Marty4650

Marty4650

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

Comments

Total: 1099, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article Merry Christmas II you: RX1R II sample gallery updated (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Doesn't this have the usual Sony DRO modes? The gallery seems to be chock full of slightly-to-wide-DR images rendered as blown JPEGs paired with their reprocessed raws, but in truth I suspect that the in-camera DRO could actually have done at least as well (and maybe better) producing the JPEGs with zero hassle. I get that it's nice to show what can be done with raw processing, but it is good not to forget that the camera itself also has options to automatically take advantage of the same great raw DR.

As a M4/3 fanboy I really hate saying this but your comparison is seriously flawed. Comparing a fixed lens full frame camera to a M4/3 ILC is pretty much like comparing apples to oranges. If sensor size doesn't matter, then why stop at 4/3? You might as well compare the full frame Sony to camera phone, then declare the camera phone much cheaper.

There is ONLY one other camera in the same class as the fixed lens full frame RX1.... and that is the Leica Q. And that camera costs twice as much as the Sony does.

The Sony RX1R II is expensive and isn't for everyone. But if you want this sort of camera, it is the bargain camera in it's admittedly small class.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 14:03 UTC
On article Gear of the Year Part 4: Dale's pick - Samsung NX1 (407 comments in total)

Perhaps Samsung's problem was they waited to long to hit a grand slam home run? They had no OMD EM5, GH4, Alpha7, or XT1 like camera until the NX1. The NX1 certainly is an outstanding camera, but did they wait too long to create it?

They were the first company to offer an APS-C MILC system (yes, even before Sony NEX), then spent the next five years grinding out insipid models. Cameras that couldn't compete with the top tier and were quickly forgotten.

They waited so long, that most of their potential customers had already adopted M4/3, Fuj X, or Sony E/FE. And finally they created a real gem, but it was too late.

Samsung was busy being "pretty good" like Hyundai, while Sony, Fuji, Panasonic and Olympus were busy being superb like Honda, Nissan and Toyota.

There is a lesson to be learned here.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 13:57 UTC as 100th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

turvyT: Good for you, Carey. The first really different article I have seen in dpreview, from the beginning of times. Something outside the box in dpr! Keep that attitude and enjoy. And tell us more about it.

While the series is titled "Gear of the Year" I believe it is really about the personal favorites for DPR staff members, and not some "Best Cameras of the Year" list.

At least I hope that was the intent. Because the former is a lot more interesting than the later.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 13:48 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Despite all the mystery there are three things we can safely predict:

1. It will be an outstanding camera. Pentax just doesn't make junk.
2. It will be perfect for Pentax K mount users who want full frame.
3. It will be very competitively priced.

However, one thing it will not do is take market share away from Canon, Nikon or Sony full frame cameras. Nikon and Canon are too firmly entrenched in the full frame market, and Sony is virtually unique having a downsized MILC product.

senn.... you are absolutely right about that.

There really is no point in Pentax creating a full frame DSLR unless they can also incorporate an AF system that is competitive with Canon and Nikon's. My assumption was that they would do this.

If they don't, they won't be able to sell very many of them.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 2, 2015 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Despite all the mystery there are three things we can safely predict:

1. It will be an outstanding camera. Pentax just doesn't make junk.
2. It will be perfect for Pentax K mount users who want full frame.
3. It will be very competitively priced.

However, one thing it will not do is take market share away from Canon, Nikon or Sony full frame cameras. Nikon and Canon are too firmly entrenched in the full frame market, and Sony is virtually unique having a downsized MILC product.

@ Chris.... I'm not a Pentax user either, but that doesn't prevent me from admiring the quality of their products. They also tend to offer a lot of value for the money, especially for camera bodies.

@ Donnie..... You might be right, but I think those Olympus and Panasonic users have already made a decision for smaller and lighter vs. bigger but better. They have also demonstrated they prefer MILC cameras to DSLRS, so if they felt the urge for FF, they would most likely go to Sony FE.

As far as Sony SLT users go, isn't there a fullframe SLT A99, and perhaps an upgrade coming soon?

Switching systems is a pretty expensive task, especially once you go beyond entry level and kit lenses. I'm sure some folks do it, but most would rather not if they like the lenses they already own.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 1, 2015 at 13:35 UTC

Despite all the mystery there are three things we can safely predict:

1. It will be an outstanding camera. Pentax just doesn't make junk.
2. It will be perfect for Pentax K mount users who want full frame.
3. It will be very competitively priced.

However, one thing it will not do is take market share away from Canon, Nikon or Sony full frame cameras. Nikon and Canon are too firmly entrenched in the full frame market, and Sony is virtually unique having a downsized MILC product.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 1, 2015 at 11:19 UTC as 41st comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

Bob Janes: This is a great shame - in order to have effective competition in the camera market we need all the players we can get: the Uk decision sounds more extensive than the German one (ie not just the NX1 but everything).

Mike.... rrcad might be right.

Of those ten MILC camera makers, five of them tried very hard to market DSLRs (Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, Leica and Samsung), but failed at it. They couldn't compete with Canon and Nikon, so they did something very different instead.

Samsung's problem was compounded by the fact that they did nothing that someone else wasn't also doing. If you wanted an APSC MILC, you had five different brands to pick from. Actually six, if you count the Pentax K-01. There was nothing unique enough about the Samsung version.

On the other hand, if you want a full frame MILC camera, Sony is your only choice. If you want a MILC camera with a 1" sensor, then Nikon 1 is your only choice (yes, I do know about the Samsung Mini, but there are very few lenses for that mini system.) If you want a MILC camera with a 4/3 sensor, then it is Olympus or Panasonic. If you want a MILC camera with a really small sensor, then Pentax Q is your only option.

Plus, marketing was poor too.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

Bob Janes: This is a great shame - in order to have effective competition in the camera market we need all the players we can get: the Uk decision sounds more extensive than the German one (ie not just the NX1 but everything).

Mike, the sad thing is that Samsung had some really nice products. And if they truly are moving out of the digital camera business, they will be missed by their customers and by camera enthusiasts in general.

But sometimes it takes more than good products to be successful. You have to be more than good. You have to fill a need, or solve a problem.

This might be why Sony keeps reinventing itself. They set themselves apart with full frame MILC cameras that might be hard to top.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 11:55 UTC
In reply to:

Bob Janes: This is a great shame - in order to have effective competition in the camera market we need all the players we can get: the Uk decision sounds more extensive than the German one (ie not just the NX1 but everything).

Competition is necessary for a free market, but sometimes you can have too many players. In this players case there are too many players in a very small market.

The net result of "too much competition" is that most are losing money, and many will end up like Samsung withdrawing from markets. This isn't a good thing for customers.

The entire MILC market is half the size of the DSLR market, and we have ten companies competing there:

Canon
Fuji
Kodak
Leica
Nikon
Olympus
Panasonic
Pentax
Samsung
Sony

The much larger DSLR market only has three players.

Sooner or later, something has to give. There has to be a market shakeout coming, and we will probably end up with four or five left standing.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 11:35 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: While they are very popular on this particular website, MILC cameras are really a very small part of an overall declining camera market. And there were ten different manufacturers in this small market, with five of them making MILC cameras with APSC sensors (Canon, Fuji, Leica, Sony, and Samsung.)

Something had to give. The market just isn't large enough to sustain so many competitors who make very similar products.

The much larger DSLR market has only two competitors now (three if you count the yet to arrive Pentax FF DSLR) so it is hard to imagine how the market could sustain five companies selling APSC based MILC cameras with 3X zoom kit lenses.

And so.... the market shakeout begins....

Scott... if that were true, wouldn't it make MORE SENSE for Samsung to say so?

example: "We are curtailing sales in Europe because we cannot keep up with the huge demand for our products in Asia."

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 14:59 UTC
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: I wonder if Samsung instead opted to MFT to begin with?

OK.... believe it or not, Samung NX was the FIRST of those five APSC based MILC camera makers, beating Sony NEX to market by four months in 2010. Fuji X, Leica T, and Canon EOS M came later. There even was a Pentax based APSC system (K-01) briefly.

And they might also be the first to go.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 14:09 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: While they are very popular on this particular website, MILC cameras are really a very small part of an overall declining camera market. And there were ten different manufacturers in this small market, with five of them making MILC cameras with APSC sensors (Canon, Fuji, Leica, Sony, and Samsung.)

Something had to give. The market just isn't large enough to sustain so many competitors who make very similar products.

The much larger DSLR market has only two competitors now (three if you count the yet to arrive Pentax FF DSLR) so it is hard to imagine how the market could sustain five companies selling APSC based MILC cameras with 3X zoom kit lenses.

And so.... the market shakeout begins....

Yes, but they still ship TWICE as many DSLRs as MILC cameras.

Can the MILC market sustain five companies selling APSC based systems? M4/3, Sony FE and Nikon 1 are unique due to their sensor size, but the five APSC players are pretty much offering very similar products.

In the end, the market will decide.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 14:02 UTC

WOW.... only $5,200!

When can I preorder one?

:)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 11:40 UTC as 34th comment

While they are very popular on this particular website, MILC cameras are really a very small part of an overall declining camera market. And there were ten different manufacturers in this small market, with five of them making MILC cameras with APSC sensors (Canon, Fuji, Leica, Sony, and Samsung.)

Something had to give. The market just isn't large enough to sustain so many competitors who make very similar products.

The much larger DSLR market has only two competitors now (three if you count the yet to arrive Pentax FF DSLR) so it is hard to imagine how the market could sustain five companies selling APSC based MILC cameras with 3X zoom kit lenses.

And so.... the market shakeout begins....

Direct link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 11:36 UTC as 183rd comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Great Bustard: You know, if you have that little trust in your photographers, then...

It may not be a question of trusting photographers.

It might be more about providing a scene exactly as it happened rather than getting artistic improvements. I know my instinct would be to clone out objects that ruin the composition, or distract from the main figure. (Like the telephone pole behind someone's head.)

These things might make a better composition but they undermine the integrity of reportage.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2015 at 21:08 UTC

If the intent was to prevent terrorist groups from staging fake scenes of carnage with strategically placed teddy bears and children playing dead, then it may not work.

You can always deceive people who want to be deceived.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 18, 2015 at 21:05 UTC as 79th comment
In reply to:

Marty4650: No manufacturer would admit to discontinuing a camera because there are "better and more upgraded" models in that market.

Heck, five years AFTER Olympus discontinued Four Thirds, they are still claiming it has NOT been discontinued! They even list a five year old model on their website, and still offer lenses for a system they abandoned.

There is something very wrong with that email.

But as long as Samsung doesn't issue a firm denial, the speculation will continue.

Yes, your 4/3 lenses will perform even better on an EM1 than an E5, as long as you use an adapter. This is because the new sensor is so much better.

You can call the E-5 "newly designed" if you want to, but it was essentially an E-3 with a new sensor, that was video capable, and an improved articulating LCD hinge.

The E-600 was a stripped down E-620. The E-450 was n E-420 with a newer sensor in it.

My point was, Olympus stopped designing DSLRs from scratch with the E-620 back in 2009. And their last 4/3 lens was designed in 2008 (the 14-54mm II), and even that was a refresh of an older lens.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 17, 2015 at 02:25 UTC
On article Olympus shows gains in first half financials (139 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: Just checked the number that Olympus has "Full Time Employees:31,540", and they helped the company made $160,000 in 6 months.

So every single Full Time Employee made $0.85 for the company per month.

No Black Friday sales from Olympus, or they will go to red again.

Mike, are you sure all 31,540 are exclusively making digital cameras? Or, are most of them working on something else? Like those very profitable medical devices?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2015 at 22:57 UTC
On article Olympus shows gains in first half financials (139 comments in total)

After losing money for years, it seems Olympus made the right decisions to reverse that trend. They now have two consecutive quarters of profitability.

They virtually eliminated their low end P&S models, and focused more attention on their high profit OM-D cameras and PRO lenses. And this isn't rocket science, it is precisely what every other MILC camera maker has been doing too.

It worked.

The low end of the market is forever gone, taken away by smartphones that keep getting better. The only way left to stay in business is to focus on high profit products that do things that no smartphone can do. This means, high end ILCs, rugged cameras, and cameras with large optical zoom ranges.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2015 at 18:46 UTC as 20th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Marty4650: No manufacturer would admit to discontinuing a camera because there are "better and more upgraded" models in that market.

Heck, five years AFTER Olympus discontinued Four Thirds, they are still claiming it has NOT been discontinued! They even list a five year old model on their website, and still offer lenses for a system they abandoned.

There is something very wrong with that email.

But as long as Samsung doesn't issue a firm denial, the speculation will continue.

@ Narrentz... Yes, not "officially" but they discontinued the system de facto.

The last newly designed 4/3 camera or lens was released in 2008. The EM1 appeared five years later in 2013.

The E600, E450, and E5 from 2010 were all tweaks of previous older cameras (E620, E420, E3)..

Direct link | Posted on Nov 12, 2015 at 14:37 UTC
Total: 1099, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »