Kawika Nui

Kawika Nui

Lives in United States CA, United States
Works as a Undeclared/General Ed
Joined on Sep 16, 2010
About me:

Keep shooting

Comments

Total: 148, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben O Connor: Priced better than GX7 back in time...
Also than P-5 & EM-5...
Better specs than many other M43 cams...

But damn that new Fuji ! It looks awesome in silver! Even I won't buy Fuji in coming times.

Fuji is great but they need some good long zoom lenses (55-300mm or 28-300mm) like everyone else has.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 01:20 UTC
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

bmwzimmer: They need to hire some of the designers at Fuji. It's a great camera for sure but boy is it ugly.

"very masculine and edgy"?
You are talking about a camera?

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 01:19 UTC
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

WT21: I loved the G6 looks, and would prefer that with a better sensor, over this beast. I'll just keep on with my GX7.

It appears that except for 4K video (a must for some people, a "so what" for others) and articulated LCD, the GX7 may generally superior to the G7. And now that it is "old" it's cheaper. I love my GX7 but 8mp stills at 30fps, plus the artic. LCD, are tempting.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 01:18 UTC
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

Couscousdelight: It looks a little like a Pentax K5.

Onlooker,
You got it right. Form should follow function but all too often "design" gets in the way.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 01:15 UTC
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (386 comments in total)
In reply to:

Vlad S: I always wrote that Panasonic µ4/3 cameras design was kinda meh... This one looks really nice – the shape, finishes, and the controls all look very sophisticated.

Seems like controls, feature set and IQ should be more important than looks. It's about photography/videography.

Direct link | Posted on May 20, 2015 at 01:14 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (513 comments in total)
In reply to:

Hugo808: I had a go on a Pentax in a shop and it had really noisy autofocus. That was the end of it for me, but are all their lenses missing the ultrasonics of the competition?

Gee, Cane,
"How you look a plastic blob from Canikon and that excites you is beyond me."

Did you take the wrong meds or something? No need to sound like such a b**ch.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 19:47 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (513 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: I might have missed it in the announcement, but is Pentax tracking down K-3 users and removing the built-in flash? And are they no longer selling the K-3 with a built in flash? From how so many people on here are crying, you would think so.

If you need a pop-up, you can buy and/or keep the K-3. If you only occasionally need GPS, then you can buy the ad-on. But if GPS is your priority then you can get the K-3 II.

Seems to me like a smart move for Pentax to give people the option. Especially since a lot of their customers choose Pentax for outdoors/adventurous cameras due to their small size, WR bodies/lenses, and excellent image quality. So having a camera with GPS that caters to those people (who probably rarely need pop-up when shooting landscapes) is a great option.

Gee, Cane,
Your point is quite good but you rather ruined it by coming across like a snotty troll.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 19:45 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (513 comments in total)
In reply to:

lacikuss: I hope the best for this camera, now is this the FF Pentax they promised 15 years ago? BTW it looks like a Nikon indeed.

"is this the FF Pentax they promised 15 years ago? "
As anyone with the ability to read simple English would know from reading the introduction to the article (or even from reading the name of the camera): no, it obviously is not.
What's your point (if any?)

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 19:41 UTC
On Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II article (513 comments in total)
In reply to:

lacikuss: I hope the best for this camera, now is this the FF Pentax they promised 15 years ago? BTW it looks like a Nikon indeed.

"it looks like a Nikon"
And your point is...?
Most cameras look pretty much like other cameras. Form should follow function.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 19:38 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II Review preview (793 comments in total)
In reply to:

munro harrap: Looking at results, the camera is junk, and the formayt is junk: focus is no better than full-frame or APS-C and if you look at the samples the grain is huge on the sports shots and degrades portraits completely at 800, and here I'm talking about reworked from RAW jpegs, by Dpreview.

At lower ISOs OK, fine, but frankly when there is just so much more leeway and resolution available at the same price in other formats elsewhere, I feel that m4/3rds customers of all brands are being cheated out of their own photography, the image quality is so poor.

Thankyou to Dpreview for helping me avoid the format completely!

"focus is no better than full-frame or APS-C"
And your point is?

"I feel that m4/3rds customers of all brands are being cheated out of their own photography"
Have you ever actually taken a picture or shot video with MFT? If not, what you "feel" is utterly irrelevant.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2015 at 23:28 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II Review preview (793 comments in total)
In reply to:

rfstudio: ehhhh find better deal somewhere else, over priced, small image sensor, you got better deal with sony or canon

"better deal somewhere else"
Just wait 6 months or so and get it cheap. The excellent Panny Gx7 ended up selling for half the original price within a year.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 16, 2015 at 23:24 UTC
On Canon XC10: What you need to know article (230 comments in total)
In reply to:

Maverick_: A fixed lens? 1" Sensor? 3.8fps? No viewfinder? for $2500?

Why would anyone want to buy this, where they have so many other options? Just the fact that you can't change the lens will keep many away from this camera.

Also it's not that small to make it a great drone camera. Who puts a large zoom lens on drones?

As a Panasonic GH user, I am in the market for a new camera, but it will not be this one.

Maverick:
If you're a GH user looking for a new camera, and if 4K isn't a "must have," check out the GX7. I like mine so much I sold my GH3.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 9, 2015 at 03:16 UTC
In reply to:

Rod McD: A 1" sensor, an add-on EVF and a super-zoom??? This is a different line of camera from the G1X's. I'm still using the original 1.5" sensor G1X with its crappy OVF, slow between shot times and great IQ (at modest ISOs). I'll upgrade it one of these years with a suitable replacement. ATM, the LX100 would be leading the race. However, a BUILT-IN high grade EVF is an absolute requirement. I simply don't want an expensive, external, add-on EVF that blocks the flash shoe in use and gets left at home, lost or whatever. An egregiously bad idea. Please give us a complete camera.

chillgreg,
You beat me to it.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 23:05 UTC
In reply to:

Vignes: not sure what's the issue with EVF. Oly pen series doesn't have one and people were happy to buy the VF2/3/4 EVF and using it for years. until EM5 come but then they omitted built in flash. Compact is compact plus cost is cost. Sony was smart to include a sub par 1.4M EVF in a6000 but after using 2.3M EVF, the 1.4 looks sub far. Serious photographers who wants EVF definitely wants the best. so either buy a body which has the best EVF or buy a good optional EVF.

Some people were happy to buy them, but a lot of people weren't. People buy a lot of stuff, including PopTarts, but that doesn't have much to do with maximum utility or quality.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 23:04 UTC
In reply to:

Smack53: What's next, no LCD to save money? Just point the camera in the general direction and let it decide what you wanted a photo of!!
Seriously though, I agree with so many others that trying to get a decent photo at longer zooms (over 100mm) can be a challenge with outstretched arms. If I'm paying as much for one of these cameras I want some kind of viewfinder. I can't always take the tripod everywhere I go to make sure I've got the composition I want. A shame since the rest of the specs look promising.

Amen to that.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 23:02 UTC
In reply to:

mcshan: I am not a superzoom guy. I would take the G1X I and II over this any day. I know this is a different series and would guess research shows there is a target audience.

mcshan,
It's true that DPR does not have a rule, but forum users should show some maturity and self-restraint. In a thread about a compact (super) zoom, specifically the G3x, comments and comparisons to relevant models (actually comparable or competitive) are useful. Comments about how "my cell phone takes better pictures" (to cite a common comment on many DPR threads) and the like are not.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 23:01 UTC
In reply to:

ChaosCloud: no EVF = no competition with Sony RX10 and Panasonic FZ1000, which seems to be the niche that this camera is aimed at. I could forgive an add-on EVF if it's of good quality.

If the zoom were manually actuated (not "fly-by-wire" like with the above 2) this camera would really catch my interest.

Good point about tiny (1/2.3") sensors, although in good light the results can be surprisingly good--provided they keep the pixel count down to about 12mp.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 22:56 UTC
In reply to:

grasscatcher: If there is no EVF, this camera should sell for around $500 (add $300 EVF to make it functional and come it at the FZ1000 $800 price point) - somehow I don't see that happening. Yes, it has 200mm over the FZ1000, but I seriously doubt it will match FZ1000 AF speed and EVF specs, let alone 4k video. It will also need 5-axis stabilization to be competitive. FZ2000 will probably have 600mm, though we'll need to wait until July 2016 for it...

Good point about the EVF. Hard to understand why anyone would make a nice camera and then force the addition of a moderately pricey Rube Goldberg add-on.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 22:53 UTC
In reply to:

TFD: Not to be a doubting Thomas but a 24-600MM eq. lens on a 1 inch sensor camera would be 50% bigger than the lens on the FZ1000.

This camera does not look that big and I question if a lens of this range for a 1" sensor would be technically or financially doable.

There maybe a marketing slight of hand that Canon has done before to not actually image across the entire sensor.

They could attain the longer range by using sensor crop.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 28, 2015 at 22:51 UTC
On Olympus OM-D E-M5 II First Impressions Review preview (1392 comments in total)
In reply to:

ThePhilips: Oly shouldn't have left out the PDAF from the E-M5 mk2...

"One could argue that without effective IBIS anything other than a rig or steadycam makes the video function of these cameras useless."
One could argue that, and one would lose. It is very easy to shoot good hand-held video, no IBIS (but with in-lens stabilization) without any tripod or other device. Obviously it depends on what you're shooting, but for sports and other action, panning, or even stationary shots. It's really not all that hard.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 16:52 UTC
Total: 148, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »