Timmbits

Timmbits

Lives in Canada Montreal, Canada
Works as a inventor
Joined on Oct 8, 2011
About me:

Deutscher, living in Montreal Canada.
Cycling, chess, design, inventions, nature, photography, are some of the things I like.

Comments

Total: 1598, showing: 1221 – 1240
« First‹ Previous6061626364Next ›Last »
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Liz Z.: I thought "Wow, this looks like a worthy alternative to the RX100-- wider angle, more zoom, brighter lens at tele," until I got to the sensor size. What was Olympus thinking in not doing at least a 1/1.7' sensor? I suspect that the users this camera is aimed at (digitally informed, not invested in the megapixel race, interested in RAW formats and manual options) will notice that "feature," and be unimpressed. It seems short sighted on Olympus' part.

Raist, do you have dual profiles on here? otherwise, why take offense to someone else's ignorance? if not having felt the comment applied to yourself as well?

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 16:19 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

ARTASHES: Before everybody starts to complain about sensor size just check this sensor performance on the other compacts (Canon HS50, SX240)
If it had 1/1.7 sensor it would have been bigger with same speed lenses (XZ-2 is that camera actually) or it would have the same size with slower lenses and you would lose all your IQ gain in low light !!!

Raist, you have nice images, that you posted links to.
Surely someone like you understands the concept of control over depth of field? Surely you have tried to take photographs at night? I don't see you doing either of those with your 1/2.3" to any level of satisfaction. With the existence of an XZ1, XZ2, and the other manufacturers' ones for the same price, what is the point of this camera anyways? Laws of physics is you will have nowhere the control over depth of field as in the others that have a 1/1.7", 2/3", with f1.8 or f1.4 lens, nowhere the night mode results of a Nikon p7700... SURELY someone of your caliber understands all that!

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 16:06 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)

Maybe it's just for the ignorant mass-market... they can see f1.8 stamped on it, but they can't see "too small a sensor" written anywhere. It will sell because of this.
To people who don't know about control over depth of field in photography, who have never attempted to take night shots, to name a couple of things.

I was just talking to someone yesterday who was thinking about upgrading her old 3MP camera, and when I mentioned sensor size, she asked me "what is a sensor"? To that person, I would say, get one of these... but then again, if you target that market, who cares about RAW?

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:53 UTC as 35th comment | 4 replies
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

iudex: If I look at this camera in context of other p&s compacts with 1/2,3" sensors, I have to praise Olympus for releasing such camera: super-bright lens, RAW, PASM modes, this is something most competitors miss.
However when I look at enthusiast comapcts with 1/1,7" sensors, most of them offer the same, with bigger sensor and for similar price (no need to go further than to Oly XZ-1). So in this contet the camera seems pointless.

Maybe it's just for the ignorant mass-market... they get the illusion of a real camera at a price point they like, because they don't understand/appreciate what extra dollars would get them.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:45 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: This camera would be interesting if Panasonic hadn't been dumping their LX7s for $279 lately. It is just like when your neighbor dumps his house for half of what it is worth and now no one else can sell theirs.

indeed... we have been reading about the LX7 at that price, but no one seems to be able to tell us where!

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:43 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Camp Freddy: Hmm, after a quick look at this and the price suggested, I think Olympus would have been better on doing an "epm" version of the larger XZ's to this type of price, or better yet, putting a fixed retracting lens onto the 16mpx mFT sensor, perhaps at a crop to a smaller mpx ( as some panasonic mFT's actually do)

Indeed, that is definitely a discussion under a different product. the reason why the RX100 gets a smaller aperture at full zoom, is because otherwise, you would have too much chromatic aberration... a design compromise they had to make, in order to cram a sensor and lens that size, into such a small package. with MFT, the compromises would be even more severe, so it wouldn't make any sense to even attempt it.
However, what WOULD be nice, is to see an MFT competitor to the Nikon-1 system's space, with a fixed lens (sort of like a slightly larger RX100, from Panasonic or Olympus), would make lots of sense. But you know WHY they won't do it? Because no one would buy their interchangeable lens MFT cameras anymore, their revenues would plummet, and they will have engineered themselves out of business (especially Olympus, with their already precarious position).

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:40 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Liz Z.: I thought "Wow, this looks like a worthy alternative to the RX100-- wider angle, more zoom, brighter lens at tele," until I got to the sensor size. What was Olympus thinking in not doing at least a 1/1.7' sensor? I suspect that the users this camera is aimed at (digitally informed, not invested in the megapixel race, interested in RAW formats and manual options) will notice that "feature," and be unimpressed. It seems short sighted on Olympus' part.

don't pay any attention to them Liz... they are noobs who don't know what DoF is, and have no idea about the laws of physics!

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:35 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ben Herrmann: When I first saw that Olympus was going to release the X-10 I had wrongly disparaged the fact that it would be a very small sensor with no RAW capabilities. So it is with much delight to observe that they've elected to add a RAW mode which really contributes to better IQ capabilities.

If they had released this cam without RAW, it would have been a different story.

So short of going the 1/1.7" sensor route, this XZ-10 could be Olympus's foray into the market that the Canon S folks once ruled (and I have an S100). Let's see how the IQ pans out. The lens and zoom factor are a step above, that's for sure.

So despite my initial misgivings about the XZ-10 (especially with Oly's previous history of P&S cams that had a massive amount of JPG compression), releasing this new enthusiast model with RAW capabilities is a step in the right direction. I'm so glad to see Olympus back in the enthusiasts market with a vengeance.

Let's see how you think you will get any control over DoF with such a small sensor.
And since when does S110 "rule" ANY space? It is the worse of all the 1/1.7"! Just look at the graphs!

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:33 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike604: so is this the XZ 1.5? that everyone was waiting for? ;-}

more like XZ-1/2 ! LOL

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:29 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)
In reply to:

ARTASHES: Before everybody starts to complain about sensor size just check this sensor performance on the other compacts (Canon HS50, SX240)
If it had 1/1.7 sensor it would have been bigger with same speed lenses (XZ-2 is that camera actually) or it would have the same size with slower lenses and you would lose all your IQ gain in low light !!!

Einstein was right... there are no limits to human stupidity.
We have the capacity to think, yet we do not!

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:28 UTC
On article Olympus announces Stylus XZ-10 enthusiast compact (198 comments in total)

with a tiny 1/2.3"sensor, this might be good for my 7 y.o. child, to introduce her to photography...
but surely anyone in their right mind wouldn't consider this over ANY of the already small 1/1.7" sensor cameras.
I really don't see the point of the existence of this camera, if not for kids.

Link | Posted on Jan 30, 2013 at 15:23 UTC as 37th comment | 8 replies
In reply to:

Roman Korcek: So Sigma will offer a redesigned 30mm F/1.4 in addition to the new 35mm F/1.4? Is that not overkill?

chunk of glass good
pencil hole bad

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

cd cooker: The old 30 1.4 has a filter size of 72mm I believe, but this new 30 1.4 is 62mm only?

"only"???? seriously? the filter size is what you care about?

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 19:06 UTC

NEEDED: 30mm f1.4 in the NX mount version

Samsung offers only f2

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 19:05 UTC as 14th comment | 3 replies
On article Wi-Fi and Samsung's 'Smart Camera Ecosystem' (44 comments in total)

BS!!!!! doesn't work, extremely hard to configure with software that is deficient and incomplete for the PC end of it, and the remote viewfinder app for android doesn't work on the majority of smartphones!!!

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 03:21 UTC as 3rd comment

Very glad that I didn't care for the wifi when I bought this... quite hard to make it work with your PC, and the remote viewfinder app is too big for the vast majority of smartphones! had to purchase a remote wired trigger instead.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 03:15 UTC as 1st comment

Now it looks like the toy that it really is.

Link | Posted on Jan 29, 2013 at 03:12 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

Timmbits: This card sounds amazing!

QUESTION: given the pure physics of WiFi transmitting a certain amount of watts output, which draws multiples more power than a low power consumption memory card does, is there a danger to the camera equipment (if not, at least in longevity), and does it endanger the camera manufacturer's warranty?

Even if it's only 0.5 watts output, for example, it is still multiples more than the typical low power consumption SD card that our cameras are designed to power up.

FOUND IT! SD memory versus SD wifi card:
Sandisk SD card power draw: max 40mA; standby 150uA
Ambicom CF WiFi power draw: max 380mA; standby 17mA

So yeah... TEN TIMES MORE power draw...

source: http://www.davespda.com/reviews/other/sdsdiowifi.htm

As you can see, at rest, the power draw is there, but shouldn't affect battery life much, in the grand scheme of all the things that are going on in the camera, that's normal. BUT... ten times more power draw on a memory card slot is a risk...

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2013 at 18:41 UTC
In reply to:

Timmbits: This card sounds amazing!

QUESTION: given the pure physics of WiFi transmitting a certain amount of watts output, which draws multiples more power than a low power consumption memory card does, is there a danger to the camera equipment (if not, at least in longevity), and does it endanger the camera manufacturer's warranty?

Even if it's only 0.5 watts output, for example, it is still multiples more than the typical low power consumption SD card that our cameras are designed to power up.

@reddog: it is more like 0.23w
@squire: the standard is all nice, but if you were a camera manufacturer, would you necessarily prioritize battery life in your camera design, or design a camera for anything the world can throw at it in an SD slot?
Before we go any further, let's try and google to see how much a memory card draws, and how much THIS card draws.

Link | Posted on Jan 28, 2013 at 18:25 UTC
On article Panasonic unveils Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 lens (3 comments in total)
In reply to:

cformont: So I assume this isn't the best lens to utilize for any type of landscape photos? I took some pics tonight and they came out like a painting instead of a picture. I would have used my other lens but didn't have it on me at the time. I tried closing the F stop to like f11 because i wanted more depth of field to get everything in focus but results weren't too good. Any help would be appreciated. thx!

I was just doing a lens hub search, and came across this lens... it sounded pretty good! I was just about to consider buying a GX1 for my daughter just so I can get this f/1.4 lens but with your feedback I don't know now.

For landscape, perhaps you may like to consider a wider angle lens, that is more designed for that?

I don't know if they are any good, but these came up during my search, and would be more appropriate (or at least come close) for landscape:
http://www.dpreview.com/products/sigma/lenses/sigma_m_19_2p8#
http://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/lenses/olympus_m_17_2p8
http://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/lenses/panasonic_20_1p7
or even this zoom lens http://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/lenses/panasonic_x_12-35_2p8/specification

Do keep in mind that the relative focal length is x2 for MFT... so a 19mm is similar to a FF 38mm... you can definitely use wider for landscape. (I just wish they would start quoting in viewing angle in addition to focal length)

Link | Posted on Jan 26, 2013 at 18:45 UTC
Total: 1598, showing: 1221 – 1240
« First‹ Previous6061626364Next ›Last »