N13L5

N13L5

Joined on Sep 12, 2011

Comments

Total: 93, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

for me, just add telephone and skype functionality to the Sony Nex 6, and I'll never look at a smart phone again.

The antenna can't take up that much extra space, and everything else is already present in that camera.

If people laugh while I hold a camera to my ear, I'm not worried about it :)

Direct link | Posted on Jan 23, 2012 at 10:17 UTC as 5th comment
On Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS preview (181 comments in total)

Panasonic wouldn't want to make a lens like this for Sony's Nex5n, would they?

Should do it just out of compassion for us poor Sony users who have either clunky lenses or a pancake that's not very good :(

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2011 at 00:46 UTC as 33rd comment | 5 replies

thought the comment below about Canon's calibration software was interesting.

Seems like one should ask any camera dealer to include calibration in the sale.

I also wonder if the same sort of calibration software is available to Sony's service centers??

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2011 at 12:31 UTC as 3rd comment
On How smartphones are changing digital photography article (51 comments in total)
In reply to:

JerseyJohn: We only have to look at the total revolution in the watch industry by the cell phone to see history repeating itself. Is a cell phone a Rolex??? No. But it gets the job done... tells time.
Some still look at photography as a method to record a certain time and place. The simplest cell phone can do that.

I think there's a lot of us who like both. But pocket size or budget size produce restrictions.

I'm sure thankful sometimes that my phone has a reasonable camera built in.

Of course, I'd always 'prefer' to whip out that fantastic large sensor camera with expensive glass instead, but alas, that didn't fit in my pocket.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2011 at 11:06 UTC
On How smartphones are changing digital photography article (51 comments in total)
In reply to:

xiod_crlx: what is this article about?
to say "yes there are smartphones on the market with cameras???"

some time ago dpreview was a REVIEWING website
where some cameras WERE TESTED and I wouldn't hesitate to say COMPARED...

An article with photo comparison of modern smartphones and cheap\inexpensive (100-200$) cameras is more than welcome

was wondering the same thing... I had more elaborate thoughts on the subject, just on my way to falling asleep on some evenings.

Just when I thought we might be getting to the beef of the subject soon, the article was over...

Direct link | Posted on Oct 21, 2011 at 11:03 UTC
In reply to:

tkbslc: Going really wide for the only prime to start your system seems pretty silly. That's what Sony did, too. Why? Most people consider that far too wide for general purpose. 27mm is not much better. They should have started with a 35 - 50mm equivalent which are much closer to general purpose lenses.

amen

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

fmian: "The new system offers a lens for every occasion."

Hahaha!!

Where is the ultra wide (4-13mm anyone?)
Where is the long macro?
Where is the fast prime?

all covered by that super bright kit zoom

dunno what you're complaining about.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 20:06 UTC
In reply to:

Andy Crowe: Why was Samsung the only company to launch a mirrorless system with a fast normal pancake? They really should be obligatory.

Nice to have a portrait lens announced early in the lineup, but where's the fast normal prime? At least Panasonic had one on their roadmap from the start.

A smaller sensor needs fast lenses more than anything, at least with the sensor crop pretty much identical to a 16mm movie frame you can use c-mount lenses with no vignetting, at least if Nikon have made their flange distance shallow enough.

I so agree with you...

The normal pancake is the only thing that kept Samsung on my list, though I couldn't buy for various other reasons :(

Smart move, and very surprising Sony/Panasonic didn't get it.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 19:42 UTC
In reply to:

dasilvamedia: Didn't Nikon realized that it actually has to be better than a Panasonic or a Sony?
This is fun! All the post Ive seen where not in the advantage of Nikon. Made my day!

again someone talks of "Clone", as if the only way to use some "standard" sensor size would automatically mean a clone... I guess that makes all DSLR cameras clones of each other?

