Marty4650

Marty4650

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

Comments

Total: 863, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On All-in-one: Ona Capri bag review article (168 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cane: That's a woman's purse.

Spending money on lenses makes sense!

But a purse is just a purse! The ones in Walmart are just as good as those designer models that cost thousands.

(Please don't tell my wife I said that)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2014 at 23:31 UTC
On All-in-one: Ona Capri bag review article (168 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stacey_K: I would think it was pretty obvious this was targeted at women? Notice the word "purse"? And just FYI, not every item made in the world is designed for men to use :)

Stacey....

The manufacturer also makes some very nice looking camera messenger bags and camera backpacks, that might appeal to men.

http://www.onabags.com/store/messenger-bags.html

And the prices are similar. I think they are pretty smart to create a line targeting women. After all, their money is good too!

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2014 at 21:11 UTC
On All-in-one: Ona Capri bag review article (168 comments in total)
In reply to:

Grosse Fatigue: I would not be caught carrying a bag like that although it could be used as a stealth bag to carry expensive equipment. You could buy something more manly at Coach or even Louis Vuitton.

I'm willing to bet there are more purses stolen each year than camera bags.

If you want to discourage theft... then make it look like a diaper bag.....

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2014 at 21:05 UTC
On All-in-one: Ona Capri bag review article (168 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cane: That's a woman's purse.

Believe it or not..... $349 is not an outrageous price for a high quality ladies purse. Some even sell for thousands of dollars.

I know. I don't understand it either.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2014 at 21:03 UTC
On All-in-one: Ona Capri bag review article (168 comments in total)

Well, considering that there are an awful lot of women photographers, this product sounds like a very good idea. My wife would love one of these.

Those men who are complaining probably need to wait for the "Hipster murse" version, which will probably follow in due time.

Personally, I prefer a camera bag to look like a camera bag. But that's just me.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2014 at 21:01 UTC as 37th comment | 4 replies
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

daddyo: I guess I don't get the real purpose/benefit of this camera.
Based on the Studio Test Scene, the Olympus E-M10 offers obviously better IQ at high ISO's. It also has built-in flash, a higher magnification LCD and EVF, a tilting LCD, IBIS, and a reasonable grip -- just to name a few advantages, not to mention a $200 lower price tag.

While I understand that the GM5 is a bit smaller and lighter, one still has to carry the clip on flash and a lens or two. If the idea is to simply use the GM5 with only the 12-32mm lens so you can stuff it in a pocket, what's the point of interchangeable lens design? Why not simply get one of the top tier P&S cameras with a reasonable zoom range - something like the Sony RX100 III?

If you want an ILC, then the Panasonic GM1/GM5 is as small as they get. They are even smaller than Pentax Q and Nikon 1 cameras.

Anything smaller might be hard to use, because the buttons get too tiny, and the ergonomics aren't the best.

If your goal is "a fixed lens camera that is small and easy to carry" then there are much better choices than a Sony RX100, There are quite a few very tiny fixed lens cameras from Canon, Fuji and Nikon.

So the Sony RX100 series only becomes the best choice if you have very specific needs. You must want a camera with image quality "almost as good as M4/3, but slightly thinner, and have no desire to ever change lenses."

The GM5 with kit lens weighs 281 grams. The RX100 weighs 240 grams, and is almost the exact same height and width, but is 26mm thinner due to the fixed lens.

Bottom line... if you want an ILC, it's almost impossible to find anything smaller than a Panasonic GM camera.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2014 at 11:50 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mr Olympian: I couldn't resist a used GM1 I found for sale. I previously tried the LX100 and A6000 and both were a little too big for my needs. I already have a DSLR for most uses, but I wanted a good camera that fits in my pocket that is not too heavy that I can take most places.
The options of several tiny pancake lenses make the GM1 and GM5 a viable option. The store did not have the 35-100 in stock. I want to see how small that zoom really is too.

Yes... the new compact 35-100mm lens is the next lens I will buy.

It will be a perfect match for my 12-32mm lens on my GM1.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2014 at 00:24 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mr Olympian: I couldn't resist a used GM1 I found for sale. I previously tried the LX100 and A6000 and both were a little too big for my needs. I already have a DSLR for most uses, but I wanted a good camera that fits in my pocket that is not too heavy that I can take most places.
The options of several tiny pancake lenses make the GM1 and GM5 a viable option. The store did not have the 35-100 in stock. I want to see how small that zoom really is too.

I bought a used GM1 just to get my hands on that tiny lens. But I soon found the tiny camera was so convenient to have with me at all times, that I now use the GM1 more than I use my EM5.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 20:33 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

white shadow: As an owner of the GM1, there is absolutely no need to go for the GM5. The tiny EVF is just too small. Yes, there were complaints from people earlier that the GM1 don't have a hotshoe but once you mount an external flash on this tiny camera the flash would be much heavier than the camera itself. One would not be able to hold it properly.

For much less money, one is better off buying a Ricoh GR to compliment the GM1.

