Hello, me again. I have the Panasonic Lumix FZ-20 and later bought this Tokina 3x zoom lens. Well, it captures aweful pics, or is it maybe that I need to get a steady stabilization like a tripod or monopd and remote shutter??? This lens only cost me $80 on ebay new. I see panasonic sells a 1.5x lens for $200, so that tells me the Tokina lens is cheap not only in quality but cost.
Joe, I think you may be mixing a converter (multiplier) and a lens. Since the FZ-20 has a built-in lens (rather than interchangable lenses like most SLRs) I assume what you bought is a converter which degrades image quality (the very best and most expensive ones degrade the image very slightly but the generic ones will show very obvious degradation).
The Panasonic converter will likely be of better quality but will still show some degradation.
I'm curious from the specs it looks like the FZ-20 has a huge zooem range with the built-in lens. Why would you need a multiplier?
My advice is if you want to really get into photography as a serious hobby get a DSLR. I had a Canon DSLR system and got in a mood one day and sold everything. I bought a Panasonic FZ-30 to use while I figured out what I wanted to do (I was really interested in using it for macro). It was fine for some stuff, but one day I wanted to start shooting birds again and it just wouldn't cut it. You can get a Nikon D50 or a Canon Rebel XT for about $600 and you could sell your Panny to recoup some of the cost.
Believe me, once you use a DSLR you won't go back!
BTW, I had an Olympus converter for the FZ-30 and didn't like it.
I have an FZ-20 that I bought as a back-up, walking-around camera, to use instead of carrying my DSLR, lenses and gear. It seemed like the perfect camera, on paper. Well, it was terrific with the grandkids at Disneyworld, but it's no substitute for a DSLR with good lenses. After the new wore off, I used it less and less and now I hardly use it at all. You might be able to buy an entry level DSLR, such as a Canon Rebel, for less than the new cost of the FZ-20. Good lenses cost more. A 300mm lens with the 1.6 Canon crop factor would give you the equivalent of 480mm compared to the FZ-20's equivalent of 432mm.
My major dislike of the FZ-20 is its electronic viewfinder. It just isn't in the same league as an optical TTL viewfinder. The exposure controls on the FZ-20 are too fiddly, too. I think Panasonic may have fixed that with the FZ-30.
The FZ-20 is OK for it's intended use, but if you really want more reach, put your money in a DSLR and a good telephoto lens.
I know a used digital rebel can be had cheap on Ebay or Fred Miranda. Like Buck said, the lenses will be an investment though! The FZ-30 is a little better camera than the 20 but nothing like using a DSLR with an optical finder. I usd the Panny on Christmas day and missed more shots than I got because it is SLOW compared to a DSLR-slow to focus, slow to write to the card etc.
Discussion
5 repliesThe Panasonic converter will likely be of better quality but will still show some degradation.
I'm curious from the specs it looks like the FZ-20 has a huge zooem range with the built-in lens. Why would you need a multiplier?
Guy
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/User-Guide/FZ-10/
A colleague at work bought the Olympus 1.4 convertor and seems fairly happy with it, but he is probably not that demanding.
My advice is if you want to really get into photography as a serious hobby get a DSLR. I had a Canon DSLR system and got in a mood one day and sold everything. I bought a Panasonic FZ-30 to use while I figured out what I wanted to do (I was really interested in using it for macro). It was fine for some stuff, but one day I wanted to start shooting birds again and it just wouldn't cut it. You can get a Nikon D50 or a Canon Rebel XT for about $600 and you could sell your Panny to recoup some of the cost.
Believe me, once you use a DSLR you won't go back!
BTW, I had an Olympus converter for the FZ-30 and didn't like it.
I have an FZ-20 that I bought as a back-up, walking-around camera, to use instead of carrying my DSLR, lenses and gear. It seemed like the perfect camera, on paper. Well, it was terrific with the grandkids at Disneyworld, but it's no substitute for a DSLR with good lenses. After the new wore off, I used it less and less and now I hardly use it at all. You might be able to buy an entry level DSLR, such as a Canon Rebel, for less than the new cost of the FZ-20. Good lenses cost more. A 300mm lens with the 1.6 Canon crop factor would give you the equivalent of 480mm compared to the FZ-20's equivalent of 432mm.
My major dislike of the FZ-20 is its electronic viewfinder. It just isn't in the same league as an optical TTL viewfinder. The exposure controls on the FZ-20 are too fiddly, too. I think Panasonic may have fixed that with the FZ-30.
The FZ-20 is OK for it's intended use, but if you really want more reach, put your money in a DSLR and a good telephoto lens.