Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7 Comments

If only Panasonic had released this back in December last year...I have the TZ5 which in itself is a fabulous camera but the sound quality for the video mode is poor. What is the sound quality like on the TZ7?

I was wondering, does the video still suffer from vertical banding when the sensor is subjected to extreme contrasts in scenes like sunsets? That's about the only thing that's keeping me from buying this camera. Thanks!

How does this camera manage to get a "9/10" for image quality? Two things are very obvious in these pics.

First, even at base ISO there is a lot of specking in dark areas of the pics. It only gets worse as the ISO goes up. This is plain to see in your ISO tests.

Second, and this is most obvious on the large picture of the beached boat, the JPEG compression or noise reduction are awful creating a watercolr type of effect even in full daylight picture.

And this is a 9/10 on image quality?

Wow...........

It may take great pictures with plenty of light, but I agree with the previous comment: you can see noise even at base ISO.

I completely disagree with the review when it said that "Dynamic range is very good considering the small size of the sensor". You cannot judge dynamic range in way way or another depending the size of the sensor: There is only one reality: the dynamic range of the picture shown is truly awful. Dynamic range is supposed to combine details of BOTH dark and highlighted areas, not only of one or the other. And that picture clearly shows that the highlight details are simply non-existent.

In my opinion, a camera with such a mediocre dynamic range, and that shows noise even at base ISO shouldn't deserve a 9 in image quality. That without mentioning the noise levels at higher ISO.... (yes; not much worse than most compacts, but still so bad...)

@Kanu

You must bear in mind, that there are several types of cameras and you should compare them with models from within the same group. So if you compare any p&s camera with a DSLR, p&s will be beaten for sure. The same applies when comparing budget DSLRs and semi-pro ones.

I own TZ5, which is by no means a perfect camera. But I can wholeheartedly recommend it to anyone interested in a good, all-round, fully automated p&s. And I'm sure that TZ7 is also worth such a recommendation (unless someone comes up with a camera similar to Fuji F31fd).

Absolutely agree with Kanu ! Also if you look at full size picture you will see how washed out are all the colors...

Please remember this is a compact camera...

If the camera is deficient image quality, then well it is deficient. There is no point "recommending" it. Nothing here is better than compact cameras we had 3-4 years ago.

How on earth will consumers know what the real deal is - and more important, how will manufacturers get the message if review websites keep giving a free pass to flawed garbage?

Can i ask, those of you who are complaining about the image quality, what are you comparing it agianst? The price is extortionate, but will go down within a couple of months of release. The TZ5 can be picked up for £170 now which is very reasonable for what it is.

The TZ5 is most definitely pocketable by the way, happily slipping into a jeans/trouser pocket. The ruggedness of the camera means it can stand up to being dropped from reasonable doubt without trashing it. Isn't this why it is considered a travel camera, rather than one to combat DSLR's?

@ ZenerEffect: sensor size is not (only) a matter of cost, for a small pocketable cam it's much more a matter of lens size. The bigger the sensor the longer the lens has to be (with equal focal length). Thats why DSLR-teles are that big. With a larger sensor a 25-300 wasn't feasible in s small cam.

@dev and Freddie: Owning a compact camera should not mean not being able to capture good pictures in low light. It is physically possible to have small camera that takes good pics in good light and low light (ie Panasonic LX3). So yes, if you compare the noise levels of this camera to the LX3, then there is a clear winner (and that's not the TZ7). For dynamic range, it seems like the Fuji F200EXR beats the TZ7 quite clearly. And if you cannot have a bigger sensor with such a long zoom, well then take the 1/2.33" sensor of this camera and instead of squishing 12 megapixels into it, put 8 (or even better, 6 or 5) megapixels in it. That would increase image quality considerably, and would allow people to realise that having a compact camera isn't an antonym of being able to shoot at low light with guarantees.
However, as Kany said, if people continue to welcome this kind of image quality, manufacturers will keep selling it to you. Your choice.

Agree. The LX3 has very short zoom and so it can have a larger sensor and IQ is very much better. It's a choice between long zoom and better picture quality, but if you want the big zoom there's no cam which is better than the TZ7, I'm afraid. I did compare it with the new Canon SX200, and the Canon is worse.
That 6 MP would be far enough and would improve picture quality a lot is obvious for us - but not for camera manufactureres ... they think they have to join the MP race and that no one would buy a cam with fewer MP than 12 ... let's be glad they didn't put 15 MP on the TZ7 ;) ...
I guess they are wrong, meanwhile a lot of digital photographers are experienced enough to know that less pixels = better quality. At least they could offer (instead of 3 colours .. ;) two versions of the same cam, one with 6 MP and one with 12 MP, and consumers could decide for themselves what to prefer ...

For a compact, I guess it isn't bad, but the IQ would not tempt me away from my 5MP camera as I don't need bigger files / pictures / A3 prints and frankly, I don't think the difference between this and the Pentax previously tested is worth the extra cash (although it would be nice to have "Leica" on the front of my camera!). What would tempt me is the speed - I hate waiting while the camera has a few quiet moments to focus / think about what it's just taken etc.
It would be useful if there was some seperate ratings - 'performance': Fast = good, slow = ****.
Colour accuracy: it's difficult to compensate for erratic colours (in various lighting conditions too). What do Cliff's cars really look like?

Good review. I really like the colors the TZ7 puts out. Now if only the price comes down to a reasonable level.

Thanks for the clarifications Cliff. But in my opinion; no, you don't have to go and compare the image quality (especially dynamic range and low light) of this camera to DSLR cameras. I mentioned that there are some (very few unfortunately) compacts that have better IQ (Fuji F31, F200EXR, and especially the Panasonic LX3 & Sigma DP1...) than this TZ7. So why compare image quality to the majority (and bad) of the compact camera market, instead of comparing it to the few and good?

If I remember correctly the Canon A2000 scored a 10/10 in IQ. To me this is excessive because a 10 should represent almost perfection, and the A2000 might take glorious pictures with plenty of light, but its low light performance is far from being 10/10 (and low light performance should not be less important than day light performance).

You mentioned that IQ includes "exposure and focusing accuracy, colour reproduction, low-light performance, lens quality, and at least in this case video quality as well, not just image noise". This is true. But if the image is great under daylight conditions, but it's so awful at ISO 400 or higher, then it cannot be said that the camera scores 9 or 10/10. Especially when, as I said before, it can be compared to other cameras that do much better, because we don't have to forget that it IS possible to have a good IQ camera for day AND low light (sometimes we could forget it, as 98% of the cameras come with tiny sensors).

Whish everybody would be a bit more critic on IQ, that could make manufacturers realise that public demands better IQ, not more megapixels.

Thanks for a great review. Perfect for someone like me who just wants the best p&s camera to improve the quality of my holiday pics.

Only worry I have is that I'm always putting my camera in and out of it's case - how will this effect the loose dial (is it really THAT bad? How does it compare to the dial on the TZ5?)

For those of you critising image quality - would any of you care to recommend a similar camera in terms of size, ease of use (iA for example) and features (HD video) that may be better for me?

Canon 960 has better image quality. I would still question if that is good enough quality, but better than this.

There is no point buying junk for features. The purpose of a camera is image quality and this aspect cannot come last in weighting, as it seem to in far too many reviews. This is why the public gets junk peddled at them - the press is far to uncritical.

Hi there,

I was wondering if I could plead for some digicam advice. I was lucky to have my first digicam purchase be a Panasonic DMC-FZ5 and up until recently I have had a glorious time happysnapping anything that took my fancy. Unfortunately, this digicam is now very tired from overuse of the zoom feature! Rather than blurring pics at zoom extremities it now blurs all pics - I'm lucky to get clear pic after 4-5 attempts.

As I'm not luxuriously flush for funds, I never embark on buying expensive purchases lightly, and always strive for quality as its true that you get what you pay for. To this end, I talk to experts and research a wide range of reviews on every model digicam thats current to the market according to what features I need. Except now, with so many options I've researched myself into total and utter confusion!

I've narrowed options down to Panasonic (either this TZ7 / FZ28 /FZ18 ?), Canon (960is?) or Nikon (L100?). I don't mind Olympus either but from reviews I'm not sure if the SP565/570 UZ? or the mju8000 tough? would really suit my requirements.

Basically, all I need in a digital camera is:
1. Quality - a camera thats not going to date quickly (is 3-5 yrs too much to ask? lol)
2. Reasonable Durability - I have 3 very active kids who know that hurting my digicam
wont be doing their popularity any favours, but what does "murphys law" care?
3. Optical Zoom - blame the FZ5... I'm addicted and Love this feature!
4. Picture Colour Quality - vividity of colour in photo printouts with low noise and
no photoshop wizardry would be ideal. I have photoshop but am completely
ILliterate for how to use it.. in fact I have several photo programs and am
equally capable with all of them! (I'm studying psychology - time to navigate
photo programs doesnt exist)
5. Automatic (intelligent auto) / Point & Shoot quick start + Motion or Blur Sensing,
(each digicam company seems to have different names for this).

Number 5 is is THE most critical factor in my purchase, and will be what sells or kills a digicam option.

While I loved my FZ5, I wasnt able to figure out a way to prevent pics of the kids from blurring when they moved or played sport. Ok, so reading technospeak in a digicam manual isnt a forte of mine, but even handing the manual over for techno-normal speak translation from friend-"experts" didnt rectify this issue. With 2 of my kids being somewhat overenergetic, having no automatic auto-anti-blur feature makes staged kidpics a nightmare, and natural kidpics nigh impossible. Since a digicam in my snaphappy hand has become my kids version of a nightmare, it just makes automatic, freeze-in-the-moment motion sensing from any camera I buy an even more essential feature!

I found I never used half the features of my FZ5 and mainly kept the dial on "simple"(automatic). Rarely, I experimented with sports, macro and fireworks settings but "simple" always managed better photography than my attempts. Most of my FZ5 pics were taken indoors or outdoors until early evening. I think I may need something more reasonable for night photography but nightpic settings arent a critical feature for my new digicam.

As to other digicam features available: I have no need for live recording functions, raw+jpeg variable formats, audio quality, zoom-while-recording, manual settings i think... or will I?) and I dont wont to buy a dslr. My maximum budget is $650AUD and I really need to purchase a camera b4 going away on april 16. I live regionally, so going out to the shops to test drive models isnt always an option for me. My eyes are crosseyed from spending 24hrs over 2 days confusing myself with reviews!

For anyone who has the expertise to translate this post to a matched digicam, I am immensely grateful in advance! Thank you everyone for your time reading this post :)

Innigowhale

Jeff at DC Resource just reviewed this camera, and even he was surprised that the Panasonic's Hi-ISO IQ was superior to the Canon SX200IS. And HE LOVES Canon cameras! After all, this camera costs less than the LX3, and has a much longer zoom range. And it's brand new. The price will go down. Panasonic (and Leica) should be applauded for producing a camera with such a long reach and such wide angle capability while retaining sharp results at both ends of the zoom range. It's too bad that there are no manual controls, because that makes it useless to me. Being able to control depth of field and shutter speed improves your pics exponentially, in my opinion. It's interesting to see that DP Review's interview with Panasonic engineers says that Leica will not allow Panasonic to use any digital enhancements to improve optical quality on any Panasonic camera with a Leica branded lens! This is why the G1 has no Leica branded lenses. I think people are too critical of compact camera's performance. I recently bought a Panasonic FX500, and when pixel peeping things don't look as good as some lower res. small sensor cameras. Yhis is proof of the experts always saying that packing more pixels onto such small sensors actually degrades image quality that requires more processing to repair. But, in real applications, such as 8x10 prints, it is still the best camera I have ever owned. If you can't deal with the limitations of small sensor cameras, then buy a DSLR. But don't criticize people who like compact cameras. People should get what they like, not what other people tell them to like.

Dear Mr Smith,

Sincere Thanks for your advice! As mentioned, technical jargon is not a forte of mine, and I found myself confused with the different functions that each digicam claims is "new & improved" or "unique to..." etc. I was unable to find reasonably consistent reviewing on blur-clear + vibrant colour printouts at a decent range of zooms for one single digicam let along comparatively. Between reviews from professionals and consumers for many digicam models, I could not establish which digicam would better suit my purposes and I felt I was just reading-around in circles.

I want to thank trustedreviews.com for providing decent, credible reviews that on the whole ARE easier for a consumer to understand. Between the professional review by yourself Mr Smith, and the consumer comments, this site provides a general, well rounded perspective on available "toys for big kids". Clearly, trustedreviews.com is the www. leader in its class. Again, thank you.
Innigowhale

Can somebody help me please? I two young children and would like to take those 'special memories' in both stills and video. At present I have a 2 yr old standard Panasonic Mini DC Camcorder (quality ok but not great) and a Nokia D50 DSLR (photo quality good). I would like some kit which does both video/photos well. Somebody bought me a Sony DCS W110 Cyvershot which does neither very well at all - in fact I'd say photo quality reminds me of old 35mm camera and video on 32" HD TV is terrible. Panasonic Lumix TZ7 seems to foot the bill but I don't know how it compares with the Sony and the other bits of kit I have.

I would be extremely grateful for any comments. Price not an issue - I just want a decent bit of kit in small package

All. after looking at my son,s TZ 3.. I have ordered a Tz7. and am at this moment waiting for delivery. My current (film) camera is an OM 10, with 35/70. Zuiko, It has given me good service, but with advanced technology, I wanted to go pocket size. I have read many good views on the tz7, together with the big, zoom, and Hopefully excellent video, I am hoping that it will fit my needs. I will report back, on my opinion of the camera, in due course. Thanks a lot for the informative video,, which swung my decision to buy, Cliff S. and to all the other comments. DGJ. S20/ 21/04/09

Ok, going to Italy in late May and I need a good quality snapshot cam...not taking an SLR. So which is it , TZ7 or LX3, and why?!?! Thank you!

All. Howdy, Yes ! my Tz7 came bang on time, from Amazon. I could have paid less, on other dealer sites. I am very pleased with the camera,it does all and more that I need, I agree with all on Cliff Smiths review, it appears the ratchet,, is now firmer. Unless you want to go full size Digital/SLR with the extra control that one would offer, then why ((bearing in mind the Tz7 Spec.)) go any bigger ? I can cover most any picture and HD VIDEO in great quality,, 25mm to 300mm zoom, and since getting the camera, I have learned that by reducing the pixels, then OPTICAL zoom can be had up to 21.4X All this is BEFORE digital zoom. !!, wow ! and then slip it in my top pocket !! just what I wanted. I recommend Highly.. but of course, it all depends,,on what (YOU) want. Cheers, DGJ. S20. 24/04/09

Hi there,

I am stuck between the TZ6 and FZ28, could someone advice me which would be better to get thanks ! PS: most important is picture quality for me.

Is there any information concerning sound quality of TZ7?
Sound of the video of TZ4 AND TZ5 was extremly poor accordig to tests and according to my experience.

I have just returned my recently purchased Panasoic Lumix TZ6. In all honesty I must agree with some of the previous comments regarding picture quality. That was this camera's biggest letdown! Grainy and noisy around the edges-YES!!! It's not what I expected from a £270 camera. Despite achieving a spectacular 9.4/10 rating on another reviewing website, which I trusted, I'm sorry to say the TZ6 didn't live up to my expectations. I'm sticking with my trusted and much loved Canon IXUS 950 IS which despite being almost 2 years old and having 'only' 4x optical zoom still produces astonishing results!!!

Is anybody here???
Is there any information concerning sound quality of TZ7?
Sound of the video of TZ4 AND TZ5 was extremly poor accordig to tests and according to my experience.

The TZ6 and TZ7 have different sensors. So you shouldn't expect them to have the same image quality output. This review is for the TZ7, not the TZ6.

Having read several reviews elsewhere it appears that the (now) experienced users are disappointed with the battery life... despite the good reviews on the features, if the battery doesn't last long then the camera. Does TrustedReviews have any comments on the matter (I feel your rating has neglected to include this very important aspect)?

Been using both the TZ7 and the LX3 for a few weeks. Their lenses and their insides are totally different, so comparing their IQ doesen't really make sense, especially since their target public is so different.
I have a F100fs, which IQ-wise is king, but is not feasible as a discrete walkaround camera. Also, in Brazil, flaunting a monster like that in certain places is an invitation to being robbed. Violently.Very violently.
The TZ7, though without real manual controls, has enough tweaks to do the job 99% of the time, while being very discrete. And the LX3 has some image charecteristics which put some DSLRs to shame (e.g. its dynamic range in "smooth" film mode after contrast is brought down and intelligent exposure is ramped up.VERY impressive!).
So you get very good (TZ7) and great (LX3) images from compact, light, discrete cams; and an incredible zoom range which is simply unique to the TZ7. The difference that makes in real-life walkaround use is astounding.
Besides, at the end of the day, all I care about is: "How do my prints look? How does that 60X45cm portrait, or landscape, look hanging on the wall?"
I don't keep a 45-inch computer monitor on the wall flicking pictures, so this hullabaloo about "noise at 100% viewing" doesen't really affect me. Obviously a lot of image quality problems, when exacerbated (fringing,softness,noise), will affect medium or even small prints, but some limitations are from physics, not design.Photons and optics have their unbendable rules, after all.
I also happen to have a much-beloved F31fd and a F45fd, and despite their larger sensors and fantastic processing, they are not as far ahead of the TZ7 in low-light IQ as I thought they would be, and actually lag behind it in dynamic range.As a matter of fact,the lack of IS evens the field, since it allows for lower ISO use on the Pannys.And the resolution difference is very real.
The real acid test, IMHO, is taking the same picture with different cameras (including DSLRs), printing them the same size (say 8x10), and mixing them up and passing them around to your friends, both DSLR acolytes and others. Dare them to reliably tell you who's who, and reflect on the results.Some interesting surprises may be in store.
Most of the great pictures in history were taken with run-ofthe mill equipment which would make us modern technogeeks cringe. The truth is we don't really use all of the features our cameras have most of the time. The idea is to focus on the picture-taking,and the inspiration, not in a button-pushing and dial-turning techno-masturbation.
Many features actually help taking better-looking pictures; but not necessarily better pictures. There's a difference there.
my 2cents.

I have only just received this camera but was almost put off by yur comment "The main mode dial on the top plate is very loose and has a very weak ratchet, and as a result it is easily turned accidentally and can end up between settings." My camera has a very firm ratchet and would not be easily moved during use. apart from the memory card did not arrive with the order so I'm using the 40mb internal to play with it every thing seems great and well worth your top marks. I think comparing these cameras with SLRs is not fair but as compact cameras go it's the best I have owned and I've owned quite a few.

hi - just wanted to echo a couple of the comments above - the mode dial on my TZ7 (just bought) is reasonably firm and it isn't easy to change mode accidentally when operating the zoom. So possibly Panasonic have sorted out this problem.

I've just bought one and it is very loose, it moves position virtually every time I take it out of the case or my pocket.

Battery life was fine, plenty to spare after 250 pics, messing around with the zoom all the time.

Picture quality seems a bigger concern. MOST pics looked great but some (usually in bright sun light) look a bit odd. Seems to struggle with high contrast pics. A typical pic I took of a golden barley field with trees in the background came out with very bright (but acceptable) field but with almost black looking trees (I'm positive they were green!). So the brights too bright and the darks too dark. My old Casio S770 always took perfect photos in bright conditions so it is disappointing to think I've supposedly made a major upgrade but a signigicant number of pics seemed inferior to my battered old Casio!

@ david g johnson or anyone?

Curious to learn more about how you get '24.4X' optical zoom?

Incidentally, haven't had much chance to test it much yet, but the mode dial seems fine (not loose) and I would say this is a little chunky for a 'shirt-pocket' camera, i.e. it's pocket-sized but weighty enough that you probably won't forget it is there.. but then I guess that'd down to the sturdy build and big lense.

One big draw for me was the reported video recording quality. Any suggested links where this is discussed thoroughly?

I have the TZ5. An excellent camera with one design flaw that I was hoping that future models would address. The top mounted mic is annoying. Anything you say on video is very lound and clear while the person you are talking to who is standing 4 feet away is muted and almost inaudible. A nightmare to try and correct when video editing. It makes for a very unbalanced audio soundtrack to your videos. Apart from that, I cannot fault the TZ series and plan to upgrade to the TZ7 when finances allow.

I have a TZ6 and was very dissappointed with it for 3 reasons.
The image quality indoors - the blurring was totally unacceptable you literally had to tell people to stand motionless to get a half descent pic (it was like going back in time) - infact it was so bad I sent it back to be checked out, (having played around with all the settings).
Secondly the time lag between between button depress and the camera actually taking the picture meant quite often you missed the shot - unacceptable delay - I just want it to tak eth epic when I press the button.
Thirdly(and in conjunction with the above point)the flash went off when you pressed the button which gave the impression photo had been taken (so people started to move off) followed by a bigger flash which was the actual photo - obviously resulting in missed moment and the blur of people moving.
These points were not mentioned in any review I read and I think are serious detractrs to usability and should have resulted in a significant mark down of the product. Not sure whether these things apply to TZ7, 5, 4 etc. My Canon from 5 years ago is still better at 5m.

Answering my own questions here - to get 24x zoom, simply lower megapixel setting (this works by using a smaller area of the sensor rather than going into digital zoom mode). There's a lot of discussion at dpreview about video quality. Some like me (not all) have an issue with jerky AVCHD video playback particularly for stuff shot in bright daylight on the PAL rather than the NTSC version (ZS3) of the camera. Anyone else have that problem here? It could be caused by a not fast enough computer but mine is as fast as they come I think..

I have had my TZ7 for little over a month. The top swicth is fine (on my camera). I have had concerns regarding the quality of my 1000 or so shots. Most shots taken indoors are poor and when printed to 8x6 they are very grainy. I have used camera's for many years (mild enthusiast) so I was a little surprised at the poor quality and frankly I blamed my skills. It is my intension to take more time and consideration over the comming weeks to check if I am at fault or I have spent £299 on a camera that takes grainy, slightly unfocused photo's.

The comments above have given me cause for concern when the guy doing the review is slammed for possible inappropriate marking... I, like many other non-pro's put alot of trust in reviews.

Does anyone know of the where-abouts of an electronic copy of DMC-TZ7 Operating Instructions?
Thanks

Bob

Directly from Panasonic:
http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_GB/Support/Downloads/220239/index.html#anker_220239

"Corner sharpness too is very good, with no chromatic aberration." Strange but there are some chromatic aberrations visible

I've bought my TZ7 in July. The buttons are not a very happy choice, but one can live with them after getting used to them. The problem is that after one month the main motor (the one that opens the lens and also moves them for zooming) started to become noisy. After 2 months (and ~5000 shots), the noise can be heard from a few meters away ! And it gets worse if the weather is hot.
The defect was accepted by the Panasonic service and a new motor was ordered. They gave me a 1 month term for fixing it. After a few upset calls, they agreed to replace my camera with a new one. I'm still waiting for it... I hope it's a better one :(

First of all, I do agree that there a few other cameras with (slghtly?) better IQ than the tz7, BUT I also believe that there is no other camera of this size, price, zoom(25-300), image quality(there are some tricky adjustments which improve it), really good and HD video (with use of noiseless zoom, stereo and HDMI output) and decent battery life (at least in my case).

It depends on what anyone wants, if you want everything (there is onlt tz7 for the moment) you have to make some (minor for me) compromises. Unfortunately there is still no perfect all around camera yet!

I can't believe I'm writing this, but I regret buying the Panasonic ZS3. I have regretted it almost from the moment I bought it. I did my homework, researched cameras for weeks, including reading the rave review it got on this site and others. In the end, despite its very high price tag (for a point-n'-shoot), I bought it.

But I am not a happy camera-per. I'm frustrated, and I'm disappointed. I regret buying it. And here is why.

I believe I am the target consumer of this camera. I live a varied, active life. I enjoy taking great photos wherever I go, but I'm not big on using many manual features. I demand great quality photos across a spectrum of situations, all at the click of a button. I'm willing to pay for that. And that is what I came to buy this high-end point-'n-shoot from Panasonic.

Yes, the zoom is awesome, particularly while filming. The HD video is surprisingly good and very clear. It also delivers well in many areas related to build. The photos, in good lighting, exceptional. Other situations--indoors or when the lame flash is involved--as good as any lower priced point-n-shoot.

The main reason for my sizable disappointment with this camera is not, as some reviewers point out, the lack of manual controls. It is just the opposite--it is the ridiculous limitations of the Intelligent Auto (IA) mode.

My grand assumption: people who buy this camera, knowing it has limited Manual controls, do not actually want many Manual controls. They want the Intelligent Auto to be amazing in every way. Like me, they will spend the vast majority of their shooting time in IA mode, and expect it to deliver. But it is, as I will point out in there three examples, not very intelligently designed for the IA user at all--it is bang-your-head-on-the-wall inexplicably designed.

First example: Aspect Ratio & Picture size. If you shoot in Manual mode you have a whole range of choice of Aspect Ratio (4:3, 3:2, 16:9) and Picture Size (0.3M, 2M, 3M, 5M, 7M, 10M). You choose the AR you want, and the size of the photo you want. Lovely. It works out to 16 different possibilities of ARxSize. You can find exactly what you like. Personally I love to shoot in 3:2 at 3M (2048x1536). Nice size photos which won't gobble up hard disk space on my computer.

BUT...(and this is the beginning of my rant against feature design that seems to ignore just who the customer of this camera is), in IA mode you have a ridiculous, inexplicable limitation on choice here. If I want to shoot in IA at 4:3 (TV dimensions), I can choose 3M, 5M, or 10M. Okay, but I really like to shoot in 3:2 (film photo dimensions) as I never view on my TV. However, if I choose 3:2 in IA, I can choose only 9.5M (3776x2520). What the $%&#? That's huge! For whatever reason the 4 other sizes available in Manual are all blocked in IA mode for 3:2. One choice. Inexplicable.

Oh, but what about 16:9 (Widescreen TV dimensions) you ask? Surely this aspect ratio must give a range of sizes to choose from? You'd think so wouldn't you. Want to guess what they offer? In 16:9 IA you get...wait for it...2M (1920x1080). The smallest. Again one choice. In IA you get a meer 5 size choices total, and 3 are for 4:3. Can someone please explain why the majority of sizes readily available in Manual are blocked in IA?

Second example. Let's talk Auto Review (reviewing of pictures immediately after taking it). In IA it is fixed to 2 seconds. Can I make it longer, say 4 or 5 seconds? No, I can't (but I could on my $150 Canon). No, if I want choice of review time, I have to be taking pictures in Manual. Again, why don't both IA and Manual modes not have the exact same review options? This kind of thing makes we want to bonk my head on the wall.

Third example. Auto LCD Off. What a great feature. Too bad it's only for Manual. IA? Nah. What the $%&#? Truly, what the the buyer of this camera wants wants--one who is more than likely to spend the vast majority of his or her photo time in Intelligent Auto mode--is all those "none photo" related functions available in Manual and IA mode. That's why I bought this camera. So why am I snookered in the IA mode? This is where I live. Why is something so fundamental as having control over LCD power saving only available in Manual mode?

My last comment on the camera is on video. I just didn't realize when I bought it the limitations of HD video as it relates to memory. The videos are crisp and clear and yes, eat up a ton of memory very quickly. When filming at any level of quality in JPEG mode the max it can record at one go is 2G. So, when recording in HD JPEG mode, 2G = 8min 20sec. So my 4G card (which seemed like a load of memory when I bought the camera) is all but gone in about 16 minutes. Moving down in video quality does open up more space, but then you're not in HD anymore. This is something for HD JPEG filmers be aware--you can only film to 2G, stop, and then you need to press go again to record more. And if you're on the road travelling, and don't have a way to download your videos off your card, you will find yourself out of memory quickly. Option: buy a really big memory card.

In the end, my frustration with this camera translates to only one thing--it is not worth it.

There are many other cameras at lower price points that can do what this camera does, in terms of picture quality. The big zoom is nice, the HD is nice, but it is not what makes a user love a camera. It's always about quality plus functionality. And in many ways, the basic IA functionality of this camera has some glaring deficiencies, thereby greatly diminishing my experience. That's the killer. Look elsewhere. I'm thinking the Canon 200IS.

This camera is all the report says it is. Excellent image quality, smooth 12x zoom, excellent wide angle lens and with a huge bonus of the HD video.

Mine came in two days from Fotosense and I can report that the problem with the selection dial has been fixed, it is now nicely notched so no problem with it moving accidentally. Intelligent auto seems extremely good at its job, producing good, clear, vibrant images. The only slight niggle is the lack of control over the settings - sometimes a bit of motion blur in a waterfall scene is needed, not sure if I can dial this in.

Oh forgot to say how good it feels in the hand - solid and nicely weighty!

I have seen at least one AVCHD footage from TZ7 which is supposed to be (and is according to mediainfo) 720@50p...after viewing this sample video, being in video producton for 20 years now, and after thorough inspection, I had to conclude that it is neither HD nor 50p...motion is jerky just as if it were a 25p recording wrapped into a 50p format...resolution doesn't seem HD at all and is seems even slightly worse than general SD...I was strongly wanting to buy this camera for compactness with AVCHD video quality added, but now I'm in serious doubt...could anyone dissuade me by uploading a short 720p sample at 50p featuring a pan for my evaluation...

I have also seen FX150 footage that, even though it's 24p, is much better looking than TZ7's...

I cannot open the videos taken on my TZ7 (.mts files) with imovie on my Apple Mac - can anyone advise?

@Alan Mayo

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=mts+files

iMovie must import the file from the connected camera.
Do not try to open the file directly. Let iMovie "find" it.
Personally, I dislike watching my .MTS files with camcorder connected to my Mac, I usu. use a piece of third party software called Pavtube MTS/M2TS Converter to transcode MTS files into MP4 or MOV for iMovie in advance.