PIX 2015
ThePhilips

ThePhilips

Lives in Germany Germany
Joined on Oct 5, 2010

Comments

Total: 1088, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

Peiasdf: I keep mistaking this camera for my X-E1. m4/3 is going the route of 4/3, getting bigger and bigger to look more series to compete with APS-C/FF while not really competing on IQ. GX8 is wider and thicker than A7R II while having less features.

> m4/3 is going the route of 4/3, getting bigger and bigger

I do not think you know what you are talking about. One of the last Oly 4/3 cameras was the E-620, which was so small, that it was painful to hold it for any prolonged period of time. (I still have it, btw.)

> getting bigger and bigger to look more serious to compete with APS-C/FF

Right. We buy cameras for the looks.

> GX8 is wider and thicker than A7R II while having ...

... more native lenses, some of which actually benefit from the larger grip.

Not every lens is a 50mm. Not every camera is bought for the bragging rights on the street photography forum.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 20, 2015 at 16:17 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

SeeRoy: " 100-300mm F4-5.6 will not be compatible with the system"
How very considerate of Panasonic toward their existing customers. I own this lens so I'll be sticking with Olympus, thanks.

> How very considerate of Panasonic

If you are not trolling, and you really own m43 and really into the tele-lenses, then by now you should have already learned the well known fact that 100-300mm has slow AF. It wasn't made for fast action, and Panasonic is kind enough to openly state this.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 19, 2015 at 19:09 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

Philly: Will someone at dpreview please put an Oly 12-60mm lens on this camera and tell us about the AF performance. Thanks! :)

@Mikofox, 12-60 needs the usual 43-m43 adapter.

AF works, but relatively slow: 12-60 is optimized for PDAF, not CDAF.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 19:32 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

Howard: Honest question:
What is the advantage of this camera over the Sony A6000?

Weather sealing. IBIS. Faster S-AF (A6000 does have very good C-AF, but S-AF slightly lags compared to the m43). Bigger RAW buffer. Larger body with more direct (and configurable) controls. Fully-articulated LCD (A6000 - tilt only). Finally, 4K video and 4K photo modes.

A6000 is a mid-level body, while GX8 is targeted at the enthusiast-level crowd. A6000 is a very good value for the money - but it is just not in the same class. If you are Sony fan, wait for the A7000 which is rumored to be announced soon: it should be in the same class as the GX8.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 19:27 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: They've gone crazy over there ay Panasonic!!! Should be mentally retarded not to grab A7ii instead of this m43 monster.Stupidity reigns !!!

Trk, let just say, you are entitled to your opinion. Even if it is an "opinion" about the basic equation from elementary school level math.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 15:01 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: They've gone crazy over there ay Panasonic!!! Should be mentally retarded not to grab A7ii instead of this m43 monster.Stupidity reigns !!!

@Trk
> Panasonic f2.8 lens does not gather the same volume of light as full frame f2.8.

Of course it doesn't! It also doesn't need to cover the FF sensor, you dimwit!

Educate yourself, please, right here on DPR, as official as it gets:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care

> The worst part here is that you think that it is cool to pay such a premium prices for those dark lenses.

As Inigo Montoya put it: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 14:19 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: They've gone crazy over there ay Panasonic!!! Should be mentally retarded not to grab A7ii instead of this m43 monster.Stupidity reigns !!!

@Trk, you mislabel the lens. There is no "Panasonic 42.5mm 1.2" - but there is "Panasonic Leica Nocticron 42.5mm 1.2". Leica magic dust is expensive.

> Also Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 costs 1000 usd, this is foolish price considering it is f5.6 lens, such a dark lens does not even exist in ff world.

It costs much less than 1000 these days. And such small lens doesn't exist in FF world. But who cares about FF world. Most people are concerned about light gathering capability and it is still f/2.8 lens. And it is only 300g.

Find me a FF 24-70 lens, with light gathering capability of f/2.8 which weighs only 300g.

I do not care about your trolling. If such small and light and bright lenses existed in FF world, I would have switched long time ago. But they do NOT exist. There are no equivalent FF lenses. And that is why we have the m43.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 14:01 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)
In reply to:

Dimit: They've gone crazy over there ay Panasonic!!! Should be mentally retarded not to grab A7ii instead of this m43 monster.Stupidity reigns !!!

Trk:
> if you take the equivalence into account

If I take equivalence in account, where is the Sony's answer to Pana 12-32 lens? In FF terms it would be 7.0-10.4/24-64mm lens. It should be 25mm high, weigh less than 100g and cost less than 300$.

> as full frame equivalent

Where? Where is this equivalent??

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 13:47 UTC
On The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 article (1253 comments in total)

Larger body is definitely not my cup of tea. BUT.

I bought GX7 for the pancakes and other smaller lenses. And it works perfectly. But as soon as I put anything even semi-decent on it (PL45 or Oly 50mm) it becomes quite unbalanced. (And Oly 50mm looked so small on a DSLR!) Hasn't hampered me yet, but in future I can imaging myself going for GM5/E-P/E-PL + G7/GX8 two body system to better cover all the lens sizes.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 13:43 UTC as 83rd comment | 1 reply
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.

"Phillips relax they report what they are told"

DPR also likes to extrapolate. We heard the "it's 12MP, so it must be the same old" from DPR many times before.

From the past Panasonic product launches, the info about sensor was/is never part of the marketing materials given to the reviewers and testers.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 17, 2015 at 08:24 UTC

... 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.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 14:47 UTC as 35th comment | 7 replies
In reply to:

Ocolon: From page ten: "There's a new 'starlight AF' mode with really tiny focus points that are designed for focusing on - you guessed it - stars."

Don't you simply set the focus to infinity when taking photos of the night sky? Does “starlight AF” imply anything else?

"Don't you simply set the focus to infinity when taking photos of the night sky?"

But one still has to actually set the focus.

And when the focus is by wire, good luck finding the infinity manually.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 14:37 UTC
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

I think DPR is not sure, because manufs rarely disclose such technical details.

In all likelyhood, it is a different (newer) sensor.

As tech advanced, it becomes harder and more expensive to manufacture the old parts.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 14:06 UTC

Seems a very good deal for the price.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 16, 2015 at 07:09 UTC as 23rd comment
In reply to:

CrashMaster: It defeats the object: Performing artists crave publicity and this threatens that. If they were ignored they would soon be begging photographer to take shots. What would be really good would be if no publicity at all were given unless they pay for it. The contracts would be scrapped were quickly.

@sh, very very few artists get to that level. And they can afford lawyers to get a better deal out of the right holders. Or go independent. And actually earn the money, not give them somebody else. But even then, they still have the lawyers, attorneys, assistants and organizers who handle the daily routine for them. Or you think the musician himself wrote the contract?

I'm in no way trying to whitewash the artists. But in this case the wrath is misguided, and should be directed against his legal representatives.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 19:51 UTC
In reply to:

CrashMaster: It defeats the object: Performing artists crave publicity and this threatens that. If they were ignored they would soon be begging photographer to take shots. What would be really good would be if no publicity at all were given unless they pay for it. The contracts would be scrapped were quickly.

> Performing artists crave publicity and this threatens that.

Yes. But the rights to literally everything outside (and sometimes to some extent inside) the artist are owned by somebody else, so called "rights holder".

While artists and performers strive for the publicity, to reach a bigger audience, the right holders do not really give a damn about anything of that and are there only for the profit. That, while artists often live off a pittance payed them back by the right holders.

The problem with the entertainment industry is that artists can hardly make any (living) money or get to the national scene without selling themselves off to some agency/label/etc.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 11:55 UTC
In reply to:

The Name is Bond: This is the fault of those prats who published unflattering pics of Beyonce.

The terms are reasonable, get over it.

> unflattering pics of Beyonce.

What is Beyonce? Link?

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 11:48 UTC
In reply to:

Top Dog Imaging: imagine being able to shoot a video without requiring someone to pull focus.

@Top: "imagine being able to shoot a video without requiring someone to pull focus."

There were talks in the past about light-field video camera. I'm not sure what came out of it.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 15, 2015 at 11:44 UTC
In reply to:

JohnEwing: Gee, I didn't know people came with serial numbers. Is this another dastardly NSA plot?

They use S/N mostly to track where/how the camera was produced to handle problems of the mass production.

The fact that support demands the S/N - that is just plain laziness. The only thing they really need is the proof of purchase, to know when the warranty starts and ends.

I wonder how EU's consumer laws would look at that. It's not my fault that the S/N rub off - it is Panasonic's, and they should be dealing with it at their own costs, not mine.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 10, 2015 at 21:43 UTC
In reply to:

Jim Salvas: Based on comments by DPR members, no lens manufacturer ever makes a rational decision on a new product. All lenses are too expensive, or have maximum apertures which are too narrow or are too wide, are the wrong focal length, or don't have necessary features like AF. And that's not to mention that other manufacturers may even be selling similar lenses, in contradiction to all the rules of commerce.

And yet, lenses get sold. And even bought by DPR members, at times. It's amazing.

Samyang, you don't know what you're doing. Just ask our experts.

Right! Darn those stupid consumers! How dare they expect that manufacturers would make products they actually want to spend their money on?!

Direct link | Posted on Jul 7, 2015 at 21:20 UTC
Total: 1088, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »