with me here. That canon is 36 - 360mm. Doesn't the minimum mm have to do with how close you can get to a subject?

Yes, but if I´m correct it also depends on size of sensor and if floating elements are inside lens or not (most of macro lens has floating elements, which is element that moves independently on rest of lens elements and thats how macro lens can achieve close focus).

[Judaeus Apella]

Well I'm looking for something that's compact, =/< $400, is good with low light/shadows and macro, and has decent battery life. I don't care about view finders. The ability to add lens attachments or additional lenses is a plus. I'd most likely get a macro accessory, unless they charge too bloody much for it which they usually do. >.>

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 is my dream camera... but I don't have $850. lol

I understand that compact as one of my needs limits my options, but I refuse to carry some big bulgy thing around. I HATE that with a freakin passion. And in the city near where I live and sometimes visit, that's an invitation to be mugged. That happened to me the last time I went into the city with an SLR. I was about to bash the guy sneaking up on me in the face with my tripod, when a street cleaner came up and scared the guy off. I'm never buying another SLR. They're clunky, annoying to travel with, and I don't like taking them into the city.

I really miss the design of the Sony W5. Strong steel casing, steel tripod mount, great battery life, and steel threads for adding lens attachments. Unfortunately, I dropped mine and ever since, it eats batterys within an hour. I have no idea what's wrong with it, but the camera repair guy told me it would cost more to fix it than to just buy another camera.

[Marin]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...al_Camera.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...al_Camera.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...al_Camera.html

[Judaeus Apella]

And that helps me how?

[Mescalamba]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...e_Digital.html

And this?

[Judaeus Apella]

[ridney]

this is what you are looking for

[Judaeus Apella]

Okay guys, now you're just messing with me. If you want to post a suggestion from now on, please actually read what I said above and take this seriously?

[Mescalamba]

Um actually.. I think that G1 + kit lens is very good choice for 499,- USD. It is compact (quite) and batter life is around 300 shots. IQ is best for this price..

[Judaeus Apella]

That's $100 too much. My max is $400. And as big as my cargo pants are, that is simply too big to fit in them. I wish it would fit but it doesn't. I've already tried, haha. I will not carry a camera bag or carry a camera around in plain view, I might as write "Please rob me?" on my forehead. And I hate carrying things anywhere else but my pockets.

Yes, I know I'm difficult and stubborn.

[Boissez]

Canon s90 or Panasonic LX3 are the best low-light compacts on the market right now. The S90 is more pocketable than the LX3 but the LX3 has better manual controls.
PS: they're both 'only' 10MP but vastly superior to any 14mp digicam on the market - their sensor is twice as big and their lenses are at least twice as bright at the wide end.

PPS: There are rumors about a new LX4 coming out next week - you may wan't to wait it out to check it out.

[Judaeus Apella]

Canon s90 or Panasonic LX3 are the best low-light compacts on the market right now. The S90 is more pocketable than the LX3 but the LX3 has better manual controls.
PS: they're both 'only' 10MP but vastly superior to any 14mp digicam on the market - their sensor is twice as big and their lenses are at least twice as bright at the wide end.

PPS: There are rumors about a new LX4 coming out next week - you may wan't to wait it out to check it out.

Thanks, I'll try and find a way to check that out but I don't know anyone locally who sells them, which really freakin urks me because Best Buy used to have them but yanked them all off the shelves!

[Boissez]

It's definitely a good idea to audition them in a brick and mortar store. They are very different cameras although they have similar specs.
Personally I went for the LX3 but the S90 definitely has its merits too...

[Judaeus Apella]

How big of a print can I get off the LX3, if perfectly exposed and focused? The whole purpose of upgrading to a larger megapixel is I wanted to get some larger prints. 8.5x11 is too small for me when I want to exhibit on my wall something I'm proud of.

[Mescalamba]

I would check dpreview.com and their LX3 review pics..

I would say, its not that tragic as other compact cameras, probably best pics.. along with G11.

[Boissez]

How big of a print can I get off the LX3, if perfectly exposed and focused? The whole purpose of upgrading to a larger megapixel is I wanted to get some larger prints. 8.5x11 is too small for me when I want to exhibit on my wall something I'm proud of.

How large you can print is very subject and context dependent IMO. I.e. for single portraits I'd say that 6MP is enough for large prints (A3-A2), as viewers seldom check the models pores out - for very large group portraits OTOH having 20 MP makes a notable difference as viewers often scrutinize those.

That said I'm pretty confident that you can make some very sharp A3 prints (I haven't made any myself - I use a 20D for that) with the LX3 using good technique and post. The lens and sensor on the LX3 is very good - one just have to be aware of it's main weakness: microcontrast (fine detail with little contrast such as hair or foliage). These have a tendency to be washed out or simply not there - but this is a given with a sensor this small.

[Judaeus Apella]

Dammit....

Fine, it looks like I can't get the performance I want without buying a larger body camera. Suggestions? And the new max balance is $450. What can I get for that?

Needs:
True 12-14 megapixel camera
No problems with detail, contrast, etc
Good in low light and capturing shadows.
Excellent macro ability or inexpensive macro lens attachment.
Decent battery life, doesn't have to be great but doesn't gulp down batteries either
HD Video and panoramic shots would really be nice to have...
It would also be nice if I could find a camera that was good at freezing motion (freezing a waterfall in place so its not all blurry), I've seen it done with inexpensive cameras but I don't remember what was used.

[Mescalamba]

Only true 12mpix is GF1/E-P2 there isn't compact that can match it.

Good low light? Ehm, depends "how good".. D700 good? Or just acceptable?

I guess you are realizing that if you have high demands, you usually need to pay high price..

Or buy something decent, second-hand.

[lazy]

Im sorry but just what do you intend on printing that you require a 12-14mp? If your looking for a P&S camera then the only "good" ones are the Canon G10/G11, Canon S90 , Panasonic Lumix LX3 / and thats it.
Anything more then that will require a camera that changes lens and only thing small enough is what Marin posted a micro 4/3's camera.

[Boissez]

Dammit....

Fine, it looks like I can't get the performance I want without buying a larger body camera. Suggestions? And the new max balance is $450. What can I get for that?

Needs:
True 12-14 megapixel camera
No problems with detail, contrast, etc
Good in low light and capturing shadows.
Excellent macro ability or inexpensive macro lens attachment.
Decent battery life, doesn't have to be great but doesn't gulp down batteries either
HD Video and panoramic shots would really be nice to have...
It would also be nice if I could find a camera that was good at freezing motion (freezing a waterfall in place so its not all blurry), I've seen it done with inexpensive cameras but I don't remember what was used.

Yeah... like the others mentioned above there is no way you can have it all with such a limited budget - but let's try anyway here's my take on a low light/macro budget DSLR setup:

Sony Alpha A230: 410$
Relatively compact and in-built image stabilizer (good for low light) - decent camera at a very good price.

Minolta AF 50mm f1.7 ~ about 80$ of ebay
Great for portraits and low light (especially with the built-in image stabiliser)

12/13mm AF extension tube ~ about 60$ of ebay
Put this on the 50mm lens and you have a decent 'semi'-macro lens (about a 3"x2" field of view)

If you're willing to buy the DSLR used you just may be able to fit within your 450$ budget.

PS: I know it's not technically 12 or 14 MP but with 10 million real fat pixels (unlike the ones in digicams) this sestup should yield you very very good images that can be blown up to poster size - but again only if you're anal about technique (re-linkage for truth )

[Judaeus Apella]

I don't want a full size DSLR... Sorry but I don't have any need to switch between lenses like that and I'm not an advanced user. I have no use for something like that and I'm sure I can find a decent camera without getting a DSLR. Remember, I'm still a beginner. Plus they're too big, expensive, and clumsy.

Are these any good?
Nikon P90
Olympus SP-590
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35
Samsung HZ25W
Canon Powershot SX20 IS

And lazy, please at least read the last post so you know what's going on in a thread before you say something?