Marty4650

Marty4650

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

Comments

Total: 956, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Fujifilm X100T Review preview (644 comments in total)

Fifty Shades of Silver!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 25, 2015 at 13:41 UTC as 99th comment
In reply to:

Marty4650: If their policy has been "to make cameras compact" since 1936, then someone must explain the Olympus E3 (2007) and E5 (2010).

Those two cameras were just as big and heavy as a Canon 5D with a sensor 1/4th the size.

@ HowaboutRAW

Guess which camera has the smallest sensor in this photo:

http://j.mp/1LQeYD7

You're right about the Canon 5D, it is a little bigger than the E5, but not by much. It is around the same overall size, but is exactly 10% heavier and has a sensor 400% larger.

The Sony A7R pictured in that link has the excuse of not having a mirror to add size and weight, but the Nikon Df has one, and it is also a LOT smaller than an Olympus E5.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 24, 2015 at 00:29 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Auclair: OK....Olympus only makes compact cameras...great...m4/3 and PSs only forever from Olympus.
Olympus will not make(enter) FF camera body...great don't do it...it's crazy.
How about making some compact FF lenses then like you (Olympus) used to a'la OM mount but for other mounts?
kinda like Zeiss, Sigma, and plenty of others do?
yes there are others making lenses for other mounts BUT OM lenses are 'still' very well respected by manual focus shooters.
modern day OM Zuiko (AF motors or not or both) with modern day glass and coatings and communication with host cameras...that'd be interesting.
i think Digital FF Zuikos made for CanikonSony would sell and rank (nearly) as high IQ-wise as Zeiss.
come on Olympus...get back in the FF game somewhere...just lenses will be fine.

Paul, the more I think about it (day dreaming, perhaps) the more sense it makes for Olympus to become a third party lens maker.

I think lens design is one of Olympus' strongest skills. And the best Zuikos have been favorably compared to Leica and Zeiss lenses at a much more affordable price. The quality is certainly there, even if the the luxury brand status isn't.

In order to market lenses for someone else's system you need to do one of three things:

* make it better
* make it cheaper
* make something that isn't available from the OEM

I'd guess that most of the opportunity lies with the first case, there is some in the second case, and none in the third. Nikon and Canon already have their lens catalogs pretty much filled. What they need is better quality lenses at the low and mid level.

OK, maybe it's just a dream. But I think it could be very profitable for Olympus.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 23, 2015 at 23:02 UTC
In reply to:

Paul Auclair: OK....Olympus only makes compact cameras...great...m4/3 and PSs only forever from Olympus.
Olympus will not make(enter) FF camera body...great don't do it...it's crazy.
How about making some compact FF lenses then like you (Olympus) used to a'la OM mount but for other mounts?
kinda like Zeiss, Sigma, and plenty of others do?
yes there are others making lenses for other mounts BUT OM lenses are 'still' very well respected by manual focus shooters.
modern day OM Zuiko (AF motors or not or both) with modern day glass and coatings and communication with host cameras...that'd be interesting.
i think Digital FF Zuikos made for CanikonSony would sell and rank (nearly) as high IQ-wise as Zeiss.
come on Olympus...get back in the FF game somewhere...just lenses will be fine.

Paul.... precisely WHY would Olympus want to go into direct competition with Nikon, Canon, Sony and now Pentax in the FF camera arena? Would they have any hope of NOT losing money on this project? And wouldn't they need to develop a ton of AF FF lenses if they did?

However, your are right about the lenses. Olympus could market FF lenses in other mounts (just like Sigma does). There are probably a few Canon and Nikon users who wouldn't mind a high quality Zuiko lens. If just a small percentage of Nikon and Canon FF users buy them, it would be instant revenue. And if they built great lenses, they could beat Sigma, Tokina and Tamron with better products, at less than Zeiss prices.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 23, 2015 at 20:57 UTC

If their policy has been "to make cameras compact" since 1936, then someone must explain the Olympus E3 (2007) and E5 (2010).

