Timmbits

Timmbits

Lives in Canada Montreal, Canada
Works as a inventor
Joined on Oct 8, 2011
About me:

Deutscher, living in Montreal Canada.
Cycling, chess, design, inventions, nature, photography, are some of the things I like.

Comments

Total: 1593, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
In reply to:

LFPCPH: As many have mentioned the Canon G5 X is ugly. However the Yashica AF 230 still takes the price as the ugliest camera ever - unbeatable.

omg you're right... that is one hideous piece.
I don't think the Canon is that ugly... the styling is a bit retro-ish, and the ergonomics are vastly improved (over some of their slippery flat bodies).

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 16:55 UTC
In reply to:

sh10453: For the G5X:
- I'm wondering if Canon is paying a license fee to Holga for this body styling.
- The knob on the front by the grip seems to be a weird location. Very unusual location.
- Canon: Please add a 5 sec to the timer options on your line of cameras. 2 sec is too short, and 10 sec is too long for most of what I do. I know you added "Custom" here. Just make it 2, 5, 10. It takes 5 seconds and a short line of code.
- Good job on the screen flexibility (fully articulated). Thumbs up.
- Hot shoe is a welcome feature. Thumbs up.
- Focal range (100mm) is too short.
- Personally, I don't care for 4k video. 1080, AVCSD is good enough for this camera (for my use).

Although I have been a Canon user for over 30 years, I have recently, started buying other competitor's cameras, except for DSLR's, for obvious reasons. Also, the waiting for the 5D IV and the 6D II has been a bit too long.

- No comment on the G9X. Not impressive at all, sadly. I may as well stick to my 3 years old LF1.

I think there should be a 7.5 seconds option, I don't care for 5 because that is cutting it a bit too precisely and easy to miss. an extra 2 for safety... or at least 6 if not 7. it should just be 2, 7, 10. or 2 6 11.

...surely you are joking about the license fee to Holga... you ARE joking, right? surely you are. I am feeling a little bit slow for even doubting for one second that you might have been serious about this. there are so many cameras, present and past, with a similar configuratoin and remotely similar look. but this is just your usual flat canon with a grip and vf added on.

I'm not too sure that the dial on the front is a bad idea... I suspect it might be very ergonomically placed, to give you access to a dial without moving a finger, because your index finger will be right there while shooting.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 16:53 UTC
In reply to:

snapa: When the price hits ~$500, I might consider trading in my Olympus XZ-2 for it IF the IQ is MUCH better than the GX-7 and close to the RX100IV. It is the first P&S from Canon that has interested me since owning the G12. It will be interesting to see how it pans out in all the reviews. Too bad it did not come with at least a 24-140 lens, then it would have been a much more interesting camera.

I hope you are referring to the G5X and not the G9X (not as good imo).
yes, it will definitely be a big step up from your XZ2.
you should see a huge difference in the situations that were challenging to your xz2, be it night photos, b&w, sports... won't be as good as an APSc, but much better than 1/1.17"

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 15:13 UTC

While the EOS is designed to look like a significant step down from a Rebel, so it doesn't cannibalize Rebel sales, itself may fall prey to the new G5X, and Canon might be missing the boat on mirrorless... they are really helping Sony out here!

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 15:07 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

vroger1: Rather than edit my last message- it is rather galling to realize that the basic reason for these digicams is that Canon won't compete with itself and its EOS line. The future is written out there. Mirrored digicams will inevitably decline in popularity as mirrorless become the new standard. Canon will either get on board or will be left in the dust.

the ONLY reason DSLRs still exist, is because of the installed base of existing lens collections.
anything a DSLR can do, a MILC can do as well.
and what many forget, is that nothing stops a maker from removing the mirror and increasing the depth of a mirrorless so it can accept old lenses too (or offer an adapter). oh wait, that is already being done isn't it?
it's only a matter of time, before that extra mechanical assembly will no longer appear in cameras.

the mirror assembly is akin to the second lens what used to be on cameras for focusing... it's very disapearance which gave birth to the SL in SLR (and now DSLR). one day, it will no longer be there. Maybe not in Marty's lifetime... but one day, it will be gone. whether fans want to admit it or not.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 15:04 UTC

disclosure: I am not a Canon fan.
that having been said, I really like the G5X. it addresses many little annoying ergonomic issues.
it has a good lens, good size, handle, controls, competes favorably on price... definitely a nice product. I _hate_ the swing-out screens though - I by far prefer the tilt-up/down variants, as I don't have to worry about banging it on something. But it's not a deal-breaker. No camera is perfect, and this is not a big negative (some people even prefer these).

On the other hand, I suspect that the G9X is aimed at those who have less knowledge or appreciation for the huge importance of having the best lens possible, and offering a nice camera for the more casual user. this is definitely a welcome change of trend, to the minuscule sensors we still see way too much of.

it's nice to see that more are now offering larger sensors and good lenses in their enthusiast compact models. definitely a great time to be in the market for a camera!

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 14:54 UTC as 54th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Timmbits: so is this made by Rokinon or Samyang?

I am a bit confused about the branding: are they the same company with two brands, or two companies that make lenses for each other?

for example, I own the Samyang 500mm/1000mm mirror lens (took shots of the red supermoon with it) but only saw it on Rokinon's site. it says Samyang 500mm f6.3 DX on it, but I've only seen it under the Rokinon name on their website. so I'm just wondering about that...

thanks @photominion

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2015 at 14:45 UTC

so is this made by Rokinon or Samyang?

I am a bit confused about the branding: are they the same company with two brands, or two companies that make lenses for each other?

for example, I own the Samyang 500mm/1000mm mirror lens (took shots of the red supermoon with it) but only saw it on Rokinon's site. it says Samyang 500mm f6.3 DX on it, but I've only seen it under the Rokinon name on their website. so I'm just wondering about that...

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 03:16 UTC as 6th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Zlatan: But there is a huge price difference.

I think this will sell well to casual enthusiasts.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 03:14 UTC
In reply to:

Gabriele Sartori: Who would buy this when a great Nokton 25mm F/0.95 is available?

I presume that it is about size and price (Nocton is twice the price).

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 03:13 UTC

I think you could probably halve the shutter speed and halve the ISO, to get much cleaner pictures.
A while ago, there were some pictures shown on DPR, and I remember an airplane shot at 1/500, and you could see it's propeller blades immobilized.
So if it can stop a plane propeller, I am pretty sure that you don't need that fast for soccer.

Anyways, thank you @DPR, for this. it is very helpful. I will stop yearning for a rx10, just get a longer lens for my nx20 and buy maybe an rx100 or lx100 or something of the sort as a pocketable. for me, these limitations are not worth getting the rx10.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 02:52 UTC as 8th comment

it is all very cute, having 4k on a small screen (and I wonder what the purpose of that would be)... but that aside, I am curious, is this phone water-resistant like one of their previous models? that is the real feature for me...
I've lost a phone to water while wading in water to supervise my young daughter while she was playing in it (and forgot I had it in my pocket and jumped in), another when I had to jump in to rescue a dog that was getting carried away by the current, and twice in a kayak, despite once putting it into 3 ziplock bags to make sure that if one opened, there were still more to protect it, and the last in a special case/bag with dual ziplocks but that cracked at the seam. Between that, and people dropping their phone into the toilet, into a pool, etc, waterproofing is really a very valuable feature for me.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 02:38 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

the Mtn Man: Who cares? The dot pitch is so small at that size that you've passed the point of diminishing returns a LONG time ago.

As for claiming two-days of battery life, haven't we learned by now that manufacturers always exaggerate battery life? It's usually something like "Results are based on an average of 30-minutes a day reading text files with the backlight at its lowest setting with the phone in airplane mode".

if they quote 2 days, and you get half that, that would be pretty good!

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 02:33 UTC
In reply to:

Zalllon: Instead focusing on something that can't be valued, they should focus on their overheating issue. This is why they are nowhere in the % of new handsets sold.

that... or the price maybe?

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 02:32 UTC
On article Super Raw? DxO ONE added to studio test scene (165 comments in total)

It seems that this has a 32mm equivalent lens, but
what is the actual focal length of the lens?
(not equivalent, but actual)

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 02:30 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Ian M.B.: Why bother even producing a camera that delivers prints so small. . I used to own an SX70, why can't Polaroid design a similar size camera, that can retain all the digital files as well as print your favourites, but not tiny 2"x 3" say 3"x 4". . if they were a decent size, (even the SX70 prints were 77mm x 79mm) people would use them at weddings and family occasions at will. . .

who was the SX70 made by? did it use special film or was it a color printer inside?

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 02:25 UTC
In reply to:

Ian M.B.: Why bother even producing a camera that delivers prints so small. . I used to own an SX70, why can't Polaroid design a similar size camera, that can retain all the digital files as well as print your favourites, but not tiny 2"x 3" say 3"x 4". . if they were a decent size, (even the SX70 prints were 77mm x 79mm) people would use them at weddings and family occasions at will. . .

Polaroid went bankrupt.
the Polaroid name was picked up by a chinese manufacturer, and has nothing to do with the original company.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2015 at 02:24 UTC
Total: 1593, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »