I won't pretend this is anything like a scientific appraisal of the Panasonic FZ-45. I have had the camera for 24 hours and have barely touched the range of settings available. I bought the FZ-45 as a lightweight carry-around camera for those situations when lugging a full dslr and lens set-up is not practical.
First impressions… the FZ-45 is very light, portable and though it feels a little flimsy compared to the 40D it is comfortable to handle and should survive moderate knocks and scrapes. I chose it over the FZ-100 and Canon SX30 IS, mainly on cost but also in the knowledge that when I want first rate shots I'll use the the DSLR. So I went in with open eyes on the relative drop in image quality. The FZ-45 has a 24x optical zoom which offers about the maximum reach as my 400mm lens. It comes with an array of auto- and manual-settings, and offers jpg and raw formats. Shutter lag is passable, but in full format you can't shoot rapid bursts (around 1 shot per second as opposed to 6 per second on the DSLR). Being so much smaller it's also slightly tricky to change settings quickly, but that should improve as I become more familiar with the camera.
As for image quality the FZ-45 simply cannot compare to a DSLR, particularly in the quality of the in-camera processed jpg files. At full size they exhibit significant signs of the image processing. This is a 100% crop of a greenfinch shot as a jpg in the FZ-45.
Click for full size image
The next shot is a similar crop of the same bird photographed with the 40D and 100-400mm lens.
Click for full size image
Neither shot has had any post-processing done to it, but it's immediately obvious that there is loss of detail in the FZ-45 image. This level of variation was consistent across a number of frames. The degradation is less of an issue when viewing the images when presented as screen-sized photos. Both these next shots have been processed for the web using my usual post-processing routine (ie a quick bit of noise reduction, level adjustment and sharpening).
Greenfinch with FZ-45
Greenfinch with EOS 40D
The next two shots were taken later in the day and compares the FZ-45 raw output with the DSLR. I'm happy with both, though there is much more detail at 100% in the DLSR shot.
Cormorant with the FZ-45, shot in raw
Cormorant with the EOS 40D
I've included a 100% crop (unprocessed) of the FZ-45 raw file here. What's interesting is that while there is evidence of some noise and soft edges (the crop is wholly unprocessed), the overall quality is better than the in-camera processed jpgs (though obviously lacking the brightness and other benefits of image processing). As a side note, I haven't used the supplied raw processing software (Silkypix 3.1 SE) as the disc failed to load (it's being replaced), so I used the Adobe dng converter instead.
I'll be using the FZ-45 quite a bit over the next little while, so I expect to get better at understanding its idiosyncrasies. That will undoubtedly assist in getting the best out of the camera. As with all equipment, there is something of a learning curve to overcome.
Camera note: images taken (as indicated) with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ45 and Canon EOS 40D. The Canon had the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L USM IS lens attached.
Words
15 Oct 2010TBR, I'll reserve judgment on how good until I play a bit more. I'm processing them in Photoshop Elements which I'm not very familiar with so it's hard to compare with the dslr raw files. I've reduced a lot of the internal processing for the jpg files on the basis that less is better and gives me more to work with. Must read the manual though!
anonymous
15 Oct 2010Anonymous writes:
Well – its interesting you found the FZ45 RAWs to be good. That must have improved since the FZ50 then (I think!)
TBR
serola
15 Oct 2010This is great 🙂 Thanks for sharing the information.
Some comments on your greenfinsh examples though… The enlarged picture of photo taken with FZ-45 is enlarged more, and therefore I wonder what it would look if seeing examples where exactly same amount enlarged. EDIT: :doh: Now I understand the chosen magnifications. FZ-45 has 14.1MP and 40D has 10.1MP.
Then it looks like FZ-45 gives much deeper blue color and tones in general by default, which of course can be either good or bad thing.
gdare
15 Oct 2010Also, in a photo made with FZ-45, every detail has the same zoom (everything is sharp) while with DSLR you need to zoom manually.
But quality is much different. Well, as you`ve said, it is good enough for web posting :up:
Words
15 Oct 2010Darko, you certainly have easier control with a dslr, and focusing is more precise. The real test will be when I start using the FZ-45 more regularly and get to know it, and set it up as I want. Only then will I know whether I'm happy with it.
Words
15 Oct 2010Sami, the enlargements for the blog were just rough, but the linked files are both at full size so provide a truer comparison.
Words
15 Oct 2010Erwin, you're welcome!
SittingFox
16 Oct 2010Interesting to hear of your experiences. I haven't used a non-DSLR for some years now. My last one was a Fuji Finepix but I had mixed feelings on its quality.
Words
17 Oct 2010Adele, yes I think stepping down is going to be hard. Good as they are, they cannot come close to the level of detail that a dslr produces so hefty cropping is out. There are just too many compromises in the design. The plus side is they don't weight anything at all (well, not that you would notice) and they do the job for small prints and blog-shots.
Ukwildlife
17 Oct 2010We've just got an fz 45 at work. Ive only played with it on a poor weather day but Im quite impressed with it. Not as good as my dslr set up but its less than 1/4 of the weight (and cost!), plus it has a niffty video mode.
Words
17 Oct 2010Neil, yes the video mode is excellent, and I much prefer having an eye-viewer for filming as it's inherently more stable to hold the camera against your face rather than peering into a screen. I'm beginning to get a handle on the stills mode, so will see how that goes. Be interested to hear how you get on with it (if as and when you get to use it).
Wulpen
19 Oct 2012Great thank you for sharing this :up: