View Single Post
  #1  
Old September 14th, 2018, 10:07 PM
Doug Kerr Doug Kerr is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alamogordo, New Mexico, USA
Posts: 8,567
Default It's the lens, stupid

It is said that, to an embryologist, a chicken is just a egg's way to create another egg. And in that same vein, it often seems (and well it should) that the role of a camera is to support a lens.

I've gotten a real appreciation for this outlook as I consider two of my favorite cameras, both Panasonic Lumix models, a DMC-FZ1000 and a DMC-ZS100. Both have the identical sensor ("one inch" size) and processing chain.

The size and weight comparison between these two machines is dramatic:



In fact, the "body" of the FZ1000 is comparable to the size of a Canon EOS 6D Mark II.



The FZ1000 has a fixed zoom lens with a focal length range of 25-400 mm ff35 equivalent, with an aperture range of f/2.8-f/4.0. The ZS100 has a fixed zoom lens with a focal length range of 25-250 mm ff35 equivalent, with an aperture range of f/2.8-f/5.9. At 250 mm, the FZ1000 lens has a maximum aperture of f/4.0, while the ZS100 is f/5.9, a little over one stop "slower" for the smaller camera.

It seems that the lenses on the two cameras differ not only in their numeric parameters but in performance: for the same focal length and aperture, the images from the FZ1000 are almost always sharper than those from the ZS100. And the lens assembly of the FZ1000 is much larger than that of the ZS100 (and I assume heavier).

So, why is the "body" of the FZ1000 so much larger, and heavier, than that of the ZS100? Well, I guess to make it a "reasonable" bearer for such a larger, and certainly heavier, lens.

So why do I like the ZS100 so much? Because I can put it in my pants pocket. And it doesn't take up a whole place at the table when we go to a banquet meeting!

Best regards,

Doug
Reply With Quote