After using this camera, is there anything you HATE about it? Optical zoom range seems a weak point.
1480054
No, optical zoom range is not so bad - especially when you compare it with the average 4/3 camera with zoom lens that is 3.5-5.6 and has a kit lens of 14-42mm. I think what is truly a problem is the fact that even sitting across the table from someone, you cannot even take a real picture of him/ her because of the camera's problem with - even relative - closeness.
1323811
I tried to use that camera but the lack of a zoom among other things led to my returning it. I ended up buying a Sony camcorder for $130 which works works much better with a zoom The Sony camcorder is extremely light and easy to carry around.
2175660
I've had the LX3 for about a year and I'm anxious to get rid of it. It's not very pocket friendly for one thing. And I still dislike the complex menu system. It obviously takes fantastic photos, but I don't know how to say this... It's just not "usable". I like to carry my camera around and take quick and spontaneous photos. And with the LX3, this is just not possible.. bulky size, manual lens cap, slow start-up, slow focusing, clunky menus, etc. Don't get me wrong. The LX3 is a fantastic camera. And it has more creative controls than the S90, but it just doesn't suit my shooting style. I'm planning to get the S90 as an everyday camera, and a Canon DSLR for more composed and serious photos. The LX3 will be going on Craigslist soon.
1461549
My experience is that the camera is good. It doesn't match up to more expensive models in terms of speed of multiple shots. I also had some trouble taking pictures at a graduation in dimmer light while my son-in-law with a more expensive Sony had no problem. It does what I want which is take good pictures of family and even scenery, but it has some limits.
1196606
Any photos developed yet? My one concern is low light photographs...Just wondering about quality and ease of use. How easy are the automatic features to use?
568654
Very bad in my experience with it. It's a good camera outdoors, especially on sunny days. Indoors, the combo of the long zoom and small sensor make for dark pics and/or blurry pics. Almost all cameras are trade-offs. This one's trade0offs were not for me. The FZ150 is a much better camera and the FZ200 is probably better yet. The FZ200 is expensive, so not a truly fail comparison. It is also bigger.The best compact in the world right now (my belief and that of many others) has a 3 -4 x zoom and a 1" sensor and costs $650 --- the Sony RX100. It's the same size as the ZS15 or maybe even a bit smaller. I wish it were cheaper !!! :-). Very bad in my experience with it. It's a good camera outdoors, especially on sunny days. Indoors, the combo of the long zoom and small sensor make for dark pics and/or blurry pics. Almost all cameras are trade-offs. This one's trade0offs were not for me. The FZ150 is a much better camera and the FZ200 is probably better yet. The FZ200 is expensive, so not a truly fail comparison. It is also bigger.The best compact in the world right now (my belief and that of many others) has a 3 -4 x zoom and a 1" sensor and costs $650 --- the Sony RX100. It's the same size as the ZS15 or... » Read More Very bad in my experience with it. It's a good camera outdoors, especially on sunny days. Indoors, the combo of the long zoom and small sensor make for dark pics and/or blurry pics. Almost all cameras are trade-offs. This one's trade0offs were not for me. The FZ150 is a much better camera and the FZ200 is probably better yet. The FZ200 is expensive, so not a truly fail comparison. It is also bigger.The best compact in the world right now (my belief and that of many others) has a 3 -4 x zoom and a 1" sensor and costs $650 --- the Sony RX100. It's the same size as the ZS15 or maybe even a bit smaller. I wish it were cheaper !!! :-). « Show Less
2096661
I have only used mine once. I am finding it is kinda a joke to use. I would love to return it. Or even sell it.. But other then that it is good for someone who loves to take photos from afar.
1649318
Has anyone seen any actual reviews of this camera as opposed to marketing spec lists? Sometimes I've seen pre-production models of cameras that get reviewed prior to actual release. It is the low light ability claims of the Nikon that I'll need to see put to the test. That's probably the biggest Achilles heel of all these superzooms. It may have a CMOS sensor (which explains the burst speed of this camera) but it is still the same small size sensor as all the superzooms so I'm dubious about any huge improvement in low light. All of the previous versions of this new crop of superzooms (Nikon, Sony, Fuji) only got a flat four star rating in Amazon while the Panasonic FZ35 and FZ40 both are at 4.6. This new group has longer zooms than the Pansonics but I need to know if the picture quality is improved in any way.
1074084
It's pretty decent! It's a bit grainy, and you can only zoom in like once before it gets into super gross and grainy, it has a blue tint to photographs. but here's a regular zoom pic with no filters:https://www.dropbox.com/s/itdukx4wzj3u3j5/2013-06-22%2013.30.41.jpg
41041
Note that many of the small cameras in this class that DO allow zoom during video produce noise while zooming that many users have described as anywhere from annoying to unacceptable. I am torn on the issue personally. I can see both sides.
1940851
Thanks again. I'll be deciding by the end of the week, because I'll have to return the Canon by Saturday! Another thing re: the Panasonic is that you can attach certain lenses to it to extend the zoom and possibly some other stuff. I like that Idea. I love cameras with big wide lenses on them!Take care, and thanks for your thoughts.
1888575
Actually no! I am currently sitting in Africa, where I have been taking amazing pictures of people, landscapes, life, urban and country. I have zoomed in all the way and then it focuses as if I were standing looking at my object of intent. Each picture is stunning. Even zoomed to the max, in a moving car, through thick traffic, my pictures still come out nice. I do wish it had a black and white feature, but every other feature is incredible. And, as stated the zoom works well. I still like my Nikon better, but this is much easier to travel with, and won't as easily be stolen in this environment. Further, it is tough, literally. I dropped it and it was run over by a passing car. I picked it up, brushed it off and kept taking pictures. The Africans around me were so shocked. Not that I showed it, but so was I. Overall, I do not get my black and whites, I cannot zoom as close as I do with my Nikon for macro shots, but I can get excellent pictures, the zoom and focus work in perfect synergy, and it can take my roughness and keep going with me, war zone, urban life, or home in the good 'ole US of A.
565036
Hello.Would anyone please comment on the zoom function of the camera? I intend to take pictures from a far distance. Thank you. Corinne
1061547
I also have this camera and have had it for nearly two years now - I have overall been nothing but disappointed with it! I am a novice photographer but it is something I do enjoy... and I get tired of the frustration with this camera!! I am currently looking at just ditching it all together and investing in something that will make photography rewarding and fulfilling again. I RARELY have good indoor/low light pictures with camera & it has always been that way, I could be side by side & my friend with a Panasonic FX series point & shoot gets phenomenal pictures & I get completely unusable images. I also have had from the day I took my H2 out of the box an issue with the batteries! I can maybe, and I do mean MAY BE stretch a set of fully charged batteries (not using the LCD either) for taking about 30 or so pictures if I'm lucky. The camera takes an abundantly long period of time to recharge the flash after discharge which means you miss some really good shots. The AF is beyond frustrating when focusing in on a monochromatic item causes it "lose" the image and then due to the zooming if it has any depth of field to it the image is out of focus. Bottom, line this camera does take very nice quality outdoor pictures, but really does anyone want to spend $500 on a camera that only takes a few pictures outside and even at that they can't take hi-speed or rapid sequence images? Good luck finding out how to get high quality images in lower or indoor lighting.
1074083
It's pretty decent! It's a bit grainy, and you can only zoom in like once before it gets into super gross and grainy, it has a blue tint to photographs. but here's a regular zoom pic with no filters: https://www.dropbox.com/s/itdukx4wzj3u3j5/2013-06-22%2013.30.41.jpg
70969
I have had problems with this camera, doing things like that. Seems like a good little camera if you don't try to zoom but the image stability feature doesn't work well. Any zoom at all and the picture blurs. I have found that if I want to take pictures that are going to need zoom then I take it on the highest number pixel available and use a program to zoom in on the part that I want, later.
2042462
Flash is pretty underpowered; understandable at this size. Without flash it pops up to ISO 800 and if the camera is stablized, generates a decent picture with a bit of noise/grain - but not terrible. Anti-shake not great in low light, so needs to be set on a table or tripod to take a decent pic