keeponkeepingon

keeponkeepingon

Lives in United States United States
Joined on May 28, 2005

Comments

Total: 279, showing: 201 – 220
« First‹ Previous910111213Next ›Last »
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150 Review article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

IcyVeins: DPR Please stop reviewing 8-month old cameras, especially compacts, when there are newer cameras that need to be reviewed, if it's not an important enough camera to review when you first get it then just move onto the newer ones and skip it. This camera is probably going to be obsoleted by a newer version in the summer anyways.

I think it's timely enough, but it's confusing why you picked this "also ran" not so super zoom with all of the other options on the market.

I know "you can't please everyone" but the last Canon Superzoom you reviewed was the SX1 and you've never reviewed a nikon superzoom.

With the much more affordable SX40 ($250 for my new one), the much more zoomy P510 and HX200 all out and generating a lot of buzz why this panasonic? What sets it apart and makes it dpreview worthy?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 13, 2012 at 06:35 UTC
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150 Review article (73 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: I may have missed it but I was very surprised you wrote this article ignoring the cheaper Canon SX40

Also you say it compares well with the Sony/Nikon competition but neglect to mention the severe lack of zoom compared to the rest of the field (600 versus 800mm+ equivalent).

You may think it does not matter but ask a birder which camera they rather have......

It would not be a big deal if the difference was not so huge but to say "compares well" and not mention how poorly Panasonic compares in actual zooming is negligent:

Zooms on leading compact telephoto cameras:

FZ150: 23X
Sony HX200v: 30X
Nikon P510: 42X
Canon SX40: 35X

"the combination of lens quality/sensor/focus at the extreme end resolved just as much detail, in direct comparisons available on the internet."

Source?????

You are claiming that at 23x the 6 megapixels from the FZ150 sensor are equivalent to 12 megapixels from the SX40 sensor at 35X?

I can't find any source that claims the canon is that bad, to the contrary the sensor in the SX40 is normally ranked above the FZ150, especially at high ISOs.

Regarding "unsable zooms" most SX40 owners in the canon forum would argue that the 35X is very useable. There are some fairly stunning pictures on the forum at full zoom that I don't thiink could be captured with the FZ150.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 14:28 UTC
On Just Posted: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150 Review article (73 comments in total)

I may have missed it but I was very surprised you wrote this article ignoring the cheaper Canon SX40

Also you say it compares well with the Sony/Nikon competition but neglect to mention the severe lack of zoom compared to the rest of the field (600 versus 800mm+ equivalent).

You may think it does not matter but ask a birder which camera they rather have......

It would not be a big deal if the difference was not so huge but to say "compares well" and not mention how poorly Panasonic compares in actual zooming is negligent:

Zooms on leading compact telephoto cameras:

FZ150: 23X
Sony HX200v: 30X
Nikon P510: 42X
Canon SX40: 35X

Direct link | Posted on Apr 12, 2012 at 09:24 UTC as 16th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

Ross Murphy: you can find good ones for free at Adobe and around the web or make your own for free

which ones are the good ones though? There is so much garbage ou t there it would almost be worth spending $16 on something decent.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 17, 2012 at 13:13 UTC

ARGGGGGGGGGGG

I just tried to download iPhoto for my 3GS and I got the error:

"This app is incompatible with this iPHone

This app requires a front facing camera"

What the heck apple?????????

It's like Light Room saying it won't install because I don't have a webcam?????

Direct link | Posted on Mar 8, 2012 at 19:35 UTC as 30th comment | 2 replies

Has academic pricing been released yet?

$59 for LR3, $50 for Photoshop CS5.5

With the declining prices can we assume $30 for LR4 student and teacher?

Ah I just googled and it's $79 for the student eddition.

I think it used to list at $99.

Odd that the Retail version gets a 50% price cut and the student version gets a 20% price cut.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 6, 2012 at 12:59 UTC as 22nd comment
In reply to:

evogt500: The IXUS 500 (10.1 MP) actually used a 1/2.3" 16MP sensor but cropped. effectively making it a 1/3" sensor ( the area which actually recieves light). Is it the same with the camera?

I was confused but then realized you are using the uk/europe model numbers.

Tranlating to english IXUS 500 HS= the new Elph 520 HS.

Gosh canon needs to hire a new Chief Naming Officer....

I

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2012 at 15:45 UTC

Thanks for the review!

Question: Does the wrist strap have a stylus thingy and was using the touchscreen better with the stylus? Older models included a little nub on the wrist strap restriction thingy, does this model have it and if so did it help cure your touch screen woes????
Suggestion: Canon's model numbers are somewhat confusing. It would be nice to have some help figuring out where this fits in the Canon Constelation as often both the old and new version are available at retail.

You would think the 510 HS would be the upgrade to the 500 HS but from the specs, it looks more like an upgrade to the SD4500? Right now the SD4500 is selling out at $159 while the 510 HS selling for a hefty $279.

For those shopping now, other than the extra 2X zoom are there enough improvements to justify the extra expense? A few lines comparing this model to it's predecessor would be a big help making that decisions...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 2, 2012 at 02:41 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply

To put the price in perspective, the Nikon V1 grip is $119:

http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Miscellaneous/3676/GR-N1000-Black-Grip-for-Nikon-1-V1.html

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2012 at 14:11 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply

Pre-recorded video works fine on the iphone 3gs but there is no option to share the videos.

You have to export the video from Camera Awesome to your camera roll then mail from the camera roll. A little cumbersome for an otherwise slick app...

Direct link | Posted on Mar 1, 2012 at 04:05 UTC as 16th comment

Wow.

They copied Casio's "past movie" then later renamed "pre recorded" video mode where the video starts 5 seconds before you hit the record button. Great for kids, pets, wale watching etc.

Is the pre-recorded video feature available in any other iphone video apps?

My only problem with the third party apps (at least on my 3GS) is I always go back to the native phone app because its a bit faster. Can't wait to see how this on does.

If this is great I may have to go back to smugmug. Hopefully they've improved their abysmal mishmash of a back end and also support movies playing in their slide shows by now?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 29, 2012 at 18:15 UTC as 26th comment
In reply to:

Kuturgan: These cameras are dead born, because Nokia 808 outperforms them in IQ.

Drop the Nokia 808 and the Sony TX20 in a pool then see which takes better pictures....

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2012 at 16:29 UTC
In reply to:

TekSavvy: The largest aperture on these cameras is 3.3 or 3.5 and with so many other small P&S's coming out with 1.8 or 2.8, this seems like a waste of production.

I understand small is in but give me a normal sized P&S that has a large aperture and really good picture quality and I'll consider it but at 3.3/3.5, I'm not even going to think about it...

Nikon P310 at f/1.8
Canon S100 at f/2.0
Canon IXUS 125 HS at f/2.7

In all fairness your examples are not 10X zoom or slim folded optic cameras.

For example, canon's and Nikons new tough cameras (the D20 and AWS 100) start at F3.9!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2012 at 16:28 UTC

How is the TX20 any different from the TX10?

Same lens, same resolution sensor same lack of external controls and touch screen that does not work underwater?

Is the TX20 just a TX10 with newer firmware for twice the price????? (got the tx10 as a gift for something like $169)

If that's the case... shame on you sony!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2012 at 15:17 UTC as 8th comment | 2 replies

One word.... WANT!

Any chance this will cross the pond to the USA any time soon?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 27, 2012 at 21:06 UTC as 211th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Timbukto: No mention that Google+ stores unlimited images at 2048x for free? You get 1 gb of free storage at higher resolutions. Picasa also lets you sync photos very quickly.

Google + will display the image to you according to what it estimates your user-agent and screen real-estate to be, these tests are misleading and show misunderstanding of core web technology where the complete bottom line is what is the max resolution they allow you to store and download back and that is 2048x which far surpasses facebook. How they Display it is completely up to the user-agent and how Google feels it should be displayed at that point in time. In otherwords Google will still have your 2048x resolution copy of your picture, but if viewed on your smartphone, will only deliver to you the necessary resolution for your mobile display. If google decides to maximize or upscale images in the future if 4k monitors/tv's become standard, they have far more leverage to do so than facebook.

Thanks for pointing the free storage for small (but still greater than most screen res) pictures.

I've not been using piscasaweb etc for some time, mainly due to the lack of storage and horrible presentation of images (understand google+ looks nicer but picasaweb was embarasing).

I was unsure what 2048x meant but it's 2048x2048 according to google:

"Free storage limits

Photos up to 2048 x 2048 pixels and videos up to 15 minutes won't count towards your free storage."

What I don't get is how they can also have video up to 15 minutes as free? It seems like that will be a lot more mb than the pictures?

Ref:
http://support.google.com/picasa/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1224181

Direct link | Posted on Feb 11, 2012 at 01:40 UTC
On Canon ventures back in the water with the rugged D20 article (48 comments in total)
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: F3.9?????

What the heck canon?

The D10 may have looked strange but at least it was F2.7 (I think?)

F3.9????

For an underwater camera????

Gosh I can't believe I waited for this. I think I'll be better off just getting a case for my S95.

"Why are you so bothered by F3.9??? This is a consumer camera."

So wasn't the D10. This is a downgrade from the D10. Of course I'm bothered. Instead of building something unique such as the D10 canon basicaly just copied the Nikon AW100 or just about any Olympus "tough" adding nothing to the market except the same thing everyone else is selling with the canon brand on it.

THey should be ashamed. We came to expect better with the D10. We waited and waited 3 years for an update and then they deliver this? Sigh of course we are bothered. Look at the thread on the canon forum. The only people happy with it are the folks that think all of these P&S cameras are trash so why bother making something decent....

Direct link | Posted on Feb 8, 2012 at 01:12 UTC
On Canon ventures back in the water with the rugged D20 article (48 comments in total)

F3.9?????

What the heck canon?

The D10 may have looked strange but at least it was F2.7 (I think?)

F3.9????

For an underwater camera????

Gosh I can't believe I waited for this. I think I'll be better off just getting a case for my S95.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 16:04 UTC as 16th comment | 7 replies

It's interesting to see these companies trying to protect their product lines at the cost of inovation.

P300 series with a 1" "1 system" sensor and the same AF UMF would certainly have been technically feasible.

But then they would risk cutting into "1 system" sales.

So instead we got a P300 with pretty much everything the same but an extra button or two and the latest sony sensor.

And no RAW? What's with that?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 1, 2012 at 05:19 UTC as 48th comment | 2 replies
On Panasonic makes DMC-TS20 semi-rugged compact camera article (14 comments in total)

F3.9??????

Kind of dim for UW???

Direct link | Posted on Jan 31, 2012 at 15:30 UTC as 8th comment
Total: 279, showing: 201 – 220
« First‹ Previous910111213Next ›Last »