camera fan not photographer

camera fan not photographer

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Mar 17, 2011

Comments

Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6
On Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Review preview (804 comments in total)

Can you bounce the flash like you can with mark I & II? That was much more useful to me than an EVF.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2014 at 02:11 UTC as 109th comment | 2 replies
On Buyers' Guide: Best DSLRs and ILCs for under $1000 article (91 comments in total)

I'd like to see a top 10 of the best up-to $500 camera (including lens) for non-photographers to buy to take great pictures in auto-everything mode, judged primarily by image quality of out-of-camera JPEGs. Because I get asked this question a lot by people who don't care about manual controls, viewfinders, or raw processing. (Eg, just want to take good pics of their kids.) What's as good as or better than the E-PM2 (less than $500 at Amazon, and I've seen down to $424)?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 30, 2013 at 04:21 UTC as 23rd comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

camera fan not photographer: Why are there no details about AF speed in this review, especially given that slow AF speed is one of the main complaints heard about this otherwise great camera? The "Performance" pages of the reviews from this site of many prior cameras that pushed the limits of quality in a small camera (e.g. GF1, E-P1, X100, E-M5) all have an entire "Autofocus speed" section, with specific comparative comments vs. other known cameras or actual timings with tenths-of-seconds precision. This review says only "the RX1 can acquire focus within a second, almost all of the time".

Within a second?!? What kind of information is that? The Olympus E-P1 was roundly criticized several years (and camera generations) ago for having AF times of half to 2/3 of a sec, so how can this review not criticize 1sec normal-light AF speed and/or provide more detail. Street photography and kids require fast AF sometimes and people want to know just how much AF speed they are giving up for the RX1's other benefits.

HowaboutRAW: CDAF varies a lot in its speed across cameras. The Olympus E-M5/E-PL5/E-PM2 are super-fast, easily as fast as the PDAF in entry-level DSLRs. The RX1 is clearly slower, but it's hard to determine from anywhere how much slower. The superior CDAF algorithms Panasonic and Olympus have developed are clearly a big part of their speed, so I think your claim that an RX1 type of camera would require a new sensor is incorrect. Various Fujifilm cameras have had their AF speed increased significantly via firmware updates. It'd be nice to have a numerical rating for the RX1 speed so that if it gets improved we can actually tell how much better it is (eg, relative to the fastest CDAF such as in the m4/3 cameras).

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2013 at 21:26 UTC
In reply to:

camera fan not photographer: Why are there no details about AF speed in this review, especially given that slow AF speed is one of the main complaints heard about this otherwise great camera? The "Performance" pages of the reviews from this site of many prior cameras that pushed the limits of quality in a small camera (e.g. GF1, E-P1, X100, E-M5) all have an entire "Autofocus speed" section, with specific comparative comments vs. other known cameras or actual timings with tenths-of-seconds precision. This review says only "the RX1 can acquire focus within a second, almost all of the time".

Within a second?!? What kind of information is that? The Olympus E-P1 was roundly criticized several years (and camera generations) ago for having AF times of half to 2/3 of a sec, so how can this review not criticize 1sec normal-light AF speed and/or provide more detail. Street photography and kids require fast AF sometimes and people want to know just how much AF speed they are giving up for the RX1's other benefits.

photog4u: I expect DPReview to have the most authoritative and systematic info, regardless of other reviews. But I did Google, and most other reviews make only qualitative statements. Eg, Steve Huff's dominates the top results and his videos are pathetic. He just shows it locking focus in clips where you can't even see when he pushes the shutter button. There's not a wealth of info as detailed as the DPReviews reviews of, for example, the Panasonic GF1 or Olympus E-P1. But if you have a link to what you think is the best review for RX1 AF speed, please share it.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2013 at 21:23 UTC

Why are there no details about AF speed in this review, especially given that slow AF speed is one of the main complaints heard about this otherwise great camera? The "Performance" pages of the reviews from this site of many prior cameras that pushed the limits of quality in a small camera (e.g. GF1, E-P1, X100, E-M5) all have an entire "Autofocus speed" section, with specific comparative comments vs. other known cameras or actual timings with tenths-of-seconds precision. This review says only "the RX1 can acquire focus within a second, almost all of the time".

Within a second?!? What kind of information is that? The Olympus E-P1 was roundly criticized several years (and camera generations) ago for having AF times of half to 2/3 of a sec, so how can this review not criticize 1sec normal-light AF speed and/or provide more detail. Street photography and kids require fast AF sometimes and people want to know just how much AF speed they are giving up for the RX1's other benefits.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2013 at 06:20 UTC as 18th comment | 5 replies
On Quick Review: Apple iPhone 5 Camera article (119 comments in total)

No specs in an entire 5-page camera review? No sensor size. No focal length. No aperture. Huh? Just because it's a phone doesn't mean the camera fundamentals are suddenly not important.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 3, 2012 at 03:23 UTC as 22nd comment | 2 replies
Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6