1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

New TZ100 vs Superzoom Lens

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by listers_nz, Jan 12, 2016.

  1. listers_nz

    listers_nz Mu-43 Veteran

    256
    Nov 22, 2013
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Simon
    I'm considering camera options for an overseas family holiday coming up later in the year (not until July, so plenty of time). I'd like an option which avoids lots of lens changes and carrying around too much gear.

    I presently have a GX7 so the Pansonic 14-140 Mk.II is under consideration (had it before, liked it, but sold it). However, The upcoming TZ100 has me wondering whether I should be looking at that instead (assuming it lives up to the marketing).

    The cost difference between the two looks like it will be minimal, so that doesn't really help.

    The TZ100 is obviously smaller and lighter than a GX7/14-140 combo, but you are stuck with the lens that is on it, which doesn't give a "fast lens" option. However, on such a trip I'd almost certainly take a second camera anyway - so something like a LX100 or maybe a GM5 with a fast prime or two could cover that.

    Maybe I'm just trying to talk myself into getting it regardless, but I'd be interested in waht others think.
     
  2. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    Small cameras are always tempting for travel. Buy it and see if you like it. You can always sell it for a small loss. How often would you use the 14-140 after your vacation? If you sold the last one for lack of use then it probably won't be different this time.
     
  3. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I am strongly considering selling my 14-140 v1 in exchange for the ZS100/TZ100 once prices drop a bit, and once I see what the RAW output is like, and the lens quality. I'm cautiously optimistic. It would also be a great way to get into some of the new Panasonic features like 4K Photo and DFD. Weird to think that a teensy little compact might end up being the wildlife/action shooting camera in the family...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. listers_nz

    listers_nz Mu-43 Veteran

    256
    Nov 22, 2013
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Simon
    You are probably right, the 14-140 would probably just sit in the cupboard until the next trip. I didn't sell the previous one because I didn't use it, I sold it to help finance the Panasonic 12-35 / 35-100 f2.8 pair, but my assumption was that once I got those I wouldn't really use the 14-140 on a regular basis.

    That is definately one of the reasons I'm leaning towards it :)

    Maybe the worry is that I might like the TZ100 too much it would make it hard to justify keeping the GX7 - nah, not going to happen! :)
     
  5. Halaking

    Halaking Mu-43 Top Veteran

    667
    Dec 17, 2012
    Los Angeles
    Morris
    Many reviews show 1 inch sensor P&S like RX100 I/II/III/IV, G7X, even LX100 all soft at the wide angle, maybe is the cost from small lens barrel, I think build-in lens somehow is inferior.
     
  6. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I am thinking along similar lines, but I have to see how good the image quality of the TZ100 is.

    My only concern is that if I had a 14-140, yes it would be much bigger. But I could also swap to my 15 or 25mm if wanted outstanding quality and/or fast aperture. I can't do that with a TZ100.

    But then again, I didn't take my m43 kit out even one time during my last family road trip. I was having too much fun pushing kids in the stroller at parks and playing on the beach. It sat in the trunk the whole time while I used my phone and small compact that fit in my wife's purse. So that's why I'm leaning towards the compact if the quality can suffice.
     
  7. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I would see the TZ100 fitting into any bag where the 14-140 could fit, literally as a direct surrogate. At least the version 1 lens that I have. So I could take my M4/3 kit with some lenses that still can't be touched by any compact (fast prime, macro, fisheye, wide angle zoom, etc...) and the general purpose good-light photography can happen with the TZ100 when quality differences will be much more subtle.
     
  8. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I guess. But if I'm carrying my kit bag, then a 310g tz100 vs a 260g 14-140 doesn't really do much for my portability, does it? Even if comparing the old 400g 14-140 it doesn't buy much. I'd only be interested if it meant I could leave the bag at home (or at least the hotel safe for most days of the trip).

    I guess my dream would be for someone to make a pocket camera that has a 1" sensor and a 35mm equiv/f1.4 prime on it. Then I could put one in each pocket (or both in a small belt bag) and leave the kit bag at home!

    The one thing that has me worried about the TZ100 is that with the slow aperture, isn't it a daytime only cam? Well we already have pretty good daytime pocket superzooms with a 1/2.3" sensor. Will this make much of a difference? Maybe an extra 20 minutes when the light fades since I have a couple ISO stops headroom? But it is not going to be a low light cam, nor will it have significant DOF control.
     
  9. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I never bring a kit bag out with me shooting. I can't even think of once. I bring a kit bag and leave it in my room, and bring the camera and lens combination I want to shoot with out with me. Maybe 1 extra lens in a small bag, sometimes.

    I don't really see the major benefit of the sensor size to be in low-light or ISO capability at all, but in terms of benefits to dynamic range, sharpness, and resolution. At 100%, 16MP or even 12MP 1/2.3" cams are always a bit fuzzy, and if you can even take RAW, it can be more trouble than it's worth (though with the obvious benefit of white balance adjustments and not having terrible, heavy noise-reduction baked in).

    To me, the utility of this camera will entirely hinge on how good the lens is.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    100% agree. That's why I'm waiting for some real reviews and haven't pre-ordered.

    Just the initial buzz of this makes me wonder if I could trade m4/3 for a TZ100 and LX100 combo. I probably won't, but it is fun to think about.
     
  11. listers_nz

    listers_nz Mu-43 Veteran

    256
    Nov 22, 2013
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Simon
    I'm not thinking of the TZ100 as something to slot into my bag in place of a 14-140, rather as something to take instead of taking the bag. In the bag (assuming I take them all) I have the P12-35/2.8, the P35-100/2.8 and the P100-300, so assuming the 14-140 would fit in there as well, I'm not sure whether I would use it in preference to one of the others.

    So I guess I need to decide if I don't want to take all the gear, would I rather take the GX7 + 14-140 or a TZ100. The advantage of the TZ100 may be that when I'm not on holiday I could just slip it into my work bag, whereas the 14-140 may just end up sitting in the cupboard.

    Neither option solves the issue of wanting something for low light use as well. Taking the GX7 with 14-140 gives the option of taking other lenses, whereas the TZ100 would mean taking a second camera (be that the GX7+ lens or something else).

    That has crossed my mind. I'm thinking that the combo would be quite good for travel - you could carry one or both depending on the situation, and it gives you a "backup" camera should one stop working for any reason. I can't see the pair replacing my m4/3 kit completely, as the GX7 + 35-100 gets used for my daughter's figure skating and neither "compact" covers this range/speed.
     
  12. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    RX10 II? :)
     
  13. listers_nz

    listers_nz Mu-43 Veteran

    256
    Nov 22, 2013
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Simon
    I had looked at bridge cameras as an option, but except for length with lens attached, the Sony is bigger and heavier than my GX7 with 35-100 f2.8, and I'd still like something smallish for when I can't take a bag full of gear, and I'm not sure the Sony will fit in my jacket pocket! :) or fit my budget either :laugh1:
     
  14. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    If you only need the long-end, you're giving up quality going from a 35-100/2.8 to the 8.8-73.3mm/2.8 on the RX10 II. And it's more expensive than the 35-100/2.8 these days, too...
     
  15. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Hi

    my friend bought the Nikon V1 when it came out, its the same size sensor, but with interchangable lenses. He only has high praise for the camera and all the images I see on his huge screen HD-TV cycling though his collection are great (when his daughter isn't watching Frozen again that is...).

    I see fool after fool on my travels struggling with a fat enormous camera and an accoutrement of L series (equivalent) f2.8 zooms I laugh as I watch them struggle (and fromthe the faces of their family, annoy them too) while they try to turn every shot into a prize winner. They labour under their burden and they transform their holiday into a tedium.

    I bought my GF1 and a 14 and a 20 for exactly the reasons of avoiding that stuff. I have often considered an LX-7 and to me the TZ100 is better again.

    I say go the TZ
     
  16. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    But the RX10 comes with a free camera and a 12-35mm f2.8, though! :)

    I know it is a bit worse, but it's worse in the same way that the TZ100 is worse than a 14-140. A little less than a stop of sensor size.

    THe line of conversation was that it's getting to the point you can almost see having 2-3 high end compacts instead of a bag of lenses and a ILC or two.
     
  17. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I think the issue is that the 14-140 is a pretty decent lens by superzoom standards, well above the "soup zoom" reputation that the old DSLR 10x zooms had. But from my fairly extensive use of it, I use it because it's versatile, not because it knocks my socks off.

    Lenses like the 12-40/2.8 or the 35-100/2.8 can knock your socks off. In a way that I doubt any 10x zoom can, whether it's interchangeable or fixed, Zeiss or Leica or Canon L.

    So while I suspect that the TZ100 may suffice for casual use in exactly the same way that the 14-140mm does, for times that I want to create really special images, I'm not sure the RX10 could scratch that itch anywhere near as well as the f2.8 zooms on M4/3 do. And that only has a little bit to do with sensor equivalence, and everything to do with optical excellence.
     
  18. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    My statements were mostly hypothetical. I don't disagree with you.
     
  19. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

  20. listers_nz

    listers_nz Mu-43 Veteran

    256
    Nov 22, 2013
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Simon
    Nice, but I'm not sure an 18mm fixed lens is for me, but each to their own.

    What I've decided I'll do is get a LX100 now (was contemplating it regardless) to "replace" a couple of P&S cameras I've just sold off. Then get the TZ100 (rather than a 14-140mm lens) when it is released, and use the two "100's" as my travel kit (depending whereI'm travelling to, obviously).

    I'm now looking at my M4/3 kit on the basis of what do I really want in the bag that I will actually use and that I don't mind carrying around. For example, I really think the half a kilogram of 100-300mm lens might be better in someone else's bag :biggrin:, and for those times when I do want something a bit longer something light like the 45-175mm might suffice instead :)