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: 67, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
On Preview: Canon PowerShot G1 X large sensor zoom compact article (776 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: This is very disappointing, Canon!
What a shame to mess up such a nice camera, especially that you gave it a better sensor, which deserves a camera with better features!

Several issues will make me pass on considering this camera (although I have been a Canon fan and user for over 30 years):

1- Ridiculous zoom (4X).

2- Unacceptable macro distance (20 cm, just when I hoped for 20 mm or even 10mm macro distance).

3- USB 2 is old news now. Why in the world would you do that when USB 3 has been out for a while now?

4- 1.9 frames per second, Canon? Isn't that embarrassing? Shame on you!

5- f2.8 is no longer great. It is time for f1.8, or at least a compromised f2.0.

I am really bummed and very disappointed by this news from Canon, and without a doubt I'll have to consider one of Fuji's new products for a pocket camera (perhaps the f770 EXR).

I'm about to start renaming Canon to Cannot.

Bummerrrrrrrrrr, Cannot!

All those years of Canon experience and yet no experience in photography... at least by those statements.
The sensor is 6.3x the size as the previous generations of G series cameras...what kind of enormous lens would you want attached to it that has a longer zoom than 4x and brighter than f 2.8?
I'm sure the Fuji will be a cute little camera but don't expect the image quality to be anywhere near what the Canon will produce.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 9, 2012 at 16:39 UTC
In reply to:

Alberto de Harenne: after this test, I have a question for the Canon people:

Hi Guys, are you Kidding?

look at this !!!!!

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-jj8cZYJqWT4/TsfGeA6XboI/AAAAAAAACaI/xhdZzU7y3Wg/s1017/Canon_s100_test.jpg

I think though the question is WHY is it out of focus. Should we assume that DPReview performed the test wrong more than once even though they have done it a thousand times correctly?...or is there some focusing issues with the S100? It would be nice to get a fair comparison but if they can't manage to get the camera working properly then there is a bigger issue than just simple edge softness with the lens.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 21, 2011 at 16:41 UTC
On DSCF1225 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (4 comments in total)

Pretty impressive...you can still read the tiny numbers on the board below. Good detail at ISO 6400.
Fuji really knows how to handle noise reduction!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 15, 2011 at 15:34 UTC as 3rd comment
On Just Posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX100V review article (72 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cy Cheze: The HX100, HX5V, HX9V, and HX7V share the same slow control characteristics. To switch modes or change settings takes time. When you use the movie button, the cameras need about 5 seconds to go from standby to run, and then even longer to stop the video and be ready to shoot a still. The delay between individual still shots is much slower than with their great grandmother, the H1. The 10fps burst mode is not much help if you aren't lucky to pick the right instant to shoot and the camera needs a rest before it is ready to shoot again. To shoot video may be more practical for action sequences. In fact, the HX series rate best decent videocams, forgiving their "stammer," shoot better stills than most videocams.

If people can put up with this slowness, and don't share certain folks' obession with NR at high ISO, then they rate well in their class. An HX200 migh take the prize were it to operate a bit faster and have a bit fewer megapixels. That's not begging for any miracles.

I think you might be exaggerating by about 4 seconds or so on the standby time.
You press the movie button and there is a short pause before it starts recording. When you press the button to stop it stops immediately but it takes the camera a couple of seconds to process before you can do anything else.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 24, 2011 at 17:42 UTC
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 (72 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 (72 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 (72 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 (269 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 (269 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 (269 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 | 7 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
Total: 67, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »