Camera Advice: SX100IS vs DMC-FZ8

[insanie]

Hi all

I'm looking into buying a camera, just for normal "everyday use" - family events, holidays etc, nothing "special" and am looking for any advice.

I think I've narrowed it down to the Canon PowerShot SX100 IS and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ8. Both seem like pretty solid camera's, good value for money and are in my price range (around R3000).

According to the reviews I've been reading (Canon (http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2007/11/13/Canon-PowerShot-SX100-IS/p4) and Panasonic (http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2007/05/05/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz8/p4) ), the Canon seems to have the better picture quality, while the Panasonic has the better features, but overall the Canon seems to come out on top. (I've based this on a number of online review not just the links posted above) I know pretty close to zero about photography, but if anyone perhaps has used either/both of the cameras, of could offer any advice based on the specs (listed in the above links), I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks

[bwana]

I see in this side-by-side (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_sx100is%2Cpanasonic_dmcfz8&show=all) comparison that the Lumix lets you shoot in RAW though how useful that will be to you is another matter.

You do mention that the Canon "seems to have the better picture quality" - if so then that's enough for me. It's all about the photos right?

[Napalm]

I've used the FZ8.


The RAW feature is quite nice, cause you can take out any noise and alter the picture without losing picture quality.

If a picture is taken in normal Camera mode (saving / compressing in .jpg format) Then the picture was already saved and compressed, so it loses some quality then. But if you should want to alter the picture then. You would lose even more quality, depending on the lighting or whotever you wanna change.

[bwana]

I've used the FZ8.


The RAW feature is quite nice, cause you can take out any noise and alter the picture without losing picture quality.

If a picture is taken in normal Camera mode (saving / compressing in .jpg format) Then the picture was already saved and compressed, so it loses some quality then. But if you should want to alter the picture then. You would lose even more quality, depending on the lighting or whotever you wanna change.RAW is nice but it isnt that nice. There are limitations. ;)

[Napalm]

But yeah, i would say. That u could not go wrong either way. Both those camera's are very similar in features. One is 10x Optical, the other is 12x Optical.(Not much in it)

Both have Optical Image Stabalizers :>>>

[koffiejunkie]

According to the reviews I've been reading (Canon (http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2007/11/13/Canon-PowerShot-SX100-IS/p4) and Panasonic (http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2007/05/05/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz8/p4) ), the Canon seems to have the better picture quality, while the Panasonic has the better features

In 10 years time when you show those pictures to your family, what are they going to notice - the camera's features or the great quality pictures you took? :)

[jacqvt]

In 10 years time when you show those pictures to your family, what are they going to notice - the camera's features or the great quality pictures you took? :)
I totally agree with you here, I had the Panasonic FZ50, which I also bought because the canon equivalent was way more expensive. BUT, Panasonic's image quality is bad, really bad. At first it looks great, but have a closer look.... Panasonic's built in noise reduction do a terrible job, even at the lowest setting. I've tried everything I could think of, but it stayed the same. You can't go wrong with canon.