I am happy with the GM1 for what it is, a tiny Micro4/3 camera which can take very good image quality photos and able to use a longer lens like the Lumix 45-150mm f/4.0-5.6 when I choose to. The Ricoh GR, its partner, can take the 28mm angle of view shots.

@ white shadow

I suspect there won't be very many GM1 users trading up to the GM5. Those of us who bought GM1s already decided we could live without an EVF on a very tiny camera.

The GM5 was designed to drag a few more new users in. The ones who said "if the GM1 had an EVF I would buy it."

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 20:29 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

JohnHoppy: I'm constantly surprised how photographers still moan about batteries. I have a GM1 and sure, after a couple of hundred it's running down, but I always have back-up batteries and many compatibles are really good as well as cheap. I got a pack of 2 for the GM1 at around £12 (USD19), no problem with them. Take up space? - Get outta here! I love the EM1 but it's the GM1 that goes everywhere with me.

Anyone who needs 1000 shots without a battery change better look elsewhere.

And good luck on sliding that DSLR into your pocket....

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 20:25 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

daddyo: I guess I don't get the real purpose/benefit of this camera.
Based on the Studio Test Scene, the Olympus E-M10 offers obviously better IQ at high ISO's. It also has built-in flash, a higher magnification LCD and EVF, a tilting LCD, IBIS, and a reasonable grip -- just to name a few advantages, not to mention a $200 lower price tag.

While I understand that the GM5 is a bit smaller and lighter, one still has to carry the clip on flash and a lens or two. If the idea is to simply use the GM5 with only the 12-32mm lens so you can stuff it in a pocket, what's the point of interchangeable lens design? Why not simply get one of the top tier P&S cameras with a reasonable zoom range - something like the Sony RX100 III?

Well....

I'm too old for "skinny jeans" so I have no problem putting my GM1 with 12-32mm lens in my pants pocket. I doubt you could even get a Sony RX100 into skinny jeans pockets.

If you need a shirt pocket camera, then the crappy Canon ELPH is the camera for you.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 20:22 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

Free Jazz: It seems GM5 still produce 10bit raw files once using E-shutter and the price is too expensive now, $599 will be reasonable for the whole M43 market.
Hoping the next GM will be equipped with IBIS and tilting screen.

"If only the GM5 had a nice hangrip.... like the GH4 has."

And if you fill everyone's wish list, then you will hear:

"Nice camera, but way too big. If only they could make it smaller...."

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 17:47 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

JohnHoppy: I'm constantly surprised how photographers still moan about batteries. I have a GM1 and sure, after a couple of hundred it's running down, but I always have back-up batteries and many compatibles are really good as well as cheap. I got a pack of 2 for the GM1 at around £12 (USD19), no problem with them. Take up space? - Get outta here! I love the EM1 but it's the GM1 that goes everywhere with me.

And I remember when we had to "change something" after 12 or 24 shots.

Changing to a spare battery after 250 shots isn't that big an ordeal.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 15:10 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (302 comments in total)
In reply to:

daddyo: I guess I don't get the real purpose/benefit of this camera.
Based on the Studio Test Scene, the Olympus E-M10 offers obviously better IQ at high ISO's. It also has built-in flash, a higher magnification LCD and EVF, a tilting LCD, IBIS, and a reasonable grip -- just to name a few advantages, not to mention a $200 lower price tag.

While I understand that the GM5 is a bit smaller and lighter, one still has to carry the clip on flash and a lens or two. If the idea is to simply use the GM5 with only the 12-32mm lens so you can stuff it in a pocket, what's the point of interchangeable lens design? Why not simply get one of the top tier P&S cameras with a reasonable zoom range - something like the Sony RX100 III?

The point is.... the GM1/GM5 just might be the best pocketable compact camera you can buy. And you still have the option of using other lenses.

When paired with both tiny kit lenses (12-32mm and 35-100mm) you have an unbeatable small kit that can produce incredibly good images.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 15:09 UTC
On Panasonic DMC-CM1 to go on sale in UK article (160 comments in total)

Just remember.... around 98% of the cell phone photographers didn't pay one cent to get a camera in their cell phone. It just came with it, and they are thrilled with the results it gets.

Would they be willing to pay more for a better camera in their cell phone? I suppose that is what the other 2% have done, since they selected one model over the other because it had a better camera, and likely paid a little more to get that model.

But would they spend $1,200 for a slightly better camera built into their cell phones? Some surely might, but most people certainly wouldn't. If image quality is their motivator, then a $700 Sony RX100 can provide better image quality, with the same sized sensor, and a faster zoom lens thrown in.

I just don't see who will be lining up to buy this camera phone.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 29, 2014 at 16:13 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
On Enthusiast mirrorless camera roundup (2014) article (304 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 (304 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 (304 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 (105 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 31st comment
On Enthusiast compact camera roundup (2014) article (185 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 37th comment | 2 replies
Total: 863, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »