PIX 2015


Joined on Jan 13, 2012


Total: 2, showing: 1 – 2
In reply to:

qwertyasdf: IMHO, rather than going premium, M43 might be better to go cheap
from what I see, many M43 owners are very happy with CCTV lenses.
They are willing to put anything that can bend light on their cameras

just make some CCTV quality lens with large aperture.
and print some DOF control crap on marketing materials, I'm sure the lens will sell.

m4/3 is perfect for my situation. I want a decent quality, pocketable camera with the capacity for different lenses. With a pancake attached a pen becomes pocketable but then has the flexibility of an slr with a couple of decent lenses. Saves me a lot of $'s only having to buy one camera. I don't need a high end compact and a dslr to chew up my budget.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 17, 2012 at 00:47 UTC
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

filipe brandao: I really don't understand why dpreview is clinging on to a marketing catch word ("mirrorless") instead of promoting a more clear classification of cameras.
Classifying these cameras as "mirrorless" is the same as saying a pencil is a inkless pen. Its confusing and forsakes a hole history of photography in which most of the cameras didn't have mirrors in their system. One should ask why isn't leica m9 included in this group.
Cameras have always been classified by how they allow the photographer to view/focus on the subject and their format. Any effort in this direction would help to clear the marketing confusion in which we roam.

I reckon they should use CSC (compact system camera). I think one of the companies (Olympus?) likes to use that term rather than mirrorless.
Another I have seen is EVIL, Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2012 at 06:23 UTC
Total: 2, showing: 1 – 2