Reading mode: Light Dark

Its now or never for superzoom EXR's

Go to last post
Lisetta1 said:
If people are serious about video I don't understand how they could use a camera without an external microphone. I haven't tried either Panny, but I just don't see the LX100 in particular as a useful video camera.
Click to expand...
I never plug in a microphone. I have a pair of TASCAM DR05s instead ... and a very nice lavalier mic from Giant Squid. I don't mind syncing multiple video and audio tracks ... for example ...


The LX100 might have the 30m limitation on it, which I would find pretty much fatal (my other Panasonic bodies do not have the limitation and I have AC power adapters for all but the GM1.)

But for shorter clips, the LX100 should be excellent. Panasonic does very nice audio on their cameras, so even that would be good for a lot of purposes. But of course if you prefer to plug in a microphone, then the G6 is a much better buy and is quite cheap, too ... you just have to have some primes instead of the fast lens on the LX100.
 
Lisetta1 said:
CAcreeks said:
Lisetta1 said:
If people are serious about video I don't understand how they could use a camera without an external microphone. I haven't tried either Panny, but I just don't see the LX100 in particular as a useful video camera.
Click to expand...
External mic is only necessary for interviews and videos like that. Most produced video, including motion pictures, has a separately recorded audio track.

For what I do - whitewater kayaking - you really don't want the sound track to begin with. It's just white noise interrupted by wind noise. One exception might be the GoPro, which has very strong noise filtering, and is good for making voice notations. But these would only be for viewing among friends, not posting.
Click to expand...
Dubbing dialogue is a pain, interviews with ambient noise usually sound really bad, and the moving gear sound of most in-camera video is imo just unacceptable. Voice over is fine, but limiting, and imo adding one track (music, sound, narration, etc) is enough for a hobbyist. But, for what you describe above where sound other than the actual environment isn't important, yes, I'm sure the mike/natural sound, or just cutting the sound and putting in a music track, would be fine.
Click to expand...
Interviews in ambient noise would probably benefit from close mic with a lavalier.
 
photoreddi said:
Kim Letkeman said:
alexisgreat said:
I sense that F550 is still one of your favorite cameras, although you've used better Fujis since.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was my favourite of all time ... the first of the best part of the F series IMO ... (others will think the F200 was the best F series, but no raw and ergonomically not that good.)

But the F770 is far more camera than the F550 was, so I am very happy to have gone that way.
Click to expand...
From what I've seen the F900 is also very good, at least as good as the F770.
Click to expand...
Better, actually, which I show in my extensive review from last year and have I believe mentioned in this thread once or twice.
photoreddi said:
Another point in its favor (as least for Fuji fandroids) it that the low cost new F900s are the ones built for the Japan market. None of the F900s designed for sale in other countries have the IR TX/RX that allow fast transfer of photos to select printers and Fuji cameras, such as the F31fd, F50fd, F100fd and a bunch of others. I checked all of the different language PDF manuals on the F900EXR's CD and the only manual that shows the IR port and has pages describing its use is the Japanese language manual. I tried it and it works, taking about a second or two to transfer each photo. The transferred photos are only 3mp though. Photos beamed to an F900 can finally allow F31, F50 and F100 owners to see their photo's histograms before transferring them to a computer. There's not much reason to shoot with the older cameras though if you've also got an F900. :)
Click to expand...
The F31 is so far out of date as to be a dinosaur. Awful cameras in the hand by modern standards. The F50 was nice, but failed at high ISO. Serious blue channel issues that they solved in the F100. But the F100 was an auto camera only (sad that Fuji thought it was a good idea at the time to run auto and manual lines separately ... what a waste of resources.)

So the F900 is not only much more modern in every possible way, it also waxes the others completely for image quality. Of course, some like the older cameras for their pixel peeping ... but that was only valid when you could actually avoid the massive purple fringing and water colors ...
 
brianj said:
Wellington100 said:
brianj said:
Wellington100 said:
brianj said:
Wellington100 said:
Kim Letkeman said:
Tommy TJ said:
I still have my F70 I think Fuji need a good shake up in common sense to not have a superzoom compact model on the market isn't wise.

If there is no F series update then that would be a huge shame, but it's their loss people will just buy other makers models. I know a lot of makers have cut their model range down (probably needed as they had too many) still I think Fuji are making a serious mistake here up your game and improve the F series rather than throwing in the towel.
Click to expand...
The problem is that phone cameras have eaten into the compact markets in general, so economies of scale are disappearing. It's a serious problem ... and I hope one that will have a solution eventually so that we don't lose all the interesting pocketable cameras out there.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
It is, and the interesting thing I find about the piano, or really any instrument (or even something unrelated like gymnastics), it seems to be much easier to learn when you're 5 years old than when you're 30, or 40, or 50. It's a humbling thought.

I love your sense of humor ;-) I think that camera is about the price of a superzoom....let me see if I can find it.

http://www.telescope.com/Orion-StarShoot-AllSky-Camera-II/p/101918.uts?keyword=allsky

They have some other interesting ones on there too

http://www.telescope.com/Astrophotography/Astrophotography-Cameras/pc/4/58.uts
--
https://supermanalexthegreat.shutterfly.com/
 
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be the FZ1000 and a m 4/3 camera with the 40-140 and 100-300 lenses? (or better yet the FZ1000 and two m 4/3 bodies each fitted with one of those lenses.) That way you get entirely away from the microsensor hell of superzoom cameras.
 
Ouch, isn't that something like 103 degrees F? The highest I've ever experienced in New Jersey is 109F that was 3 summers ago, that would be 43C I think. We went from that to over 100 inches of snow in the winter haha.

How does your HS50 do on that kind of photography, Dicky?
 
Kim, I see you still have your Coolpix 990, how does that hold up compared to newer cams (in bright light, ISO 100), as far as the sharpness of the lens, shooting macros, etc, is concerned?
 
Kim Letkeman said:
Lisetta1 said:
If people are serious about video I don't understand how they could use a camera without an external microphone. I haven't tried either Panny, but I just don't see the LX100 in particular as a useful video camera.
Click to expand...
I never plug in a microphone. I have a pair of TASCAM DR05s instead ... and a very nice lavalier mic from Giant Squid. I don't mind syncing multiple video and audio tracks ... for example ...


The LX100 might have the 30m limitation on it, which I would find pretty much fatal (my other Panasonic bodies do not have the limitation and I have AC power adapters for all but the GM1.)

But for shorter clips, the LX100 should be excellent. Panasonic does very nice audio on their cameras, so even that would be good for a lot of purposes. But of course if you prefer to plug in a microphone, then the G6 is a much better buy and is quite cheap, too ... you just have to have some primes instead of the fast lens on the LX100.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
Click to expand...
That's all good, too, if you have the time. My point was just that I've never heard adequate in-camera audio on these kinds of cameras, though I realize taste varies. (Also, I've never seen/heard Panny camera audio. I -did- almost buy the FZ200 because of the jack--which Canons don't have--but settled on Fuji instead. Maybe I would have found the FZ200's audio acceptable, never occurred to me it would be! lol.)

re: piano. I have two favorite words: fake book. :)
 
Last edited:
alexisgreat said:
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be ...
Click to expand...
Addressing an entirely different point ...
alexisgreat said:
I told you Qupzilla wont let me do that, I cant even properly edit my posts without going into "plain text mode." I'm experimenting with different browsers right now.
Click to expand...
This reply is being composed using Qupzilla in WYSIWYG mode (aka Rich Text mode, not Plain Text mode). It works the same way that Firefox, SeaMonkey, Opera and every other browser that I've ever used works. So I highly doubt that Qupzilla won't let you do proper quoting. There's either someting wrong with your computer, or something wrong with how you're trying to quote. But I thoroughly described how to do it so I don't really know where the problem lies. Computer? alexisgreat? Computer? alexisgreat? I give up. It's an insoluble conundrum.

.

FYI, I installed Qupzilla a month ago and it still works. How about that!

.
alexisgreat said:
alexisgreat said:
alexisgreat said:
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be the FZ1000 and a m 4/3 camera with the 40-140 and 100-300 lenses? (or better yet the FZ1000 and two m 4/3 bodies each fitted with one of those lenses.) That way you get entirely away from the microsensor hell of superzoom cameras.
Click to expand...
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be the FZ1000 and a m 4/3 camera with the 40-140 and 100-300 lenses? (or better yet the FZ1000 and two m 4/3 bodies each fitted with one of those lenses.) That way you get entirely away from the microsensor hell of superzoom cameras.
Click to expand...
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be the FZ1000 and a m 4/3 camera with the 40-140 and 100-300 lenses? (or better yet the FZ1000 and two m 4/3 bodies each fitted with one of those lenses.) That way you get entirely away from the microsensor hell of superzoom cameras.
Click to expand...
 
photoreddi said:
alexisgreat said:
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be ...
Click to expand...
Addressing an entirely different point ...
photoreddi said:
I told you Qupzilla wont let me do that, I cant even properly edit my posts without going into "plain text mode." I'm experimenting with different browsers right now.
Click to expand...
This reply is being composed using Qupzilla in WYSIWYG mode (aka Rich Text mode, not Plain Text mode). It works the same way that Firefox, SeaMonkey, Opera and every other browser that I've ever used works. So I highly doubt that Qupzilla won't let you do proper quoting. There's either someting wrong with your computer, or something wrong with how you're trying to quote. But I thoroughly described how to do it so I don't really know where the problem lies. Computer? alexisgreat? Computer? alexisgreat? I give up. It's an insoluble conundrum.
Click to expand...
I think we just solved it! I think lol..... turns out some flash content was being blocked. Now I just need to figure out why all those resources are being used up and why accessing my folders takes so long.
Errr, I guess I need to remove the > to get my replies to show up properly, also need to figure out what all these colors mean and what >> means vs > All I know is that red is the most recent post I'm responding to- right?
photoreddi said:
FYI, I installed Qupzilla a month ago and it still works. How about that!
Click to expand...
I can finally use a nontext editor! Before, this window would just collapse and wouldn't let me edit posts. I believe it was a flash issue. I still have some flash issues as the ads that are supposed to be to the right are replaced by an empty box and a big F. But the usage of resources is a bigger deal for me, I dont want to wait a few min every time I open wordpad or access my documents or my c drive.
photoreddi said:
.
photoreddi said:
photoreddi said:
photoreddi said:
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be the FZ1000 and a m 4/3 camera with the 40-140 and 100-300 lenses? (or better yet the FZ1000 and two m 4/3 bodies each fitted with one of those lenses.) That way you get entirely away from the microsensor hell of superzoom cameras.
Click to expand...
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be the FZ1000 and a m 4/3 camera with the 40-140 and 100-300 lenses? (or better yet the FZ1000 and two m 4/3 bodies each fitted with one of those lenses.) That way you get entirely away from the microsensor hell of superzoom cameras.
Click to expand...
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be the FZ1000 and a m 4/3 camera with the 40-140 and 100-300 lenses? (or better yet the FZ1000 and two m 4/3 bodies each fitted with one of those lenses.) That way you get entirely away from the microsensor hell of superzoom cameras.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
alexisgreat said:
photoreddi said:
alexisgreat said:
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be ...
Click to expand...
Addressing an entirely different point ...
alexisgreat said:
I told you Qupzilla wont let me do that, I cant even properly edit my posts without going into "plain text mode." I'm experimenting with different browsers right now.
Click to expand...
This reply is being composed using Qupzilla in WYSIWYG mode (aka Rich Text mode, not Plain Text mode). It works the same way that Firefox, SeaMonkey, Opera and every other browser that I've ever used works. So I highly doubt that Qupzilla won't let you do proper quoting. There's either someting wrong with your computer, or something wrong with how you're trying to quote. But I thoroughly described how to do it so I don't really know where the problem lies. Computer? alexisgreat? Computer? alexisgreat? I give up. It's an insoluble conundrum.
Click to expand...
I think we just solved it! I think lol..... turns out some flash content was being blocked. Now I just need to figure out why all those resources are being used up and why accessing my folders takes so long.
Errr, I guess I need to remove the > to get my replies to show up properly, also need to figure out what all these colors mean and what >> means vs > All I know is that red is the most recent post I'm responding to- right?
Click to expand...
Red is what I see for one level of indentation, green for two levels. When you switch from Rich Text mode to Text mode, the single level indents (red) are changed to ">" and second level indents (green) are changed to ">>". Whether you change back to Rich Text mode or not, when you post the reply, others will see either the vertical colored indent lines or the ">" characters depending on which text mode they use as their default. If you have three paragraphs (or portions thereof) highlighted, each time you click on the left indent button or the right indent button, the whole lot is indented. As I wrote at least a month ago, super easy.

You could even be totally color blind and you'd know which text was quoted from the most recent post. It's not that it's "red", it's that you only see a single vertical line for that portion of the quoted text. If colors weren't used at all, it would still be easy to distinguish first level quotes from second level quotes. When you look at DPReview's thread trees, you don't see vertical lines, but up to a point, each reply level gets indented by a number of spaces. Some email readers implement multiple vertical lines to help follow reply tree levels. Actually, this was so long ago that the indent level used by those email readers probably weren't use for email, but may have been for reading replies in newsgroups. But that was in a land long ago and far away.

.
alexisgreat said:
alexisgreat said:
FYI, I installed Qupzilla a month ago and it still works. How about that!
Click to expand...
I can finally use a nontext editor! Before, this window would just collapse and wouldn't let me edit posts. I believe it was a flash issue. I still have some flash issues as the ads that are supposed to be to the right are replaced by an empty box and a big F.
Click to expand...
And you call that a problem? That's why extensions like Adblock Plus were written. :)

.
alexisgreat said:
But the usage of resources is a bigger deal for me, I dont want to wait a few min every time I open wordpad or access my documents or my c drive.
Click to expand...
How much RAM does your computer have and are you using a fixed amount of it for the OS's cache memory or are you letting the OS manage how much RAM is used for caching? When the amount of RAM used is too small, you can get enormous slow downs as real memory becomes virtual, where real memory is written to your hard disk (usually the C: drive) so that it can be made available whenever the app. (or the OS) needs more real memory.
 
Last edited:
photoreddi said:
alexisgreat said:
photoreddi said:
alexisgreat said:
That's a really good point, maybe a better 1-2 punch would be ...
Click to expand...
Addressing an entirely different point ...
photoreddi said:
I told you Qupzilla wont let me do that, I cant even properly edit my posts without going into "plain text mode." I'm experimenting with different browsers right now.
Click to expand...
This reply is being composed using Qupzilla in WYSIWYG mode (aka Rich Text mode, not Plain Text mode). It works the same way that Firefox, SeaMonkey, Opera and every other browser that I've ever used works. So I highly doubt that Qupzilla won't let you do proper quoting. There's either someting wrong with your computer, or something wrong with how you're trying to quote. But I thoroughly described how to do it so I don't really know where the problem lies. Computer? alexisgreat? Computer? alexisgreat? I give up. It's an insoluble conundrum.
Click to expand...
I think we just solved it! I think lol..... turns out some flash content was being blocked. Now I just need to figure out why all those resources are being used up and why accessing my folders takes so long.
Errr, I guess I need to remove the > to get my replies to show up properly, also need to figure out what all these colors mean and what >> means vs > All I know is that red is the most recent post I'm responding to- right?
Click to expand...
Red is what I see for one level of indentation, green for two levels. When you switch from Rich Text mode to Text mode, the single level indents (red) are changed to ">" and second level indents (green) are changed to ">>". Whether you change back to Rich Text mode or not, when you post the reply, others will see either the vertical colored indent lines or the ">" characters depending on which text mode they use as their default. If you have three paragraphs (or portions thereof) highlighted, each time you click on the left indent button or the right indent button, the whole lot is indented. As I wrote at least a month ago, super easy.
Click to expand...
Wait there is a left indent button and a right indent button? I haven't seen this before.

So yellow is the same as >>> and purple is >>>> ?
photoreddi said:
You could even be totally color blind and you'd know which text was quoted from the most recent post. It's not that it's "red", it's that you only see a single vertical line for that portion of the quoted text. If colors weren't used at all, it would still be easy to distinguish first level quotes from second level quotes. When you look at DPReview's thread trees, you don't see vertical lines, but up to a point, each reply level gets indented by a number of spaces. Some email readers implement multiple vertical lines to help follow reply tree levels. Actually, this was so long ago that the indent level used by those email readers probably weren't use for email, but may have been for reading replies in newsgroups. But that was in a land long ago and far away.

.
photoreddi said:
photoreddi said:
FYI, I installed Qupzilla a month ago and it still works. How about that!
Click to expand...
I can finally use a nontext editor! Before, this window would just collapse and wouldn't let me edit posts. I believe it was a flash issue. I still have some flash issues as the ads that are supposed to be to the right are replaced by an empty box and a big F.
Click to expand...
And you call that a problem? That's why extensions like Adblock Plus were written. :)
Click to expand...
How do you like Qupzilla? Can you do a little experiment for me, PR? I cant get Facebook to work with Qupzilla for some reason, it maxes my resources out freezes everything and crashes the browser. What does going to that site do for you on that browser? Just go to it and then click on the thing that takes you to your inbox and let me know how it behaves, thanks!
photoreddi said:
photoreddi said:
But the usage of resources is a bigger deal for me, I dont want to wait a few min every time I open wordpad or access my documents or my c drive.
Click to expand...
How much RAM does your computer have and are you using a fixed amount of it for the OS's cache memory or are you letting the OS manage how much RAM is used for caching? When the amount of RAM used is too small, you can get enormous slow downs as real memory becomes virtual, where real memory is written to your hard disk (usually the C: drive) so that it can be made available whenever the app. (or the OS) needs more real memory.
Click to expand...
The computer has 2 GB of RAM and I'm letting Windows manage virtual memory for me, it normally sets aside 2 GB on the HD for virtual RAM but it will take more if needed.
 
alexisgreat said:
alexisgreat said:
...
Click to expand...
How do you like Qupzilla?
Click to expand...
I can take it or leave it. It works. It's usable but I'm too attached to some of Firefox's features to want to replace it with Qupzilla.

.
alexisgreat said:
Can you do a little experiment for me, PR? I cant get Facebook to work with Qupzilla for some reason, it maxes my resources out freezes everything and crashes the browser. What does going to that site do for you on that browser? Just go to it and then click on the thing that takes you to your inbox and let me know how it behaves, thanks!
Click to expand...
Ha ha ha ha ha. Me, have a Facebook inbox? I see that it wants me to sign up but that'll never happen. As a substitute I went to Flickr/explore and it loaded what seems to be between 300 and 400 photos. I opened several of them and moved around and Qupzilla remained responsive. Qupzillia isn't your problem. Your computer is your problem, I think.

.
alexisgreat said:
alexisgreat said:
alexisgreat said:
But the usage of resources is a bigger deal for me, I dont want to wait a few min every time I open wordpad or access my documents or my c drive.
Click to expand...
How much RAM does your computer have and are you using a fixed amount of it for the OS's cache memory or are you letting the OS manage how much RAM is used for caching? When the amount of RAM used is too small, you can get enormous slow downs as real memory becomes virtual, where real memory is written to your hard disk (usually the C: drive) so that it can be made available whenever the app. (or the OS) needs more real memory.
Click to expand...
The computer has 2 GB of RAM and I'm letting Windows manage virtual memory for me, it normally sets aside 2 GB on the HD for virtual RAM but it will take more if needed.
Click to expand...
Yep. That appears to be the problem. I hope that 2 GB of RAM hasn't maxed out your computer. The days of some XP computers maxxing out at 2 GB and others not being able to use much more than 3 GB of 4 GB installed RAM should be a forgotten memory. I wouldn't be surprised if your computer only has one memory slot, but whether it has one or two, I'd recommend upgrading to at least 4 GB, preferably more if your computer can handle it. Are you running 32-bit or 64-bit Windows? If 32-bit, don't buy more than 4 GB of memory.Which version of Windows? Check the following page if you're running Windows 7. If not, search for something similar for the OS you're running.

http://www.online-tech-tips.com/computer-tips/windows-7-ram-requirements-how-much-memory-do-i-need/

.

I saved a screen cap. of several of Task Managers screens for you. Did you look at it? Compare the memory information on the Performance tab with what your computer shows. Look at Physical Memory. What do you have for Total, Cached, Available and Free? Look at it twice. First, just after booting up when you aren't running any apps. Then again after using Qupzilla to go to your Facebook inbox. Or to www.Flickr.com/explore.
 
Not just for superzooms but in general



33647cc201574f0c9e1240c96cfe1246.jpg





It's all about the DR folks
 
Lisetta1 said:
Kim Letkeman said:
Lisetta1 said:
If people are serious about video I don't understand how they could use a camera without an external microphone. I haven't tried either Panny, but I just don't see the LX100 in particular as a useful video camera.
Click to expand...
I never plug in a microphone. I have a pair of TASCAM DR05s instead ... and a very nice lavalier mic from Giant Squid. I don't mind syncing multiple video and audio tracks ... for example ...


The LX100 might have the 30m limitation on it, which I would find pretty much fatal (my other Panasonic bodies do not have the limitation and I have AC power adapters for all but the GM1.)

But for shorter clips, the LX100 should be excellent. Panasonic does very nice audio on their cameras, so even that would be good for a lot of purposes. But of course if you prefer to plug in a microphone, then the G6 is a much better buy and is quite cheap, too ... you just have to have some primes instead of the fast lens on the LX100.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
alexisgreat said:
It is, and the interesting thing I find about the piano, or really any instrument (or even something unrelated like gymnastics), it seems to be much easier to learn when you're 5 years old than when you're 30, or 40, or 50. It's a humbling thought.

I love your sense of humor ;-) I think that camera is about the price of a superzoom....let me see if I can find it.

http://www.telescope.com/Orion-StarShoot-AllSky-Camera-II/p/101918.uts?keyword=allsky

They have some other interesting ones on there too

http://www.telescope.com/Astrophotography/Astrophotography-Cameras/pc/4/58.uts
--
https://supermanalexthegreat.shutterfly.com/
Click to expand...
Yeah, there are some very cool specialized cameras ... were that my primary hobby, I could justify the expense of the full kit (solid GEM, quality telescope, great camera) ... but alas, it would be #3 on the list and thus the runt of the litter, always starving ...
 
Tommy TJ said:
Not just for superzooms but in general

33647cc201574f0c9e1240c96cfe1246.jpg

It's all about the DR folks
Click to expand...
You have to balance the down side with the upside and that is not such a pretty picture ...

--

Nothing Special

This blog is my personal space. Do not confuse this with statements or opinions on behalf of any employer I have ever had, have now, or will ever have in the future.
kimletkeman.blogspot.com kimletkeman.blogspot.com
 
Wellington100 said:
brianj said:
Wellington100 said:
brianj said:
Wellington100 said:
brianj said:
Wellington100 said:
Kim Letkeman said:
Tommy TJ said:
I still have my F70 I think Fuji need a good shake up in common sense to not have a superzoom compact model on the market isn't wise.

If there is no F series update then that would be a huge shame, but it's their loss people will just buy other makers models. I know a lot of makers have cut their model range down (probably needed as they had too many) still I think Fuji are making a serious mistake here up your game and improve the F series rather than throwing in the towel.
Click to expand...
The problem is that phone cameras have eaten into the compact markets in general, so economies of scale are disappearing. It's a serious problem ... and I hope one that will have a solution eventually so that we don't lose all the interesting pocketable cameras out there.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top