So, by your logic, if I have a car company, and I don't want to make a clone of all the other successful car models, I'll just build the same thing but with really small wheels, so nobody can say its a clone of cars using 17" wheels. My tiny-wheeled car will go great on smooth roads, but don't go near any potholes :P

The whole "clone" concept is ridiculous with respect to cameras, they all do the same thing in the same way. Yes, variations on the theme make great difference to usability and picture quality, but if Apple had designed the original shape of the DSLR, it could have sued them all out of business over "trade dress" imitation, thats how alike they all look.
Wasn't enough for Samsung to have their buttons in different places either ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 19:38 UTC
In reply to:

rocklobster: Canon must be having a good old laugh right now as all that this camera has got that M43 has not is phase detect focussing - not a selling point for buyers that will be attracted to this product.

Nikon should have aimed higher towards the NEX-7 or at least the NEX-5 but perhaps they, like Sony, could not make lenses small enough.

Cheers

Canon must be slowly, secretly cooking its own soup all the while Nikon is doing free market research for them.

Since I need a camera next month, I'll just buy some discontinued model temporary camera, till I can see what Canon comes up with.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 19:25 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Love Nikon's lenses design.

Yes, some of them have a Bauhaus look to them, like old Braun products. Now we just have to get Nikon to put better glass in them.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 19:19 UTC
In reply to:

kenghor: Nikon is doomed!

The small 2.7x crop sensor is a joke to those who users who bother to have an inter-changeable lens system. How much of the small-form advantage does it has over the GF3 / Nex series, if any at all? And those who like it to be really small will simply stay with the compact cameras.

I see that Nikon can only capitalise on its brand name to sell such a system to those who knows little about camera. Probably cannibalising its p&s and low end DSLR customers.

Nikon is not a big company compared to the other electronic giants such as Canon, Sony, Panny and Samsung. With its resources spreading thin, its DSLR business may as a result suffer big time.

@ Cy Cheze
you say "Would it make sense to offer a clone of the m4/3 or NEX devices?"

Who would ever suggest Nikon make a clone :P How about beating them with a better camera, eliminating the warts of the other systems? Isn't that Nikon's strength?

Of course you can't do that if you're in fearful protectionist mode.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 19:17 UTC
In reply to:

zanypoet: Cursed small sensors. Nikon is bringing knife to a gun fight.

I wonder why Nikon so fears cannibalizing entry level DSLR's. Its happening with or without them.

And lets say, their own, well designed small-sized APS-C sensor camera does take sales away from the D3100/D5100, where is the problem? They are not selling them for any less money, but they are more prone to sell little proprietary attachments like Sony is already doing.

Further, looking at Sony's E-mount lenses, those aren't any smaller than their A-mount lenses. Not surprising, cause they have to serve the same size sensor.

So, for Nikon, there's no issue to keep using the same lens mount and lenses. Several Nikon DSLR prime lenses are smaller than Sony's E-mount prime lenses coming out in December.

So, Nikon wouldn't anger its customer base over lens concerns, nor would they loose any money if more people switched to smaller Nikons, cause they wouldn't need to switch brands.

I'd pay MORE not less for a smaller mirrorless D5100 sister from Nikon with the same low light power.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 19:05 UTC
In reply to:

zanypoet: At least it's not ugly like NEX7 ala soup can attached to cigarette box.

You do have a point there...

I think I would have bought a Nex long ago, if they had a ~30mm pancake... But that 18mm is just too wide as an only lens for me.

And the new 35mm macro and 50mm portrait lenses are no shorter than the kit zoom either, so we're back to soup can on a cigarette box. (even though the cigarette box is nicely designed)

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 18:47 UTC
In reply to:

Razgriz: My word look at all of the complaints about the size of sensors and speeds of lenses and unfavourable apertures.

I thought it was all about the moment, framing and the capture.

I wonder if Rembrant or Picasso made the same critique when some new paint brushes appeared on the market?

Just a thought!

Absolutely! At every art school, there's always bitching and moaning about brushes and colors...

You see, painting is very slow... so various chatter is inevitable while doing it, and when you make a mistake, you need something to blame it on.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 18:39 UTC
In reply to:

jameshamm: Smart: make a caricature of a mirrorless camera to portray the format as crap.

now I see what they're trying to do...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 25, 2011 at 18:35 UTC
On Why make a small-sensor mirrorless camera? article (279 comments in total)
In reply to:

ishu: 1. For the compact camera user, the sensor is bigger, not smaller.
2. For the compact camera user, this camera is screamingly fast.
3. There are many more compact users to "upgrade" than DSLR users to "downgrade."
4. Whether this market realizes the value of the CX remains to be seen.

If CX delivers as promised, the fast response closes an enormous performance gap between the "highest-end" compacts vs. "lowest-end" DSLRs. That alone could make Nikon CX the choice of soccer moms because it offers something you can't get on any other "approachable" (not "affordable") camera.

Then consider affordable high-magnification low-light lenses like the new $250 50mm f/1.8 DX (think school performances, high school sports; see a trend?) and I would buy one for my wife, whose bridge camera is "too slow." Notably, she's never wanted to get the "out-of-focus-background thing" known by the DPR crowd as shallow DOF.

Makes perfect sense that not everybody cares about DOF. Wasn't there some other thing sensor size helped with?

What if the lighting isn't that great and your kids look all grainy with red, green and blue dots all over their faces, or blurred cause the shutter had to stay open longer, just because you picked a camera for its processing speed, instead of one that takes better pictures when the light isn't perfect?

One that is the same size and less expensive in spite of higher picture quality?

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2011 at 22:04 UTC
On Why make a small-sensor mirrorless camera? article (279 comments in total)

When is Nikon's Board going to hire Leo Apotheker as CEO?

He's available and he'll take care of everything!

He'll discontinue the J/V 1 in about a month, get rid of the low profit hardware business and move Nikon into software by purchasing Adobe...!

And people will be buying Nikon J1' like crazy for $99 for their mothers and grand mothers.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2011 at 21:49 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply
On Why make a small-sensor mirrorless camera? article (279 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lensjoy: Seems like a bit of a yawn to me. The 1" sensor is bigger than what's in enthusiast P/S cameras such as the Canon S90, but the interchangeable lens design screams for a better sensor than 1".

What I want is the 1" sensor in a nice, small P/S body for better low light performance and better image quality. That would make more sense, and represent a breakthrough in the enthusiast P/S market. Instead, we get this.

Yeah, if they put that sensor in their next Coolpix, in that price range, people will be all over it, and other P&S makers would have to scramble...

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2011 at 21:42 UTC
On Why make a small-sensor mirrorless camera? article (279 comments in total)
In reply to:

DaveMarx: Sensor size is a non-issue, or soon will be. The inherent technical quality of a 4x5 negative will always beat 35mm. We still moved from Speed Graphics to Nikons. Negative quality was not the pivot point in our decisions. Do you think Nikon doesn't remember? We're at the point of diminishing returns on sensor quality when we have to push bench tests to ISO 800 or 1600 before we see a meaningful difference between sensor sizes. That's like Tri-X vs. Plus-X, man!

10 FPS full-feature shooting? Near-instant AF? A bag full of lenses and bodies half the bulk and weight of today's? One photographer in the right place at the right time, with one camera, one family of lenses, able to sell both stills and motion... We'll see V1s on football sidelines and at news events, and we'll follow. This is how Nikon created the era of the SLR.

They'll keep supporting the legacy format, too. Folks will switch whenever they're ready, and not before. But, flippin' mirror, you're the weakest link. Goodbye!

Your whole argument is imaginary, as there are already cameras with bigger sensors that are NOT any bigger than the Nikon 1 stuff.

I'd totally follow you if Nikon had actually produced a smaller, lighter camera with less protruding lenses, but they haven't.

On the contrary if you look at the latest release Panasonic 18-42 lens, which is a zoom as flat as a pancake lens.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 24, 2011 at 21:38 UTC
Total: 93, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »