From the data fro the FZ72 promised significant advantages: The electronic viewfinder, because (almost) can not be seen when the sun from behind the display of the compact. The unrivaled 20er wide angle is especially in narrow medieval cities of advantage the 1200s Tele recorded previously unavailable details fomatfüllend and movie recording with 50i or 50p should allow zappelfreie sequences. To take into account were the size and weight compared to the compact in the belt bag, the question of whether my video programs with the AVCHD and if necessary the MP4 format would cope, and not least the various scathing assessments that alternative were found in the FZ200 (the FZ72 was still too new). Nevertheless, I wanted to test the FZ72 and just return if necessary.
The criticism mainly affected image quality and noise - both turned out to be no worse than in my compact car, when I sufficiently so get along. As the FZ72 also has a iA with rudimentary image processing routines that are naturally perfect performs on the computer. But if time is of essence, makes the automatic rule the optimal settings.
The 10.5-megapixel (16: 9) of the compact only require a slight pixel smearing by Gaussian filtering, then again by sharpening blurry masking. So the Verkrisseln and aliasing effects disappear because of the different Pixelate of camera, computer program and TV screen, the picture is amazingly sharp. The 12 megapixel FZ72 at the 16: 9 does not cause these effects.
A video projector, I use a variety of reasons do not, so I do not need a razor-sharp images in bed Lake format. Even when a report for a little light noisy picture is better than none at all, especially since the computer can do well against some.
The electronic viewfinder is too coarse pixelated, too small, as its refresh rate. True, but that bothers me a little, I'm mainly to the image content, I can aim for (from behind the sun in about) only on suspicion of the compact frequently. Schön would be a flexible eye cup that would prevent lateral light. The frame rate is only noticed during fast camera movements, therefore it does not disturb.
Then at the FZ72 distortions had been criticized in the wide angle. In the test with squared paper was only to find a minimum pincushion distortion, but you do not notice at the usual image contents (moreover, they could be by imaging yes eliminate). With "distortion" was therefore probably the falling building edges meant tilted at something holding the camera - but for the record the physics responsible. Of course, this effect is more pronounced than at 20mm at 25mm or more. But he also can be eliminated by image processing.
With all the video formats of the FZ72 my editing program is clear, even shutting pixels does it flawlessly. Amazingly, even allows the current Media Player under WIN7 a direct preview.
When Videoton was a point of criticism that the intrinsic noise of the camera would be recorded. It turned out that behind closed doors, the automatic modulation pulls up to the point that a constant slight nibble is recorded. That you can hear with the ear close to the camera, as the cause proved the stabilizer and the Continuous AF in almost equal proportions. The contrast hardly Zoom, if you hold a zoom drive necessary. If one has not exactly chosen a quiet glade with a few birds as a motive, the noise usually go under the background level. If necessary you can even follow up on the sound file separately when disconnected interferers and inferior when cutting. Ditto if necessary even with a zoom drive, for which, however, the push may be more sensitive to use. The FZ72 is therefore in this respect no full-fledged video camera, but this was also not designed. I can certainly live with their imperfections.