ivey3721

ivey3721

Lives in Canada Canada
Joined on Sep 30, 2009

Comments

Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Review preview (578 comments in total)
In reply to:

ivey3721: Canon, Nikon chose to have in-lenses stabilization system, while Sony has its IBIS. And like Canikon, Panasonic chose to have in-lenses stabilization system,too. Since when the lack of IBIS (or not efficient enough) prevent a camera from owning Gold Award?
And lack of in-camera raw process? Seriously?

Think about this:
"the fantastic Canon 85 F1.2 or Nikon 85 F1.4 does not have in-lenses stabilization. Therefore, lack of IBIS, as well as lack of in-camera raw processing, prevented Canon 5D Mark III and Nikon 800 (E) owning the gold award. "

Fair enough?

How about Leica?

The point here is not the score, nor the award, but the reasons provided by DPR in its conclusion part are hard to be justified.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2013 at 17:28 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Review preview (578 comments in total)
In reply to:

ivey3721: Canon, Nikon chose to have in-lenses stabilization system, while Sony has its IBIS. And like Canikon, Panasonic chose to have in-lenses stabilization system,too. Since when the lack of IBIS (or not efficient enough) prevent a camera from owning Gold Award?
And lack of in-camera raw process? Seriously?

Martin0reg, the two approaches (stabilization in-lenses and in-body) have their pros and cons, and that is another story (and a long story). The point I want to makes is that the lack of IBIS (or not efficient IBIS) has never prevented a canon camera (or nikon, leica) from owning gold award. I just don't understand the reasons provided by DPR in their conclusion part. Don't get me wrong, I own both canon and M43 gears.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2013 at 13:07 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Review preview (578 comments in total)

Canon, Nikon chose to have in-lenses stabilization system, while Sony has its IBIS. And like Canikon, Panasonic chose to have in-lenses stabilization system,too. Since when the lack of IBIS (or not efficient enough) prevent a camera from owning Gold Award?
And lack of in-camera raw process? Seriously?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2013 at 12:35 UTC as 150th comment | 4 replies
On PPE 2013: Hands-on with Panasonic's newest cameras article (37 comments in total)
In reply to:

utomo99: Panasonic, please create RX 100 competitor. This is not small enough. if Sony can make small things, why not panasonic ? use big sensor, small body, start from 24mm and use fast lens. and many people will buy it

"please create RX 100 competitor"......
"use BIG sensor, SMALL body, start from 24MM and use FAST lens".
Hopefully you know what you are talking about.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 26, 2013 at 02:13 UTC
On Olympus PEN E-P5 Review preview (497 comments in total)
In reply to:

mapgraphs: Robin Wong's review of the ep5:

http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2013/06/olympus-pen-e-p5-review-street-shooting.html

See his Initial Thoughts article also:

http://robinwong.blogspot.com/2013/05/olympus-pen-e-p5-initial-thoughts-and.html

I read somewhere that Robin Wong is Olympus' employee, isn't he?

Direct link | Posted on Oct 4, 2013 at 03:28 UTC
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

ivey3721: Did Panasonic claim that GX1 compete against NEX5N, not NEX7?
If GX1 is posintioned this way, would NEX-5n/GX1/E-P3 group makes more sense than a NEX-7/EP3/GX1?

I second. It makes more sense to me.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 20:17 UTC
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

ivey3721: Did Panasonic claim that GX1 compete against NEX5N, not NEX7?
If GX1 is posintioned this way, would NEX-5n/GX1/E-P3 group makes more sense than a NEX-7/EP3/GX1?

I beleive GH2 and NEX7 should be in one group - they are different cameras, but both camera are the top of the line.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 15:35 UTC
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)

Did Panasonic claim that GX1 compete against NEX5N, not NEX7?
If GX1 is posintioned this way, would NEX-5n/GX1/E-P3 group makes more sense than a NEX-7/EP3/GX1?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 15:18 UTC as 74th comment | 5 replies
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

SF Photo Gal: Not sure I quite got the "Specialist" category. Seems like those all could be placed in the other categories.

I bought my GH2 for its high quality still picture, not just for video. It is interesting that now GH2 is in the same group as Pentax Q.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 14:55 UTC
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike Ronesia: GH2 not an Enthusiast and grouped with the J1 as a niche? Also the video transfer rate is now 24MBPS with the new FW.

I second Mike.
To me, NEX-5/GX1/E-P3 group makes more sense than NEX-7/GX1/E-P3. Did Panasonic claim that GX1 compete against NEX5, not NEX7?

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 14:48 UTC
Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10