Those two cameras were just as big and heavy as a Canon 5D with a sensor 1/4th the size.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 23, 2015 at 19:14 UTC as 34th comment | 12 replies
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: This camera seems to produce some of the most beautiful colours I've ever seen. But strangely, at ISO 12800, they also seem to loose a lot of saturation. Nonetheless, I just might buy one for me and keep the ISO at a reasonnable level. Very nice!

Exactly, BarnET.

Around 95% of us are amateurs who never shoot above ISO 1600. So why compare a budget priced pocket cam to a full frame professional cameras and use ISO 12800 as the standard by which it must be judged? That standard goes well beyond absurd.

The point is conceded.

The GF7 is NOT the best camera for shooting in extremely low light. But it is still one heck of a good camera for amateur photographers and it is priced very reasonably.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2015 at 00:33 UTC
In reply to:

JeanPierre Thibaudeau: This camera seems to produce some of the most beautiful colours I've ever seen. But strangely, at ISO 12800, they also seem to loose a lot of saturation. Nonetheless, I just might buy one for me and keep the ISO at a reasonnable level. Very nice!

JeanPierre..... how often do you shoot at ISO 12800?

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 13:44 UTC

This entire photo set could be used as a primer on "why shooting raw is a good idea." The jpegs look pretty good. The edited raw files look better.

This is really a very capable compact camera, especially for the price.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 12:57 UTC as 19th comment | 2 replies
On 13-Dan-ISO_12800-ACR photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (4 comments in total)

This entire photo set could be used as a primer on "why shooting raw is a good idea." The jpegs look pretty good. The raw files look better.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 14, 2015 at 12:29 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
On Olympus offers Stylus SH-2 with Raw support article (46 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: Lots of money. What about the XZ series?

Well, this is a different sort of camera. It has a smaller sensor, a slower lens and a much larger zoom range than the XZ-2 ihs.

The XZ-2 is probably a much better camera, but it will cost more and can't give you anything over 128mm. Personally, I'd take the XZ-2, but I can understand how others might prefer the huge 24X range of the SH-2 over the limited 4X range of the XZ-2.

Oh.... and a $399 list price at release really means "$249 six months from now."

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 07:20 UTC
On A Compact PEN: Olympus Stylus SH-2 Hands-on article (150 comments in total)

This looks like a very nice alternative to the Panasonic travel zoom cameras. And a 25X optical zoom in such a small camera is nice to have, even if the lens is relatively slow.

I think you will see more P&S cameras like this one. Cameras who can do things that no cameraphone can do.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 07:13 UTC as 44th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Marty4650: Before the EM5 II, the EM10 had a few features the EM5 lacked. And now the EM5 II fixed that, but has a few features the EM1 lacks.

You really can never have three discrete products that stair step beautifully, unless you release all three on the same date, then update all three on the same date.

And this is nothing new for Olympus. When the E30 came out, it had a better sensor and more features than the E3 had. Olympus always puts their latest technology into their latest camera, rather than holding it back for the "flagship's next upgrade" like Canon and Nikon usually do.

If you always wait for the next model, then you end up never buying anything. Because there is always another model coming in the future.

Personally, I am waiting for the EM5 III so I can pick up an EM5 II at a very good price. I'm not that fussy. Used or refurbished works for me! By the time the EM5 III comes along, my EM5 will be around 5 years old and probably need replacement.

But if it doesn't, I will probably just keep it and wait for the EM5 IV to come along, so I can pick up an EM5 III cheaply!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 11, 2015 at 01:20 UTC

Before the EM5 II, the EM10 had a few features the EM5 lacked. And now the EM5 II fixed that, but has a few features the EM1 lacks.

You really can never have three discrete products that stair step beautifully, unless you release all three on the same date, then update all three on the same date.

And this is nothing new for Olympus. When the E30 came out, it had a better sensor and more features than the E3 had. Olympus always puts their latest technology into their latest camera, rather than holding it back for the "flagship's next upgrade" like Canon and Nikon usually do.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2015 at 20:24 UTC as 22nd comment | 7 replies
On Flasher smartphone flash launched on Kickstarter post (73 comments in total)

It really is fascinating how the cell phone cult keeps trying to convert a "convenient snapshot device" into a real camera. Because the more they try, the less convenient it gets.

When they are done creating all their add on attachments you will need a bag to haul around your clip on lenses and clip on flashes.

https://www.google.com/search?q=camera+phone+attachments&safe=off&rlz=1C1ZMDB_enUS503US526&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Rtn-VNiUE8i5ggT-h4T4Aw&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAg&biw=1440&bih=815

This reminds me of those kits they used to sell to transform your VW Beatle into a miniature Rolls Royce!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 10, 2015 at 11:47 UTC as 20th comment
In reply to:

GoneMirrorless: It appears the Sony APSC owners are getting the short end of the stick here. They were attracted by inexpensive bodies and small lenses, but Sony for now is ignoring them. I believe a 60mm macro for $500-600 would sell a lot more units because very few NEX owners outside this forum want to pay over $1000 for a lens.
This is great news for anyone willing to pay for top quality, but bad news for the common guy who wants something inexpensive but better than a smartphone.

This could be a smart business strategy for Sony.

The give up the low end of the market to Samsung, while challenging Nikon, Canon, and Fuji (to a large extent) for the high end. Meanwhile, M4/3 tries to work both ends, and really can't compete with a full frame sensor, or rock bottom pricing.

So Sony moves "upmarket" at a time when sales for cheaper cameras are dropping like a rock.

It sounds like a business strategy developed by an accountant!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 14:31 UTC

It all comes down to this:

1. It can be small (like Pentax Q)
2. It can be sexy (like Fuji X)
3. It can be cheap (like Samsung NX)
4. It can have scores of lenses (like M4/3)

But you can't have everything in the same system.

Pick which two you want, then select your system accordingly. Stop wishing for everything in the same system, because it will never happen.

And now Sony offers a fifth option that no one else has...

5. It can have a full frame sensor with world class image quality.

If you want an apple, then don't buy an orange.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 5, 2015 at 11:49 UTC as 13th comment | 9 replies

Folks can all quibble about these lenses being too long, too expensive or too late. But the fact remains that Sony is doing exactly what it needs to do to turn the A7 into a system rather than just a collection of cameras.

Rather than comparing this to M4/3 you should be comparing it to FF lenses from Canon and Nikon, because that is exactly the league they belong in.

The Sony FE line just got a whole lot more attractive.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 4, 2015 at 22:29 UTC as 24th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

LeitzKameraAktion: I'm intrigued Mr Iida doesn't rule out Fuji making a Monochrome X camera.
I'd DEFINITELY buy one - click the 'Like' button if you would too!

And virtually no one would buy one.

Leica can pull this off because they can charge $8,000 per camera, to cover extremely low volumes. Can Fuji do that?

Not ruling something out doesn't mean you will ever see it available for sale. This is still a business and not an exercise to provide every possible camera that someone someplace might want.

It actually is possible to get a black and white image from a color file. A monochrome sensor would do it better, but how many people are actually willing to pay for a camera made in the "dozens" and not in the "thousands?"

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2015 at 15:12 UTC
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: First releasing the "High Quality Expensive optics" (35mm F 1.4) then releasing mediocre optics but "faster autofocusing" one! (35mm F 2.0)

Interesting order. Seems like all camera company has its own tactics to juice off their customers!

Yes, they are usually the same people!

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2015 at 00:09 UTC
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: First releasing the "High Quality Expensive optics" (35mm F 1.4) then releasing mediocre optics but "faster autofocusing" one! (35mm F 2.0)

Interesting order. Seems like all camera company has its own tactics to juice off their customers!

It is usually the folks who have never used a particular lens who are the ones who label it "crappy."

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 13:32 UTC
Total: 956, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »