SamTruax

SamTruax

Lives in Canada Guelph, Ontario, Canada
Works as a Art Director
Joined on Jul 2, 2008
About me:

Own or have owned...
Casio QV 300
Canon A5
Casio EXlim7
Nikon Coolpix 5000
Nikon Coolpix 8800
Panasonic Lumix FZ18
Canon G9
Canon A570 IS
Canon A720 IS
Olympus E510 - w/kit lenses, 70-300, Panny Leica 14-50 f 2.8
Panasonic Lumix LX3
Fuji S100fs
Fuji S2 Pro
Fuji S5 Pro
Nikon 50 1.8, Tamron 90 2.8 Macro
Olympus E330
Olympus E520 w/kit 40-150 (new), Zuiko 18-180, Zuiko 50 f2
Canon G11
Pentax K-x w/kit 18-55, 55-300, FA 50 1.4, multiple old K and screw mount manual lenses
Canon G7
Sony R1
Canon EOS 10D
Olympus E-PL1
Panasonic G1
mZuiko 14-42, 17 2.8
Panny 20 1.7, 45-200
Sony TX5
Sigma DP1s
Fuji S200EXR
Panasonic LX5
Olympus E620, kit lenses, 50 f2, 14-54 Mk I, FL36R
Olympus E420
Sony HX100V
Olympus XZ-1
Panasonic G2
Panasonic 14-45

Comments

Total: 63, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

bobbarber: I'm a m43 user and where this camera fails for me is price point.

I do think some of the features are interesting and the image quality is "good enough" for me (and I'm sure most of us, except, well, pixel-peeping is the life blood of this forum).

I also like the idea of a very small sensor camera with interchangeable lenses, because of the advantages for telephoto.

But this camera is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too high priced, especially considering all of the excellent dslrs in the used camera market.

And if it is for non-enthusiasts, then why are they trying to sell it with a couple of esoteric features that even the majority of enthusiasts care little about?

If it were a $300 or $400 camera, maybe.

You can also pick up a Nex 5 now for $500... Much bigger sensor.
The Nikon is way over priced.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2011 at 02:47 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX100V review article (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rachotilko: Dear DP,

this being my first post, I could not resist but to write down my utter dissapointment with this review. The IQ assessment is just embarrasing, as Panasonic FZ-150's output is just so obviously superior at any ISO level. Even people interested in buying superzooms are not that much psychovisualy impared so as not to recognize texture armaggedon left by overzealous noise reduction in HX100's output.

I mind you, I own no Panasonic and am no fan or adversary of any brand. I am just sad for HX100 being yet another megapixel race victim. I am equally dissapointed by this review, probably marking the end of DPreview's reputability. 73% ? No way !!!

Come on... spend 5 min looking at the Sony talk forum and find me all the disappointed HX100v owners.
I'm a pixel peeper and I own DSLRs and m 4/3 cameras. I wasn't narrow minded enough to expect the HX100v's output to be detailed at 100%. It has a great zoom, sharp lens and unbelievable video quality.
The only people that have been disappointed are the ones that think they need to view a 16 Mp image at 100%.
If you can't manage to print a good image from the HX100v at A4/tabloid size then you are doing something wrong. If you are also trying to print such images at 600 x 600 then you need to rethink your workflow. Glossy magazines are usually printed no higher than 300 x 300 and anything over 150 dpi is perfectly acceptable in advertising.
The HX100v is more than capable for my needs and many others.
I miss the days of the Fuji S100sf which had a decent sized sensor and low enough pixel count but those days are gone.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 23, 2011 at 16:31 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX100V review article (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

harrisoncac: Dear DPR audience:
What do you say about HX100V against NIKON P500?

There is a reason why the Nikon is over $100 cheaper in most stores right now.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2011 at 15:26 UTC
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX100V review article (71 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mayank B: Wow, another compact camera review. Hope this would be a regular feature. Thank you, DP Review!

I think he was applauding the fact that there is another compact camera review. This site is geared more to reviews of DSLRs so its nice to see a review of a camera like this.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 22, 2011 at 15:25 UTC
On Lytro announces Light Field Camera article (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

SamTruax: So the question remains... after what Adobe pulled this week how do we know that there is anything in this technology at all? What if it is just a fixed focus lens on a cheap digital camera and the images are just being 'played with' in the software. Maybe the image being captured is completely in focus front to back and then the software is just 'highlighting' an area that you want to have focused on.
Maybe they are just really good at making a gimmick like "background defocus" look good. Just my opinion.

Do I need to be corrected on Adobe as well? I don't remember them stating that the image they were using was only a simulation... if they did then I stand corrected. I only caught the statement they made afterward.
Just because everyone else does it with their marketing doesn't mean it is right.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2011 at 20:17 UTC
On Lytro announces Light Field Camera article (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

SamTruax: So the question remains... after what Adobe pulled this week how do we know that there is anything in this technology at all? What if it is just a fixed focus lens on a cheap digital camera and the images are just being 'played with' in the software. Maybe the image being captured is completely in focus front to back and then the software is just 'highlighting' an area that you want to have focused on.
Maybe they are just really good at making a gimmick like "background defocus" look good. Just my opinion.

Well obviously you guys are experts so I stand corrected!
I hope it lives up to the hype.
I think we will have to wait until this technology shows up in a 'real' camera before we can see any benefit to it. Right now it seems like a novelty for people who post to facebook and the like. I guess they are hoping that will fuel the interest and raise the funds needed to see this put to some good use.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2011 at 20:12 UTC
On Lytro announces Light Field Camera article (271 comments in total)

So the question remains... after what Adobe pulled this week how do we know that there is anything in this technology at all? What if it is just a fixed focus lens on a cheap digital camera and the images are just being 'played with' in the software. Maybe the image being captured is completely in focus front to back and then the software is just 'highlighting' an area that you want to have focused on.
Maybe they are just really good at making a gimmick like "background defocus" look good. Just my opinion.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2011 at 19:23 UTC as 128th comment | 8 replies
On DSC_0436 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (3 comments in total)
In reply to:

Nikolay Staykov: wow, this image at iso 900 is cleaner compared to canon 7d image taken at even lower iso seting!

Wow... I hope you get a new monitor soon :-)
The image looks pretty good but nothing in these samples is out performing any of the newer APS-C sensors out there. View these images at 100% and you will see that it isn't even close. The m 4/3 sensor is getting much better detail as well but that may have to do more with the lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 18, 2011 at 14:45 UTC

I think I will have to see the real thing before I really believe it. These seemed a little too good to be true.
Only time will tell.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 17, 2011 at 18:59 UTC as 26th comment
In reply to:

JackM: Lipstick on a pig.

Yes, when the photos lie the zoom grows... thank-you Geppeto!

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2011 at 19:18 UTC

Pretty ugly looking design...but I am sure it will sell well.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 05:43 UTC as 407th comment
In reply to:

roblarosa: Wow, and the V1 runs $200 more than the G3, what a joke.

The joke is on the people who buy it instead of the better G3.
But, you are right, it will outsell the G3.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 21, 2011 at 05:38 UTC
On Just Posted: Panasonic DMC-FH7 compact camera review article (38 comments in total)
In reply to:

SamTruax: I love Panasonic cameras but I don't know why every Panasonic point & shoot seems to take priority on this site. I am guessing there are some politics involved.
We have been waiting for a review of the Sony HX100v for ever (and finally we had some studio shots added) but it seems that every Panasonic that comes out gets special attention.

Thanks for the response Barney. However, I still don't understand how it took until just recently for you guys to get your hands on an HX100v. Canada seemed to be the last place on the planet to get stock and I have had mine for a couple of months now. The FZ150 isn't even available to the public yet but there has been plenty of coverage so far.
I am not suggesting a bias, I just wonder what the difference is in DPReview's relationship with Panasonic as compared to Sony. Is Sony just not interested in what anyone thinks because they are doing so well without the help?
Thanks

Direct link | Posted on Sep 8, 2011 at 15:16 UTC
On Just Posted: Panasonic DMC-FH7 compact camera review article (38 comments in total)

I love Panasonic cameras but I don't know why every Panasonic point & shoot seems to take priority on this site. I am guessing there are some politics involved.
We have been waiting for a review of the Sony HX100v for ever (and finally we had some studio shots added) but it seems that every Panasonic that comes out gets special attention.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 7, 2011 at 21:09 UTC as 16th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

pixelsensible: Incredible!

Who wants to buy the gigantic 18-55 Sony lens that comes with a bit of a camera ? Looks like Sony got to go back to the drawing board immediately.

Well, when it does, hopefully Sony will also drop its mindless pursuit of more and more megapixels too. Those who do not agree with me on this point, please bear with me - I know you are not happy.

Why should they if their sensors perform as well at a smaller size?

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2011 at 13:32 UTC
On Preview:olympusepl3 (77 comments in total)
In reply to:

MGJA: No orientation sensor in 2011? How is that even possible?

Camera makers, listen up. The vast, vast majority of users will pay a $2 premium - what orientation sensors cost in bulk, according to the VIA spec sheet - to not have to right hundreds of pictures manually after a shoot. Really. You don't win any customers by having the sensor, but you sure as heck lose them...

Well I can see how that would be more important than image quality :-)

Posted on Aug 23, 2011 at 14:43 UTC

Unless Sony completely changed the way they manufactured their Touch Screen I think there may be a problem with the Sony camera that was used. I have the TX5 and it works perfectly well under water. I didn't think I would like a touch screen camera but the TX5 is quick and intuitive...and can really take a beating.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 17, 2011 at 13:43 UTC as 31st comment
On Q-ISO-1600-NRLOW-P1000589 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (2 comments in total)
In reply to:

harrisoncac: Panasonic made a big jump on image quality/noise handling.
Nice shot. Thanks

How can this be described as a big jump?
It certainly isn't any better than what other superzooms look like at this ISO...and only marginally better than the FZ100.
The amount of pink, purple and green splotches in his hair and beard are a little disconcerting.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 3, 2011 at 16:38 UTC

This is great... I just watched a movie that had a sunset photo just like mine on the wall... I am suing their butts off!

Give me a break

Direct link | Posted on Jul 23, 2011 at 04:16 UTC as 72nd comment | 2 replies
On DSC00638 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

There was a time when we wouldn't even think to show 1600 ISO images from such a small sensor cam. Now most of these cameras are producing very acceptable images at that level. Portrait shots at 800 ISO are the norm now.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2011 at 02:51 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 63, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »