Reading mode: Light Dark

Pick the next m4/3rds innovation to be adopted by "big 3."

Go to last post
I try to waste as little time as possible on those who are on my ignore list. They get there by asking frivolous, stupid questions to which they already know the answers ...
 
Wu Jiaqiu said:
JaKing said:
Gregg, if you insist on behaving as you do, you have to expect people to apply unflattering labels to you.

But then you have stated that you do this for "fun".
Click to expand...
why do you always make it personal John?

It's irrelevant to any discussion.......
Click to expand...
Gregg , it becomes relevant when your behaviour makes it so.
 
JaKing said:
I try to waste as little time as possible on those who are on my ignore list. They get there by asking frivolous, stupid questions to which they already know the answers ...
Click to expand...
Asking to clarify what you meant by the innovation you cited is a stupid question? And if I am on your ignore list then how are you responding?
 
JaKing said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
JaKing said:
Gregg, if you insist on behaving as you do, you have to expect people to apply unflattering labels to you.

But then you have stated that you do this for "fun".
Click to expand...
why do you always make it personal John?

It's irrelevant to any discussion.......
Click to expand...
Gregg , it becomes relevant when your behaviour makes it so.
Click to expand...
no it never is relevant, i'm sorry i am not going to communicate with you if you're going to get personal
 
Maybe because you follow me around asking inane questions?

There is a name for that kind of behaviour when it has gone on for more than ten years.
 
Wu Jiaqiu said:
JaKing said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
JaKing said:
Gregg, if you insist on behaving as you do, you have to expect people to apply unflattering labels to you.

But then you have stated that you do this for "fun".
Click to expand...
why do you always make it personal John?

It's irrelevant to any discussion.......
Click to expand...
Gregg , it becomes relevant when your behaviour makes it so.
Click to expand...
no it never is relevant, i'm sorry i am not going to communicate with you if you're going to get personal
Click to expand...
And how do you explain or excuse your behaviour towards me over the last 10+ years?
 
JaKing said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
JaKing said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
JaKing said:
Gregg, if you insist on behaving as you do, you have to expect people to apply unflattering labels to you.

But then you have stated that you do this for "fun".
Click to expand...
why do you always make it personal John?

It's irrelevant to any discussion.......
Click to expand...
Gregg , it becomes relevant when your behaviour makes it so.
Click to expand...
no it never is relevant, i'm sorry i am not going to communicate with you if you're going to get personal
Click to expand...
And how do you explain or excuse your behaviour towards me over the last 10+ years?
Click to expand...
yes i have acted terribly in the past i admit that, i try not to get personal if i can help it these days. And of course it takes two to tango.
 
Wu Jiaqiu said:
DiffractionLtd said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
DiffractionLtd said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
DiffractionLtd said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
DiffractionLtd said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
not this again, all companies copy others good ideas, Olympus hasn't been shy about doing this.....just like everyone else
Click to expand...
Like?
Click to expand...
let's start with IBIS...your turn
Click to expand...
So which company had sensor-based image stabilization first?
Click to expand...
in a Dslr i believe it was Minolta
Click to expand...
There was an electronic technique to steady images, but I'm not sure "anti-shake" was the same as sensor-based image stabilization. Maybe it was?
Click to expand...
well it moved the sensor to compensate for camera movements.....so...you know
Click to expand...
An inferior implementation, probably not even based on the same process. Much like sensor cleaning before ultrasonic took hold.
Click to expand...
if it moves the sensor to compensate for camera movements then it's the same principle, it may do it in a different fashion but results to a certain degree will be the same, inferior to when? Now? of course it is, are sensors better now than before?
Click to expand...
A coach with horses moves forward on two or four wheels - just as engine-powered vehicles do. Nonetheless, claiming that the principle function is the same would be ridiculous to the max.
 
nzmacro said:
JaKing said:
Danny, try sensor self cleaning that actually worked, for just one such ...

Won an EISA award for it around 2007/8 IIRC for its implementation in the E-1 ?
Click to expand...
:-) Yep, the only two cameras I can go out without checking or cleaning are the Oly's. It is simply the best. The Sony and the Panasonics I clean all the time. I don't even check the E-M1 now and I do see it all the time in the other cameras with BIF's on blue sky.

So yeah John, that's one that actually does work mate, no doubt about it :-)

Danny.
Click to expand...
That's amazing me as Panny adopted the Oly system.

But what about HighRes?
 
Last edited:
DonParrot said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
DiffractionLtd said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
DiffractionLtd said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
DiffractionLtd said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
DiffractionLtd said:
Wu Jiaqiu said:
not this again, all companies copy others good ideas, Olympus hasn't been shy about doing this.....just like everyone else
Click to expand...
Like?
Click to expand...
let's start with IBIS...your turn
Click to expand...
So which company had sensor-based image stabilization first?
Click to expand...
in a Dslr i believe it was Minolta
Click to expand...
There was an electronic technique to steady images, but I'm not sure "anti-shake" was the same as sensor-based image stabilization. Maybe it was?
Click to expand...
well it moved the sensor to compensate for camera movements.....so...you know
Click to expand...
An inferior implementation, probably not even based on the same process. Much like sensor cleaning before ultrasonic took hold.
Click to expand...
if it moves the sensor to compensate for camera movements then it's the same principle, it may do it in a different fashion but results to a certain degree will be the same, inferior to when? Now? of course it is, are sensors better now than before?
Click to expand...
A coach with horses moves forward on two or four wheels - just as engine-powered vehicles do. Nonetheless, claiming that the principle function is the same would be ridiculous to the max.
Click to expand...
the principle that the sensor moves to compensate for camera movement is constant for all IBIS cameras, the way it is done has changed over the years but the underlying principle remains the same.
 
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