Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ70 SuperZoom Camera - $318.40 C&C @ Harvey Norman ($350- $400 Elsewhere)

Related Stores

Harvey Norman

• 

  UncommonName on 10/01/2016 - 11:14

  -3

  Why would someone buy a DSLR-like bulky point-and-shoot??!

  • 

    SteveAndBelle on 10/01/2016 - 11:20

    +3

    Yes, I also thought the same thing… until I used one :) The 60x Optical Zoom on this is equivalent to a 1200mm DSLR lens making it far more compact and effective than a DSLR for what we need it for.

    • 

      UncommonName on 10/01/2016 - 11:25

      Zoom is a convenience, not an indicator of image quality.

      At that zoomed in range, image stabilization practically becomes helpless. Try to take some photos at 1200 mm (equivalent) and see how soft the image is.

      DSLR 1200mm lenses are pro level sharp lens, that's why those costs thousands of dollars, there could be no comparison of them with P&S lens.

      • 

        SteveAndBelle on 10/01/2016 - 11:29

        +3

        Yes, we did that and the clarity at full optical zoom was more than acceptable for us. Actually couldn't fault it TBH and even managed to digitally zoom in on the zoomed shot and still end up with a very clear & acceptable image! Of course as per the description above, it cannot be compared to a pro grade camera but 'each to their own' and it does an incredible job for what it is. Far more enjoyable to use too with zero hassle.

      • 

        UncommonName on 10/01/2016 - 11:33

        @SteveAndBelle: If you are happy, then all is well.

      • 

        SteveAndBelle on 10/01/2016 - 11:43

        +6

        @bargainaus: … and this is where the buck stops :) Another example of this is audio. I have a pair of $11,000 'Martin Logan' Electrostatic Speakers at home powered by thousands of dollars of high-end 'Perreaux' Amplification running through very wanky and expensive Audiophile grade cables. It all sounds absolutely phenomenal and so it should but switching over to my $200 Chinese Tripath Amp connected to a pair of tiny $100 Voll Bookshelf speakers the difference in sound quality is nowhere near $11,000+ worth. Lucky for me I didn't have to pay retail for any of the high-end gear but it does reinforce the issue that cost and/or specs doesn't always reflect the 'real world' performance & functionality.

      • 

        Duff5000 on 10/01/2016 - 21:16

        +1

        The difference in $$ becomes apparent when you use cameras like this in somehting other than outdoors in good light.

        In good light lots of people wouldn't notice the difference between this and an ILC. Once the light level drops though, the superzoom quickly becomes useless. The lenses are too slow and the sensors too small to cope with the high ISO required.

        I gave my wife a sony untrazoom recently and they are excellent to have but if the conditions are anything but ideal the ILC is going to be used instead.

• 

  deathwarrior on 10/01/2016 - 11:17

  +2

  $25 newsletter Voucher will reduce it to $293.4

• 

  Coops1 on 10/01/2016 - 11:45

  -1

  I have never looked back. http://www.sony.com.au/product/dsc-wx500
  - 30x Optical, 60x IntelliZoom (you cant even tell its digital)
  - Steadyshot makes for a perfect non blurred zoomed image
  - SLR in Point and Shoot format
  But, each to their own

  • 

    unity1 on 10/01/2016 - 15:53

    And FREE headphones?

    • 

      Coops1 on 10/01/2016 - 20:47

      Yes, there was and maybe still a deal with these…..videopro deal on eBay was a ripper….I bought ages before this though.

      • 

        unity1 on 10/01/2016 - 20:57

        Their $297 deal was still active the other day, but obviously no eBay discount now. Today is the last day of the Sony promotion too.

  • 

    Duff5000 on 10/01/2016 - 21:26

    +1

    30x Optical, 60x IntelliZoom (you cant even tell its digital)

    Have been using the hx60v with the 30 optical wich is very similar to this. The digital zoom is nothing like having an equivalent optical zoom, not even close. Just crop your shots later.

    • Steadyshot makes for a perfect non blurred zoomed image

    Lens quickly drops from f3.5 to f6 which dramatically increases your shutter speed if you are zoomed in. In anything other than good light (or sticking to the wide angle) the stabilizer isn't much help.

    • SLR in Point and Shoot format

    That doesn't really make any sense. Ultrazoom in a compact format maybe, this is nothing like a SLR.

    • 

      Coops1 on 10/01/2016 - 22:41

      I own 2 SLR's, I use the Sony 70% of the time……

      Like I said, each to their own.

      • 

        Duff5000 on 11/01/2016 - 10:33

        +1

        Indeed, wasnt suggesting the sony is a bad camera just clarifying from experience that your 3 points were rather questionable. Is it usable for a good percentage of what people want photograph? Sure, i wouldn't have bought one otherwise. They are a handy tool to have but lets not exagerate.

        The "intellizoom" is nothing like the optical zoom, the lens is slow and it is nothing like a SLR.

        100% crop at 60x http://i.imgur.com/QqpQDr3.jpg
        It isnt any better than just shooting at 30x and cropping in post, nor should anyone expect it to be.

• 

  kevitkotw on 10/01/2016 - 14:58

  +1

  For what it is worth, here are my 2 cents.

  I am enthusiast when it comes to photography, I am aspiring to get professional results without blowing my cash on the 'go-to' professional gear. My research has been focused on bang for buck equipment that can achieve professional looking results.

  I would never buy this camera with regard to what I am trying to achieve. It is not capable of focusing sharply, accurately or quickly enough for my needs. It doesn't have the ability to capture detail or colour to the level that I am looking for.

  While focusing to 1200mm on a dslr equivalent sounds amazing, I see this as a gimmick, and it would never produce a photo that I was happy with. I would suggest that an image from a decent dslr could be photographed at 300 or 400mm, cropped to the same magnification and have more usable image quality. Having said that, the amount of heavy cropping involved there would compromise a picture significantly as well, but it does illustrate how 1200mm equivalent is highly subjective.

  Bottom line is, my opinion is subjective, as is everyone the opinion of everyone else. I wrote this because of the glowing reports on this style of camera. I hope my playing the devil's advocate provides some perspective to anyone wishing to use something other than a smart phone for photos.

  If people would like to learn about photgraphy equipment, check out the materials produced by Tony and Chelsea Northrup at YouTube, or their website, I think they have reached a good balance of solid information while still being approachable.

  • 

    netsurfer on 10/01/2016 - 16:53

    +1

    The key point the OP was trying to point out is that even OP's professional friend (with DSLR gear) is happy with this camera as a ready to shoot, easy to carry, a more relaxed way to take photos. Sure you can bring your 70-300mm with your DSLR, but that could be time consuming and heavy.

    A decent 70-300mm with the result you want probably implies a Canon L lens or a Nikon equivalent of an L lens. That lens is $1000+. Image quality of a cheap 70-300mm lens (e.g. in the $100-$200 range) is really sub-par, cannot even beat a kit lens in the 70-135mm and the 300mm isn't sharp (I had one and it was such a disappointment). In fact, it was after experiencing the sub-par quality of the low end 70-300mm DSLR telephoto lens, I decided to get a cheap point and shoot instead.

    By the way, I cannot comment on this camera because I don't own it nor used it before. I have DSLR, micro 4/3rd and cheap point and shoot (only up to 750mm equivalent with IS and 1080p60fps, but that one costs way less than this one). I do use the point and shoot quite a lot while I am outside. Sometimes, I just want to relax and point and shoot. Majority of my photos are not important anyway.

    Composition, lighting, and the actual content of the image are often far more important than the camera and the lens. Besides, a Canon 5D mark III with a L lens would be an overkill for me. I don't have the skills to benefit from it. As for the real professionals, they KNOW whether this camera is suitable for them or not.

• 

  itsdanthaman on 10/01/2016 - 16:39

  +1

  for those who dont care about the pure art of photography, this camera is fantastic. Have taken many professional style photos with this camera, we happily paid $400. Have never seen it this low.