Marty4650

Marty4650

Lives in United States NC, United States
Works as a Retired Industrial Engineer
Joined on May 20, 2005

Comments

Total: 814, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

plasnu: Which camera should I buy? Sony, but I didn't know that Sony is not the enthusiast mirrorless camera.

Barney is right. It really isn't easy to decide on classes when all types of cameras can work pretty well, or work pretty poorly.

The presence or absence of a mirror is probably the LEAST important factor. It might make more sense to group cameras by:

* size and weight
* price category
* build quality and weather sealing

Grouping them by "whether they have a mirror" makes less and less sense today.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 11:30 UTC
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: "As we round the bend, into the home stretch...

Sony pulling away by three lengths, followed Panasonic, Olympus and Samsung neck to neck for second place...

Fuji trying to pass those three with renewed breakaway energy...

At the far stretch, just now, making it at the halfway mark, is Nikon and Canon...

Wait...

Nikon is struggling...

Oooh! Canon has just collapsed and smashed the M into pieces! What a tragedy! The EOS M has disintegrated into oblivion!"

.

The Pentax K-01 and Pentax Q never got out of the gate!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 11:23 UTC
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (187 comments in total)
In reply to:

aeonsim: This is just bizare no Sony cameras when between they effectively dominate mirrorless? The A6000or the A7 should definately been here if your were seperating by price the A7, if by features the A6000.

If your going to claim the A7 is a different category I might understand though as I've mentioned the price is similar to half these cameras but the A6000, sure it's cheaper but feature wise? Claiming that's a different category when your putting the Nikon 1 V3 here is just foolish.

This confusion is caused by the irrational need to consider "mirrorless" as a separate category of camera, while some mirrorless cameras are just as large and just as expensive as cameras with mirrors.

Image quality can vary greatly in both types, because the presence of a mirror has nothing to do with the quality of the result. The sensor size has more to do with that, so categorizing cameras by sensor size would make more sense than by whether they have a mirror or not.

The real distinction should be small cameras vs large cameras, or cheap cameras vs expensive cameras.

Making this a separate category makes about as much sense as rating cars with navigation systems against cars without navigation systems.

The MILC fans (and I am one of them) cannot have it both ways. We say this format is superior because it is smaller and lighter, then we select cameras that are "almost as big, more expensive, with image quality almost as good," as reasons for going with the format.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 11:09 UTC
On Samsung NX mini Review preview (63 comments in total)

This certainly looks like an interesting "pocket rocket."

It has a few rough edges, but the second or third generation should be pretty good.

The 1" sensor might be much more common in a few more years.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2014 at 00:48 UTC as 21st comment
On Enthusiast compact camera roundup (2014) article (180 comments in total)

I am guessing when Dpreview said "fixed lens may not appeal to some shooters" as a con for the X100T, they really meant "prime lens" since ever camera in this group has a fixed lens.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 12:40 UTC as 36th comment | 2 replies

Great idea.... base it on the Sony RX100 II and not the Sony RX100 III.

I wonder what kind of drugs the Hassleblad folks are smoking?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 12:31 UTC as 31st comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Can this thing make phonecalls too?

Or is it just a camera that looks like a smartphone?

While I sometimes have the urge to repair things rather than replace them.... you are right... it is almost impossible to do.

The repair cost usually approaches the cost of buying a brand new one, and there aren't very many people left who can actually repair things. So you must pay whatever price they ask, or just throw it away and buy a new one.

This is especially true of cameras. Where both labor and parts are very expensive. It usually is cheaper to buy a used copy of the same camera on ebay.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 25, 2014 at 16:04 UTC
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

webber15: Marty,,I cannot help bu think you're wrong on so many levels...As a nature togger,longer lenses are my thing,,but,,quite often I'm in a place of nice scenery,,I don't like changing lenses,and most often want to travel light so a second (largish) cam is out of the question...I take many snapshots with my mobile (coz its small and always on me),so this is almost perfect for my needs/situation...if I could afford it I'd buy it,,but I can't,,could do with the price coming down a couple of hundred,,then I'm in...

Hetedik...omd's are for stills,,pannys for videos...

Well, we are all entitled to our opinions. And for some this might be an ideal solution.

I suppose we should let the marketplace decide whether this product will be a hit or a miss.

It's not like I haven't been wrong before. I thought 4/3 DSLRs were the greatest thing since sliced bread. Even for a few years after Olympus stopped making them.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 25, 2014 at 12:43 UTC
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (152 comments in total)

I think there is a popular myth that cell phone users all want an outstanding camera. The truth is, almost all of them are very happy with a "pretty good camera for snapshots, email attachments, and for web blog and facebook photos."

There is probably another myth that serious photo enthusiasts would pay any price to own a good camera that can make phone calls too.

There are probably a few people who will want one of these, but not very many who will be willing to pay the very high price for one. Most photo enthusiasts would rather spend that much money for a high grade lens or a photo trip than for a cell phone that can take better photos.

Bottom line... the cell phone fans won't need it, and the camera geeks won't want it, leaving very few customers left.

This makes it an interesting exercise, but an epic commercial failure.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 25, 2014 at 10:43 UTC as 19th comment | 6 replies
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Can this thing make phonecalls too?

Or is it just a camera that looks like a smartphone?

Papa, my father was born in 1905, which means he was 24 when the Great Depression hit the USA. I won't say he was a "cheapskate" but his favorite saying was "what's wrong with the old one?"

If anything could be repaired or patched, then it was fixed up and never replaced. He wore the same pair of shoes for ten years, getting it resoled and reheeled whenever needed. When I wore holes in the elbows of my shirts, those shirts just became "short sleeved shirts."

He died in January 1979 at age 73, so he never got to see the digital age. That was 35 years ago, and I still miss him every day of my life.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 24, 2014 at 23:18 UTC
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

te 2r: I like everyone's reaction of "But I can buy a smartphone and an RX100 for less!", missing the entire point of the pocket-able convergence of the two things. This isn't only a smartphone and a camera, it's also the thinnest 1"-sensor enthusiast compact by far.

It costs a lot, but this isn't a high volume, ultra mainstream Galaxy S5, you know? It's a super niche 1st-gen device. Personally, I'd consider it if they brought it to the US.

If they sell this in the USA, then very few people will buy them for $1000. But they will sign two year contracts with their mobile carrier and get them for $199 or so.

I would bet the actual cost to the customer will be no different than getting the flagship Apple or Samsung phones.

But here's the problem. Many people like to get a new phone every two years. Because they can, when they have a service contract. Most people wouldn't spend $1,000 for a camera unless they planned to use it for five years.

And this is a problem for convergence devices. The technology in some parts moves faster than others. So you could end up with a VCR built into a LCD TV, and then wish you had waited for the model with a built in DVD or BluRay player.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 24, 2014 at 21:15 UTC
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Can this thing make phonecalls too?

Or is it just a camera that looks like a smartphone?

John, I read the article and the press release and all I could discover was that the camera has "smartphone technology." Until I read it again and saw "4G LTE technology."

So, this means it really is a phone too.

It is odd that they would downplay this feature. There are plenty of people who might want a very good camera.... that can also make phonecalls. This should be a headline feature for a camera!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 24, 2014 at 21:10 UTC
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (152 comments in total)

Can this thing make phonecalls too?

Or is it just a camera that looks like a smartphone?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 24, 2014 at 19:51 UTC as 51st comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

Marty4650: I never did understand why Sony had IBIS on their DSLRs and DSLTs but not on their NEX and Alpha E cameras. So now a great camera just got better.

A very smart move by Sony.

If Sony is lucky, then Nikon and Canon aren't paying attention again.

Canon makes their own sensors, and perhaps this keeps their production costs lower than buying sensors from Sony would.

Leica.... well, it's just hard to understand why they would build the world's best cameras and then put second rate sensors into them. They certainly have enough profit margin to afford the very best. Still, the Leica owners don't seem to mind, and if they are happy, then Leica really doesn't have a problem.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 21:51 UTC
In reply to:

rabbitzilla: I don't want IBIS.
I want lenses, lot of them.

The IBIS/OIS "argument" was settled the instant that MILC camera makers started selling adapters for legacy lenses.

Both methods work with native lenses, but only IBIS will work with adapted lenses.

Sony has never made an OIS lens for their DSLRs or DSLTs, because they never had to. They had IBIS for that. They needed to put IBIS in the Alpha 7 camera to make their own legacy lenses more useful. And... everyone else's legacy lenses too.

For anyone who likes using legacy lenses on a MILC camera, then IBIS is the obvious choice for image stabilization.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 14:22 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: I never did understand why Sony had IBIS on their DSLRs and DSLTs but not on their NEX and Alpha E cameras. So now a great camera just got better.

A very smart move by Sony.

If Sony is lucky, then Nikon and Canon aren't paying attention again.

Just remember... Sony always had IBIS in their full frame DSLRs.

So they are "reintroducing it" in their new A7 II model.

I wonder if they are using the 5-axis technology from Olympus, or if they developed it themselves?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 13:09 UTC
In reply to:

peeyaj: I am a newbie in cameras.. I just want to ask a question.

Does having an IBIS in a full frame mirrorless camera a big deal? What is the advantage compared to others especially 4/3 and DSLRs? Thanks.

Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 10:01 UTC
In reply to:

Mike FL: It is a great news and game change.

Finally Sony gets what it wants/needs from Olympus, but it took too long after Sony invested in Olympus years ago...

Luckily, I have not bought replacement camera yet, and can not wait to see Sony's APS-C cameras get IBIS; better yet, 5-axis.

Sony is on the steroid in recent year.

If Sony "got this IBIS technology from Olympus" then the Sony users should be thrilled. Their 5-Axis IS is nothing short of amazing. You just won't need a tripod as often.

This feature should be extended all the way down the product line too.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 09:58 UTC
In reply to:

rabbitzilla: I don't want IBIS.
I want lenses, lot of them.

@rabbitzilla....

Great news for the IBIS-phobic!

IBIS CAN be switched OFF!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 09:51 UTC
In reply to:

shadowz: hats off to sony for... spearheading innovation... in a land of slumbering giants ....:)

YAAAAAAYYY...:):):)

I doubt Nikon and Canon will take this lying down.
I feel a wave of gold plated special editions coming.

Brace yourself.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 09:49 UTC
Total: 814, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »