JohnHoppy

JohnHoppy

Lives in France Jonzac, France
Works as a Retired
Joined on Apr 24, 2011

Comments

Total: 38, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 First Impressions Review preview (294 comments in total)

I'm constantly surprised how photographers still moan about batteries. I have a GM1 and sure, after a couple of hundred it's running down, but I always have back-up batteries and many compatibles are really good as well as cheap. I got a pack of 2 for the GM1 at around £12 (USD19), no problem with them. Take up space? - Get outta here! I love the EM1 but it's the GM1 that goes everywhere with me.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 4, 2014 at 12:45 UTC as 31st comment | 12 replies
On Richard Franiec offers Canon PowerShot G7 X custom grip article (110 comments in total)

Whether or not manufacturers should design their cameras better - and they should - is a wasted debatte. Fact is, they don't listen. I have had a couple of Richard's grips, they do transform the camera (and take up no extra space). Delivered to Europe for around 27 bucks was okay for a 50% improvement in handling. He's a nice bloke, too! Get one for your GM1, it will transform the camera.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 1, 2014 at 07:54 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)
In reply to:

Sdaniella: Canon Powershot Premium Compact newer "later model" large zoom video (teaser*):

http://www.canon.nl/assets/videoplayers/video.html?bctid=3785004121001

(Canon NL)

*most have seen a similar (but not exactly same) Powershot G promo video but this has added a bit of Canon 'history promo' covering G1XMkII, G7X, and teaser of new model only shows up at the very end of the video clip (same as screen capture shown elsewhere)

The lens appears to follow pattern of an interchangeable zoom lens, rather than a fixed zoom lens.
Sensor size, to keep zoom compact, would have to be smaller, maybe 4/3" sensor.
If folks prefer G1X 1.5" sized sensor, then the interchangeable zoom will definitely be a "large zoom" for a Powershot.
If the sensor is smaller, like a m43, it will be a model that slots below G1X-series, but above G7X.
With an interchangeable "large zoom" compact, with 4/3" (or 2x crop) sensor (18x13.5), it could be an EOS-G mount, and adaptable to EOS-M lenses and EF lenses, too.

hhmmm...

@Sdaniella. How the heck did an argument about body size creep into a feature on a Canon marketing exercise? And why the attack on m4/3? Let's kill this - (1) the "king of oversize bodies relative to sensor size" is not m4/3 - you should look at Nikon 1 Series. (2). The Body Mass Index of any Canon SLR and its lens relative to sensor size is gretater than any M4/3 standard combo. Go weigh and size up a few. Then let's dispense with this nonsense because who really cares?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 9, 2014 at 22:51 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeFairbanks: When someone in sales/marketing starts flapping their gums with a bunch of adverbs and adjectives, it's fair for the consumer to say, "Get to the point."

My father used to say, "Stop beating around the bush."

Canon's executives are spending way too much time in meetings (the alternative to work), and this ad campaign shows.

Will it work? I have no idea. I'm no expert, but as a prosumer of gear it's not working on me. I find it annoying, condescending, contrived, and useless. But if it causes the average Joe to get pumped up and buy Canon products, then it will be a success.

Hype is a way to sell to the consumer who doesn't like to think or research. It's a way to assume (probably correctly) that most people are easy to manipulate.

And I agree with Canon (if their assumption is that people are easy to fool with hype). Look at the ebola epidemic. Right now there are people on motorcycles or on flimsy ladders worried that they might catch ebola, all because the TV hyped it.

One might imagine, Mr. G., that you are the Canon Protection Society, your talk of the comptetition "dancing in the streets" is a little dramatic. This was Canon's play and they blew it. Nobody drove them to it. Most respondents here are not Canon-bashing nor even raising the flag for the competition. Canon's 'teaser' raised an expectation in people in the photography community, which it was intended to do. Having that expectation dashed, as we see in these comments, is Canon's responsibility, not theirs. Canon may "see the impossible", it's too bad they can't see the obvious.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 9, 2014 at 17:03 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeFairbanks: When someone in sales/marketing starts flapping their gums with a bunch of adverbs and adjectives, it's fair for the consumer to say, "Get to the point."

My father used to say, "Stop beating around the bush."

Canon's executives are spending way too much time in meetings (the alternative to work), and this ad campaign shows.

Will it work? I have no idea. I'm no expert, but as a prosumer of gear it's not working on me. I find it annoying, condescending, contrived, and useless. But if it causes the average Joe to get pumped up and buy Canon products, then it will be a success.

Hype is a way to sell to the consumer who doesn't like to think or research. It's a way to assume (probably correctly) that most people are easy to manipulate.

And I agree with Canon (if their assumption is that people are easy to fool with hype). Look at the ebola epidemic. Right now there are people on motorcycles or on flimsy ladders worried that they might catch ebola, all because the TV hyped it.

I think, Mr. G., you are missing the point. This blog has now run to nearly 1500 hits and most of them are NEGATIVE! If Canon thinks that is good marketing, as a former marketing man myself, I do not. Whether people have mis-read Canon's drift or not, there are a lot of turned-off consumers out there. Not a good result. I don't call their marketing effective, I call it pathetic.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 9, 2014 at 15:37 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Canon still thinks that they are “Winning”. They think that total market share is the ultimate measure of success. They built up such a dominate market share years ago that they can’t even fathom that it will ever go away.

Just watch over the next year. Some people will buy the 7D MKII and G7X. However, those sales won’t stay strong after Christmas. After that Canon will begin to see their sales slide drastically. Other manufactures will see sales slides as well. However, Canon and Nikon’s will be EPIC or Disastrous depending on your point of view.

Sales will continue to struggle after that. They simply will have saturated the market for DSLRs. Everyone who wants one of their cameras will have it already and everyone else will want some form of mirrorless camera.

Eventually they will decide that mirrorless is the answer. It will be too late. They will fade away just like Kodak. I really wish I could go back to the days of the Canon A5 Zoom, S400, S1-IS, and Canon 5D MK II.

In part, I agree, and it's clear today's fiasco is a major miscalculation. But much as I dislike Canon, they will not go away. Despite their lack of innovation, their arrogance and inability to judge the mood of the market, they have the resources to have mirrorless covered, even as we speak. Mirrorless is where innovation has been several years now, but Canon are not stupid, they must have a team working on a backup plan for when the market calls Time on their stale ideas, tired of Canon's protection of its cash cows. The EOS-M was probably a result of a directive to "not make it too good": they have engineers who can turn out a good CSC if they want to. The only question is, how much ground will they need to recoup? But disappear? - I doubt that.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 19:09 UTC
On 'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. article (1669 comments in total)

Another nail in the coffin of credibility. Canon, you have only yourselves to blame. How stupid and naive do you think the market is? I'm glad I went mirrorless years ago, it's where things are happening and Canon's outdated hype is just so much crap.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2014 at 17:23 UTC as 360th comment

A breath of fresh air, Mr. Fuji, thank you. Contrast with the Canon and Nikon interviews - "I Am Imagination" indeed! Since when? And Canon have been "serious about it since the beginning"? Would you buy a used car from these characters?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2014 at 12:42 UTC as 33rd comment
On Olympus takes Pen E-PL6 beyond Asia article (76 comments in total)
In reply to:

Greynerd: The best way to describe the EPL's is a standard everythingless PEN camera stripped bare of any but absolutely essential components but with the concession of a PASM dial. I just cannot understand why DSLR owners have never taken to mirrorless. A mystery indeed.
Edit: Probably they do not bother to show the reverse of the camera as there is so little there worth showing.

It is not true that "DSLR owners have never taken to mirrorless" - around the world they are. This perception appears to be that of North America, where the Marketing machines of the big SLR boys would have you believe the SLR remains the superior tool. The rest if us find the CSC has merits of its own. In Europe and particularly in Asia, mirrorless cameras are widely accepted now as a valuable genre. Like many, I traded my big, heavy SLR glass for m43 and would never go back. Mirrorless is just as valid and a lot more fun.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 12, 2014 at 21:14 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)
In reply to:

JohnHoppy: For once, DPR, I agree. Not that this latest V3 is a 'bad' camera - seems to have merit in some measure, but you are right to question where it fits in. But is it designed to "fit in"? Or is it designed to highlight the better sense in buying one of Nikon's SLR offerings instead? If Nikon were serious about a spear-thrust into new technologies, surely they would see what the other mirrorless companies were achieving as they swim against the tide of SLR resistance, and bring out a model that followed that line of success. They haven't. It all seems like a noble effort designed to go nowhere, and I suggest Michael Reichmann's view - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/what_matters.shtml - is not far wide of the mark.

Are you saying Nikon has not followed in the same track as Canon? Nikon are still in a position of strength in the ILC market, this V3 is hardly their best shot in a sector that has gone from Zero in 2008 to 25% of the ILC market in 5 years. DPR are right to take a sceptical view.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2014 at 16:30 UTC
On Am I missing something here? article (637 comments in total)

For once, DPR, I agree. Not that this latest V3 is a 'bad' camera - seems to have merit in some measure, but you are right to question where it fits in. But is it designed to "fit in"? Or is it designed to highlight the better sense in buying one of Nikon's SLR offerings instead? If Nikon were serious about a spear-thrust into new technologies, surely they would see what the other mirrorless companies were achieving as they swim against the tide of SLR resistance, and bring out a model that followed that line of success. They haven't. It all seems like a noble effort designed to go nowhere, and I suggest Michael Reichmann's view - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/what_matters.shtml - is not far wide of the mark.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 15, 2014 at 11:49 UTC as 78th comment | 4 replies
On Fujifilm X-T1 First Impressions Review preview (1656 comments in total)

Brief word of overdue praise for the author: Jeff Keller and Gordon Laing are the best reviewers in the business. Jeff's clear appraisals are always impartial and illuminating. I hope he is in charge of the full reviews of this and the EM10. One thing is for sure - photography has been a whole lot livelier since mirrorless came on the scene.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 28, 2014 at 10:40 UTC as 368th comment
On Enthusiast interchangeable lens camera 2013 roundup article (468 comments in total)
In reply to:

JohnHoppy: Whilst having no problem with dpreview's choices, I wonder why the scoring system is, by their admission, heavily weighted towards IQ. Where even cameras around the $700 Mark can now produce IQ that a few years ago you could only see in the best $2000+ cameras, might we not put IQ into a more comparative relationship with other factors? When so many good cams offer me high IQ, I am going to make a choice based on factors like handling and functionality or balance of features. With so many cams offering excellent potential IQ, maybe dpreview should look again at its "heavy weighting". Or perhaps they could indicate what miscroscopic level of detail they consider High IQ is.

I don't have a problem with any of that, Josh. I think DPR's problem is that slapping a single Neon sign on a camera that says "82%" or whatever is far too limited. Tends to promote elitism too ("Hey, my Nikon got 83%, that beats your Canon at 82%"). Some review sites (CameraLabs is always very fair) offer results at several levels and in fact DPR do too but then blow it all by giving a single % figure and admitting their scoring is weighted in ways many might dispute. My main point was about IQ being overrated, but DPR themselves admit Portability (e.g.) isn't factored in, and portability is another big issue today with Compact System Cameras making a big selling point here.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 27, 2013 at 20:20 UTC
On Enthusiast interchangeable lens camera 2013 roundup article (468 comments in total)

Whilst having no problem with dpreview's choices, I wonder why the scoring system is, by their admission, heavily weighted towards IQ. Where even cameras around the $700 Mark can now produce IQ that a few years ago you could only see in the best $2000+ cameras, might we not put IQ into a more comparative relationship with other factors? When so many good cams offer me high IQ, I am going to make a choice based on factors like handling and functionality or balance of features. With so many cams offering excellent potential IQ, maybe dpreview should look again at its "heavy weighting". Or perhaps they could indicate what miscroscopic level of detail they consider High IQ is.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 26, 2013 at 23:25 UTC as 106th comment | 4 replies
On Will consumer DSLRs be 'dead in 5 years?' post (134 comments in total)

I suspect many respondents here have not actually read Andrew Reid's full article. It repays reading. It may well be true that traditional photographic devices are in terminal decline, but unless innovation is allowed to flourish, that decline is most certain. The advent of new technology such as mirrorless is only part of a process that seeks to perpetuate a specific device for the enjoyment of photography as we know it. Market leader Canon's EOS-M was a poor effort that really said, "Our SLR is the thing to buy" and Nikon's 1 series was weakly conceived too. By steadfastly opposing mirrorless and throwing its weight against what it represented rather than embracing and adapting it, Canon in effect has projected its own possible fate. Things will have to change or Reid's scenario may be a reality in a few years.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2013 at 10:27 UTC as 28th comment | 6 replies
On Will consumer DSLRs be 'dead in 5 years?' post (134 comments in total)

The nature of photography and its tools has changed. Today pictures are taken on smartphones, not to frame on the wall but to share with the web or mail to friends. Photography has become part of the throw-away society. Most users don't care how many pixels the tool has, nor about exposure or IQ. Traditionally, to take pictures you bought a camera, now your phone does it. Only those who wish to do more with their images will now buy a specific tool for the job, and the nature of that tool is in question. The "serious" photographer aspires to get the best tool for the job: most are now waking up to the potential of newer technology so it's a foolish man who is going to back the old horses. Cost is a red herring. The "movers and shakers" in recent years have been the mirrorless boys. The mirror box for decades remained unchanged and unchangeable but electronics has changed that: it’s difficult to see budget SLRs continuing when economies of scale can make electronics cheaper.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 28, 2013 at 23:14 UTC as 77th comment
On Buying a digital SLR article (149 comments in total)
In reply to:

JohnHoppy: I could get really angry with dpreview. If you are going to write an article entitled “Digital SLR Buying Guide” and talk about SLRs, that’s fine, but you stick in Mirrorless at the end as though it were some sort of inferior sub-species. CSCs/mirrorless cameras are not SLRs, and in parts of the world outside USA are giving SLRs a pretty hard time. You also have a section here “Advantages” and “Disadvantages”, some of which are argumentative at least, where you don’t publish such a subjective opinion for SLRs, which further suggests you infer CSCs are inferior to SLRs. You do not have the same judgements to make about SLRs relative to CSCs. This is not good journalism – either treat Mirrorless as a separate category or leave people to judge the merits for themselves. You state there are “pros and cons to a mirrorless system camera when compared to a similarly priced DSLR”, but you don’t state the converse. In another couple of years, you will be looking at this differently.

Your reaction to my reaction is one of non-response to the points raised. Simply, I feel your article treats the Mirrorless species as an "also-ran" when many people believe it's as relevant to today's photography as Reflex has been. Further, I have Reflex and Mirrorless, what's this nonsense about a "loyalist defence"?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 6, 2012 at 15:37 UTC
On Buying a digital SLR article (149 comments in total)

I could get really angry with dpreview. If you are going to write an article entitled “Digital SLR Buying Guide” and talk about SLRs, that’s fine, but you stick in Mirrorless at the end as though it were some sort of inferior sub-species. CSCs/mirrorless cameras are not SLRs, and in parts of the world outside USA are giving SLRs a pretty hard time. You also have a section here “Advantages” and “Disadvantages”, some of which are argumentative at least, where you don’t publish such a subjective opinion for SLRs, which further suggests you infer CSCs are inferior to SLRs. You do not have the same judgements to make about SLRs relative to CSCs. This is not good journalism – either treat Mirrorless as a separate category or leave people to judge the merits for themselves. You state there are “pros and cons to a mirrorless system camera when compared to a similarly priced DSLR”, but you don’t state the converse. In another couple of years, you will be looking at this differently.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 5, 2012 at 16:19 UTC as 51st comment | 6 replies

Full marks to Easycass for his design study. And interesting reactions, mostly positive: ignore those detractors who feel they're qualified to criticise, let them design their own! I know how difficult it is, I designed my 'dream camera' a while ago and guess what I called it? - "C1". Now how odd is that?!! So there is design talent out there, my only question is - how do we get the camera makers to listen? Instead of rolling out the same incremental updates time after time.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2012 at 14:46 UTC as 147th comment

Having long shown their high-level 12mp SLRs (D700 etc.) offer top quality images without the excesses of high MP rates, Nikon are now playing the Canon card. Megapixel Wars again? We thought these two giants had put that nonsense aside.
It might be the best budget cam ever. Higher quality images? – Maybe. Many a pro will say differences between 12 and 18mp cameras are slight unless you print high-detail posters. If Nikon bring to a budget cam the quality of its 24mp D3X, okay, but I suspect this is about no more than selling the “bigger and better megapixels” charm to novices who seldom print past 8x10 and shoot on Auto, who would see no difference in their pics between this and a 12mp model. Whilst people pay, manufacturers will find increasing MP an easy route to sales. Nikon are not providing high MP at bargain price for altruistic reasons! Perhaps Nikon sees the growth of CSCs as hitting their base models and the MP card is the easiest one to play against newer technology.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 20, 2012 at 10:21 UTC as 48th comment
Total: 38, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »