Kawika Nui

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: 179, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)

Barney,
I admire your willingness to engage in rational discussion with some posters who appear incapable of it. You have a lot more patience and forbearance than most people.
Good review, thanks.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:42 UTC as 13th comment
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

rallyfan: Remarkable achievement by Canon. Not only have they made a world-class $700 compact camera, they've also made it the only $700 compact that costs $1K. The reviewer then commented that an additional $250 for a... viewfinder would be "annoying." Wow.

Careful! You are getting into advanced maths here. Overwhelming for many consumers.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:30 UTC
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

dark goob: Oh, Canon still makes cameras? Interesting, non-sexy contraption. I wonder who in their right mind will buy it. I guess Sony sold enough RX10 units that someone in Canon got their behind chewed out at a board-room meeting in Japan. And here is the uninspired result...

Great snark! "non-sexy" "who in their right mind" "uninspired"
Are we feeling a bit witchy today?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:26 UTC
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

SolidMetal: Whats wrong with many people here? Canon puts down the biggest range superzoom in 1 inch class with sony sensor and still people hate it.
The problem is that it seems in 2015 its so damn trendy to hate Canon. You can hate it because it has no EVF and the lens is slower... well, you could hate others cause of the shorter zoom range. It is the same with the DSLR world, where most Nikons dont even have a damn expsim. mode but noone bats an eye.

Rubbish. If someone needs a VF, they are not "hating" anything. Many people avoided many Oly products for years because they had no VF. It's called rational decision-making.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:23 UTC
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

GT500M: Well the main reason I would consider this and other superzooms is for the focal length range. Try capturing Red Parrots high up in the trees in Costa Rica with a 200mm equivalent focal length. I just managed it with a Sony HX400 though the results were very grainy on an overcast day.

I have an A7r and the cost, size and weight of long lenses for such a system mean I like to complement it with a decent bridge or superzoom which I am on the lookout for again....

I love the RX10 but its' reach at the long end makes it less than a total travel all-rounder.

The Canon is on my list and I would get the viewfinder as I can't shoot using the LCD only.

nicoboston: that Luminous Landscape review is impressive. I'd say teh G3X looks ideal for me to audition as my next travel compact (ish) camera....

GT500M:
Try MFT. Panny 45-175mm is very light and gives 350mm equiv. The 100-300mm is larger and heavier, but on a GX7 it's not too bad (I carry it around a lot in a small bag slung across my back) and you get great reach and great images. Also GX7 and some other Panny cameras have a sensor crop zoom that greatly extends the range; lower pixel count but no resampling and no image degradation.

rallyfan:
You are 100% correct. Oly finally saw the light (pun intended) and for the most part quit trying to peddle cameras with no VF. Point and pray is a waste of time. And with long zoom, you can steady and guide the camera much better with VF and the camera close to your head.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:18 UTC
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: I can get a nice APS-C DSLR kit for so much money. Silly.

Agreed; you also can get a nice MFT camera and zoom for this much money.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:14 UTC
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

johnsmith404: Lol. Again, in Japan only the EVF comes for almost free like with the previous GX and the EOS M3.

And next Canon will lament about how the world outside Japan is too stupid to understand their non-DSLR product lines.

Unfortunately no one outside of Japan can order anything from Amazon.jp. I've tried.
As for B&H, I agree. I have pretty much quit buying cameras on Amazon; B&H is more professional, often has better prices or better deals (gift cards, etc.) Also Amazon started sending me menacing emails when I returned a defective camera and--naturally--the lenses I had bought to go with it (even though they were not defective and I never said they were) since obviously without the camera the lenses were useless. Amazon suggested that I was returning a lot of items and maybe I would be happier without my Amazon account. I still have the account, but after that I am using it a lot less.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:09 UTC
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jock Elliott: Those who practice what I call "wildlife photography for the rest of us" -- ie, long-range photography with (relatively) light, nimble superzoom cameras and generally without tripods -- might be interested in the "figure of merit" calculations for this camera.

Figure of merit calculates the total reach potential of a camera/lens combo by multiplying the equivalent focal length squared times the number of pixels. It does not factor in the quality of the pixels.

Here are some of the numbers for various cameras and combos (the higher, the better):

FZ200 -- 4.320
FZ1000 -- 3.216
D3300 with 70-300 -- 4.860
Olympus M5 with 100-300 -- 5.760
Nikon D810 with 400mm tele -- 5.760
Nikon 1 V3 with 70-300CX -- 14.580
Canon G3X -- 7.272

So the G3X comes off pretty well. I own and shoot with the FZ200.

For more about this concept, check out this: http://www.photographerslounge.org/threads/30576/
Be sure to check out the link to the original article.
Cheers, Jock

Thanks for an interesting and useful measure of tele effectiveness.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:07 UTC
On Shooting with the Canon PowerShot G3 X article (281 comments in total)

"extras, like a built-in viewfinder "
I understand what you are saying, but a built-in VF is hardly an "extra;" it's an integral part of a camera and one that is absolutely necessary in many situations.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 29, 2015 at 15:00 UTC as 14th comment
In reply to:

cgarrard: DPR- Are you absolutely sure its the same exact sensor as the FZ200? It's a 4 yr old sensor (if you consider development time as well), so that seems a bit odd. Surely the specs are similar, but is it the exact same model sensor? That would both surprise me, and not surprise me at the same time (laughs).

Thanks,

Carl

"Cameraegg stated that FZ300 has 1inch sensor just like FZ1000."
That should teach you to pay less attention to Cameraegg.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2015 at 17:30 UTC
In reply to:

vhlemos: I think it´s time to focus on bigger sensors. If Panasonic is trying to lead between camera's manufacturers. This is the next step.

"Pana was a good P&S camera maker. Too bad to see it going down model by model"
Surely you jest. The FZ150 was better than the FZ100. The FZ300 appears likely to be better than the FZ150 and the FZ200.

In MFT, The GX7 is better than its predecessors. (In my experience it was also better than the GH3.) The GX8 appears likely to be better than the GX7.
Can you provide an example of deteriorating capability in these camera lines? (With corroborating evidence, of course.)

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2015 at 17:27 UTC
In reply to:

ThePhilips: ... If the sensor is not the same (very likely) then I think the Panasonic should sue the DPR for slander, libel and defamation. Just saying.

Because DPR might well have just killed the FZ300 launch by claiming that the sensor is the same old one. Such rumors, once they are out there, are impossible to deal with.

And to teach DPR a lesson that when you are #1 site, with the largest audience, one has to choose the words carefully.

Why claim that The Philips is angry or tense or whatever? He is raising a valid issue in a rational way. If he is incorrect, point it out. Few things are more intellectually and socially dishonest than branding someone as "angry" or "a complainer" or "uptight" simply because they point out what they perceive to be a defect, a problem or an issue.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2015 at 17:23 UTC
In reply to:

Aleo Veuliah: Great all around Camera.

Well done Panasonic.

"once you try the larger sensor models, you'll never look at this category again."
Rubbish. Another self-appointed "superior person" who will tell the rest of us what fools we are.
Timbits: please provide a link to your gallery, which must surely be vast and filled with exquisite examples of the highest level of photographic art.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 18, 2015 at 17:14 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review preview (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

JakeB: That is one ugly camera.

And yes, it does matter to me.

Those who have no eye for design have no business using cameras in the first place.

How did Ansel Adams and Matthew B. Brady, and Joe Rosenthal, and Annie Leibovitz and Diane Arbus and all the rest manage to get such great shots with such "ugly" cameras? No doubt your refined sensibility could have done so much better.
As if.
Your comments, Jake, manage to be both petty and silly at the same time.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 20:14 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review preview (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kawika Nui: " it's trying to be a non-specific interchangeable lens camera: a camera where you don't have to think about whether it has a mirror or not."

Can someone explain this point? When I shoot with a DSLR, I never bother to think about whether it has a mirror or not. When I shoot with mirrorless (or Sony SLT), I never bother think about whether it has a mirror or not.

The only time I have thought about mirror/mirrorless is for video: can't stand having to view through the screen when shooting video, so I prefer the mirrorless. But that was a one-time decision that took about 10 seconds of thought.

Is there any common shooting situation where one needs to think about whether it has a mirror or not?

RB,
Thanks for the clarification. The whole "which is better" conversation reminds me of all the endless "Ford vs. Chevy" prattle of 40-50 years ago. And it is just about as likely to reach a useful conclusion.

My personal issue with MFT has been the long-standing 16mp resolution, which really could have been increased without loss of IQ. And finally Panny has done it with the sensible 20mp GX8 which is now on my "to buy" list.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 20:10 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Review preview (429 comments in total)

" it's trying to be a non-specific interchangeable lens camera: a camera where you don't have to think about whether it has a mirror or not."

Can someone explain this point? When I shoot with a DSLR, I never bother to think about whether it has a mirror or not. When I shoot with mirrorless (or Sony SLT), I never bother think about whether it has a mirror or not.

The only time I have thought about mirror/mirrorless is for video: can't stand having to view through the screen when shooting video, so I prefer the mirrorless. But that was a one-time decision that took about 10 seconds of thought.

Is there any common shooting situation where one needs to think about whether it has a mirror or not?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 02:58 UTC as 21st comment | 2 replies
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (495 comments in total)
In reply to:

JimHohn: How about lens quality for the new Panasonic DMC-G7 ? I am new to this format.

Felice makes good observations, but misses the point. One great benefit of MFT over, say Sony E-mount is that there is a wide assortment of lenses to choose from. Therefore, your odds of finding the right lens for your uses is increased. For example, E-mount still lacks a xx-300mm lens; this is a very common and useful type of lens readily available in other major camera platforms, including MFT.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2015 at 00:20 UTC
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (495 comments in total)
In reply to:

Felice62: I am quite happy with my g6 and I am not attracted by the 4k capabilities of the g7. What is the margin the g7 has over the g6 in terms of image quality in the range of sensitivity between 1600 and 3200 ISO with its new sensor? If it achieves 1 stop better performance it might appeal me. Else I'll keep my g6.

"A good photographer, like a good sniper, will make every shot count...Unfortunately, most newbies nowadays never bother to even get their skill right. 4K video is not a solution to bad photography."
And your point is? Are you saying that all those sports and action photographers who use burst shooting are wasteful newbies?
How about: "large ISO range is not a solution to bad photography" or "a good camera is not a solution to bad photography" or "a DSLR is not a solution to bad photography" or "digital cameras are not a solution to bad photography" etc.? Seems to be a comment that works with just about any product or feature one could imagine.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2015 at 00:17 UTC
On Hands-on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 article (495 comments in total)

Is there any reliable USA retail source for buying the G7 body only? (I already have all the Panasonic MFT lenses I want or need.) Can't find this option on the Panasonic USA site, Amazon and B&H don't offer it either. I've heard that Panasonic UK sells body only, but that would not be a convenient point of purchase for a number of reasons.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 29, 2015 at 00:08 UTC as 7th comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 real-world samples article (102 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gavril Margittai: These images are very similar to each other. I did not learn from them too much. With plenty of daylight my wife's Iphone6 can do just as well. Maybe not if you pixel peep, but these are not images worth pixel peeping.
I would expect DPR to take the trouble of putting more variety in. How about some night shots? how about a nice portrait in available (low) light inside a subway station?

Should I learn from these "real world samples" that the G7 is only good for snaps? I don't believe this is true.

Best just use your wife's cell phone and let the rest of us enjoy photography with a variety of lenses, various 4K options, etc.
And what is "pixel peeping," really? A hackneyed, despective term used by people who don't do significant cropping and/or enlarging and don't care about detail in photographs.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 24, 2015 at 02:29 UTC
Total: 179, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »