Kawika Nui

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

Keep shooting

Comments

Total: 247, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

pcworth: Since they did not change the sensor, and I don't care about 4K video, are there many compelling reasons to upgrade from my FZ200 at this point?

There are some. Weather sealing, for one. Image quality is said to be better due to better processor. Graham Houghton has a good discussion of "handling improvements, better controls and features." Imaging Resource and Camera Decision both have good side-by-side comparisons of features and functions.
I'm moving up from the FZ150 and I do care about 4K video (partly for the 8MP stills at 30fps). If I had an FZ200, I'm not sure what I would do. Wait for the price to come down, definitely.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2016 at 01:18 UTC
On article Look Sharp: Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85/GX80 video preview (130 comments in total)
In reply to:

stevesdpr: Hello all. I'm torn between the GX85 and the new Canon G7x Mark II. Its for my wife who travels a lot and wants a compact camera with as much bang for the buck. She takes a lot of portrait shots and landscape including night shots in low light. She also loves macro for nature and close ups and also loves taking shots of wildlife. The G7X MII does not have an EVF so for me that's a deal breaker. For my wife though she doesn't seem to mind no EVF and thinks she will be fine with just the touchscreen. I was hoping to get some expert opinions on both cameras. Myself I have the OMD EM-1 with 2 Pro Lenses that I use regularly so I'm biased to MF3 and interchangeable lens cameras. The G7XMII goes for $700 and the GX85 $800. I'm trying to talk her into the GX85 that I think is worth the extra $100 but maybe I'm wrong?

I love my GX7, but for travel I've found that a fixed lens camera with decent zoom is better. Changing lenses is a pain when traveling; you miss too many shots. Your wife may think she doesn't care about VF but she might.
I personally would go with FZ300 or FZ1000, or one of Panasonic's smaller good zoom cameras (ZS50? or something like that). Weather sealing could be important when traveling.
Also burst: one problem with Canon is that they don't care about burst shooting (low rates, small buffers on many cameras). 4K video is great because you get 8MP stills at 30fps with almost no limit.
Bottom line: there is no point in buying a camera that limits you because it lacks features or decent specs. Of course everyone has their own preferences but for me the Panasonic line of zooms really touches all the key points.
Check out Randy Weaver's recommendations; there is also some guy that does safaris and has recommendations (sorry I can't recall the website).

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2016 at 04:07 UTC

Does anyone know (not presume, or suppose, but know) if the FZ300 4k video is the result of a 1:1 sensor crop, or if a different process (such as full sensor readout + resampling) is involved?
(According to Camera Labs, Panasonic uses different methods on different cameras; the GH4 uses 1:1 sensor crop but other Panny 4k cameras use other methods.)
Thanks in advance

Link | Posted on Apr 22, 2016 at 03:25 UTC as 2nd comment
On article Small but mighty: hands on with the Panasonic GX85/GX80 (311 comments in total)
In reply to:

cosinaphile: the same silly field sequential color tearing evf that crippled the gx 7 now in the the gx 80\85 .....why are the decision makers at panny so foolish??

i thought that the gx 8 marked the end of these sub standard evfs as the gx8 has a decent evf even as it has a big hollow pointlessly large body for a micro 43 sensored camera that apparently lacked enough mass to counteract shutter shock

the cool new electro magnetic shutter brings exciting feature to the new camera
but dut to the stupid stupid stupid reappearance of the color tearing evf in the gx 80\85 .... this camera is dead on arrival

shame on panasonic

Yes, sigh, "crippled the GX7" etc. etc. My GX7 is anything but crippled and I've never noticed any tearing at all. So much for apocalyptic pronouncements. DOA. Right.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 01:37 UTC
On article Small but mighty: hands on with the Panasonic GX85/GX80 (311 comments in total)
In reply to:

kvcsmrtn: Gaise, shall I upgrade from lx7? I am thinking to buy it with the 14-140 and maybe the 25mm f1.4. Thanks Folks!

Soundknight:
Who are you disagreeing with? Don't see any comment about 4K in this part of the thread.
4K, of course, yields 8MP frames at 30fps with infinite buffer depth. That's hard to beat for reasonably large stills.
Many 4K shooters report that the video is much sharper and "deeper" when reduced to 1080p. Another benefit.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2016 at 01:35 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G3 X: What you need to know (612 comments in total)
In reply to:

thoth22: Wow, Canon allowed 1080/60p on this camera. Those are some big strides Canon, I figured you'd wait for the next version to unleash that tech.

Why wait? The add-on EVF (an engineering marvel) is available on this version. They're still working on the burst rate and buffer depth...

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2016 at 15:25 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G3 X: What you need to know (612 comments in total)
In reply to:

108: you know, you look at these incredible 1" sensor samples , just like the sony rx100's etc...or the Pana fz1000, and you really start to wonder what really you're after with a particular gear, and what kind of photography you really want to get , in short you better know why you're doing what you're doing ..

But do any of us really know why we are doing what we're doing? Aren't we all conditioned by a confusing tangle of expectations, ambitions, desires and possibilities (real and imagined) that lead us to believe that we know,when actually we are simply reacting to impulses and inputs that we understand only dimly, if at all?

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2016 at 15:24 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G3 X: What you need to know (612 comments in total)
In reply to:

snapa: "Unfortunately, it drops the ball in performance in a number of key ways. With disappointing AF speed, sluggish cycle times and burst rates with RAW and RAW+JPEG modes, as well as below average battery life and lack of an EVF to name a few, the Canon G3X leaves a lot to be desired"

The last words in the conclusion.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-g3x/canon-g3x-conclusion.htm

Not a good camera at all!

Yes, and it's a shame. Love Canon color and IQ over the years. When I first heard about this camera, I was really excited because it looked like an out-of-the-park home run. But it's more like an infield blooper. Basically the feature set limits it to the role of a very expensive snapshot camera, with some possible uses in portraits or landscape. Sports, action, wildlife? Forget it.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2016 at 15:20 UTC
On article Canon PowerShot G3 X: What you need to know (612 comments in total)

So sad. Some incredible features. But:
EVF is an add-on. More money, more bulk.
Burst is a joke. Buffer for JPEG is about 1.5 seconds worth of frames. RAW burst is less than 1fps. Most people can push the shutter faster than that.
Well, OK, how about shooting 4K video at 30fps? That would at least give 8mp pictures at a decent rate with a virtually bottomless buffer. Oh, that's right, no 4K video.
So if we want to get EVF, we're looking at over $1K and still no functional burst.
For the same price you can get a new GX7 with a 14-42mm and 100-300mm lens. Light weight, larger sensor, great burst, great feature set. Or you might look at the a6000 with a 16-50mm and 55-210mm lens. Now you're up to APS-C size sensor, with a very compact and light kit.
For years Canon has shown indifference to burst rate and depth. Do they hate sports and action shooting? And they seem to think that viewfinders are for sissies.
Sad.

Link | Posted on Feb 15, 2016 at 15:15 UTC as 2nd comment
In reply to:

GarysInSoCal: QUESTION... how many of us portrait, wildlife, fashion and scenic photographers take continuous photos of sports cars bearing down on us at a high rate of speed?... NO THANKS Sony... my lowlight shooting Nikon D750 (30+ year Nikon shooter and never changing) is doing just fine at -3EV... and my 500+ photographic awards over on ViewBug will be climbing to over 600 very soon... ;)

http://www.viewbug.com/member/garyabigt#/garyabigt/awards

Self-promoting spam. For shame.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2016 at 01:26 UTC
On article Kodak reborn: A look at JK Imaging's 2014 lineup (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

jhwaaser: I am shocked at the lousy response to the Kodak name on here. Kodak invented digital photography, and Kodak, Nikon, and Olympus, all involved in film photography, were the first to tame the excess contrast of the charge coupled device. As a professional photographer, I tried Agfa, Ilford, and even earlier, Ansco products, but I discovered that Nikon cameras and Kodak film, paper, and chemicals made it easier for mecto make top quality photos without problems. I owned, used, and loved Kodak Z510 and Z712 cameras (okay, so my C735 was a p.o.s.) and I thought I would wait and get a Z-Max at a cheap price when they went out of business, but they sold out of that model first, and I lost out. One of my favorite film cameras was the Retina, and I had a iiic stolen out of a Stouffers motel, and haven't bought a Stouffers product since! High-end Kodak products rock, and I hope that the new products treat the brand name as well as, say, the resurrected Triumph motorcycles....

Great. So give Kodak a display case in the Photography Hall of Fame. Then we can all go out and take pictures with cameras that offer far more today.
And no one is giving a "lousy response to the Kodak name." They are responding to this camera, with these features, at this price.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2016 at 15:45 UTC
On article Kodak reborn: A look at JK Imaging's 2014 lineup (201 comments in total)
In reply to:

harley13: Kodak is a great (was) company that invented , basically photography. Sony really???A great company to be sure but KODAK commands better than what some folks say. Go Kodak.

Nostalgia is great but now is now, and either the products are better or they aren't.

Link | Posted on Feb 9, 2016 at 15:40 UTC
In reply to:

Teru Kage: Impressive, but the price is a major barrier. I wonder if Olympus will create a similar non-stabilized version?

Agree about the price; wait 6 months and get a used one much cheaper.
As for xx-300mm, the Lumix 100-300mm works great. It is half the weight and a fraction of the price of the 100-400mm. But if you want the extra reach (and, one suspects the extra IQ), the new lens is worth it.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 22:30 UTC
In reply to:

Chaitanya S: Interesting addition to micro 4/3 finally this system is getting tele lenses.

This lens is a welcome addition, although it weighs almost twice as much as the 100-300mm, and costs 2-3 times more. But one can always wait six months and pick up a good used one much cheaper than the new price.
As for adapters for Canon (or Tamron or Sigma) or other lenses, that means more expense, more bulk, more weight, more hassle and often a loss of one or more functions (AF, etc.)
I had been flirting with the idea of the Sony a6300 and getting a Sigma 150-500 to overcome the lack of long zoom Sony lenses, but that would require an adapter, etc.
The a6300's larger sensor and higher pixel count are tempting, but without long reach I can't use it. This new Panny lens solves the problem nicely.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 22:25 UTC
In reply to:

jalywol: The link on this page goes to the DMC-ZS100 / TZ100, not the 100-400mm....

One month later, and the link is still the same. GIGO.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 22:21 UTC

When I click the link that says:
"View our hands-on preview of the Panasonic Leica DG 100-400mm F3.5-5.6"

I am directed to the Lumix zs100 review:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1743027483/far-reaching-panasonic-lumix-dmc-zs100-tz100-hands-on-preview

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2016 at 22:16 UTC as 2nd comment

"a less-often seen side of sharks as peaceful creatures"
Sharks, like some dogs, are very peaceful until they're not.

Link | Posted on Jan 20, 2016 at 17:05 UTC as 19th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Ross the Fidller: Looks like a nice & interesting compact, with a 1"sensor, but why do North Americans have to have their own naming that's different to the rest of the world? Canon Rebel comes to mind too.

It's "ZS" in Mexico and Argentina (I haven't bothered to check other Latin American countries). So the US-bashing is pretty silly. Blame the Western Hemisphere if you must blame someone. Or ask why the rest of the world doesn't conform to the "New World."

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2016 at 16:29 UTC
In reply to:

Just a Photographer: I do believe Virtual Reality will have its place, but not for photo viewing.

The point of photographing scenes is to point out the beauty or to put emphasis on the subject. However in many cases only part of the view is worthwhile to look at. The rest of the screen if often distracting or not filled with the same beauty.

Surely you don't think I meant to imply that each/any latest techno-toy is a good thing.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2015 at 19:53 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1296 comments in total)
In reply to:

bernardf12: The only reason I don't like this camera is because it doesn't have a tilting screen. The flip out screens require too many actions to get to the tilting position. And you have to go through these actions repeatedly through your day shooting. Others may like this, but it's not for me because I use the tilted screen quite often.

"do you use the tilt screen in portrait mode?
i didn't think so."
Why didn't you think so?

Link | Posted on Nov 22, 2015 at 02:34 UTC
Total: 247, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »