Haha.. ermz just to point out something:
Absolute difference of price of camera = 200
but FZ 5 comes with a battery, S2 doesn't.
so you add price of 4 2500 mah AA batteries + charger: (from 13 to 20, say 16) + (from 35 - 45, say 40)
thus absolute price difference = 256
price of a spare FZ5 batt: 28
for that extra 56 u can buy 2 more FZ5 batts which should last you 1500 shots.
to get extra 1500 shots out of the S2, you need ,say 500 shots each set batt, thus u need extra 3 sets.
3 * 16 = $48
Thus, given such comparison, to get 1500 shots from either camera, given cost of camera, the absolute price difference INCREASES!
*not to mention of course, 3 * 4 = 12 AA batteries you must carry vs 2 spare FZ5 batt
FZ5 can take the pro cards btw.
also if they can support 1gb they can support 2. FZ5 uses the fat16 system hits a limit at 4gb i think.. so u should be able to use all the way up.
FZ5, if u care fo spend $15, can make ur own battery pack with 6AA batts. initial test with 2500mAh: 800 shots and still not dead. then had to use the batt for my flash so took it out to recharge.
Beethoven => hmm that one i'm not sure.. it's just something i've heard and read.
Anyway circular polarizers are more expensive than linear ones because they have to include both the linear polarizer and a quarter-wave plate. I suppose the stacking of more material is detrimental to light quality. it's like stacking filters.
and if i'm not wrong, circular polarizers are 1st used coz film SLR autofocus cameras relies on the light coming in. most of the digital cameras don't need it nowadays. I'm not sure about SLR, never tried. if i'm not wrong also dun need, coz tech is more advanced. I've heard it's necessary though, if you're using high end dslrs (aka 1dmk2, d2h etc)
Here's more stuff on linear VS circular
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/polarizers.shtml
http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/photos/filters_uv_pol/faq.html
http://dpfwiw.com/filters.htm
read 1st n 4th post of below:
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CuFJ&unified_p=1
Absolute difference of price of camera = 200
but FZ 5 comes with a battery, S2 doesn't.
so you add price of 4 2500 mah AA batteries + charger: (from 13 to 20, say 16) + (from 35 - 45, say 40)
thus absolute price difference = 256
price of a spare FZ5 batt: 28
for that extra 56 u can buy 2 more FZ5 batts which should last you 1500 shots.
to get extra 1500 shots out of the S2, you need ,say 500 shots each set batt, thus u need extra 3 sets.
3 * 16 = $48
Thus, given such comparison, to get 1500 shots from either camera, given cost of camera, the absolute price difference INCREASES!
*not to mention of course, 3 * 4 = 12 AA batteries you must carry vs 2 spare FZ5 batt
FZ5 can take the pro cards btw.
also if they can support 1gb they can support 2. FZ5 uses the fat16 system hits a limit at 4gb i think.. so u should be able to use all the way up.
FZ5, if u care fo spend $15, can make ur own battery pack with 6AA batts. initial test with 2500mAh: 800 shots and still not dead. then had to use the batt for my flash so took it out to recharge.
Beethoven => hmm that one i'm not sure.. it's just something i've heard and read.
Anyway circular polarizers are more expensive than linear ones because they have to include both the linear polarizer and a quarter-wave plate. I suppose the stacking of more material is detrimental to light quality. it's like stacking filters.
and if i'm not wrong, circular polarizers are 1st used coz film SLR autofocus cameras relies on the light coming in. most of the digital cameras don't need it nowadays. I'm not sure about SLR, never tried. if i'm not wrong also dun need, coz tech is more advanced. I've heard it's necessary though, if you're using high end dslrs (aka 1dmk2, d2h etc)
Here's more stuff on linear VS circular
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/polarizers.shtml
http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/photos/filters_uv_pol/faq.html
http://dpfwiw.com/filters.htm
read 1st n 4th post of below:
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CuFJ&unified_p=1