ChrisLumix

Lives in United Kingdom United Kingdom
Joined on Feb 13, 2011

Comments

Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

TorsteinH: Apple chipset, M something, who cares? How is this of relevance here?

@sportyaccordy

"I'm also not sure if Apple will allow me to do basic things like change my own HDD/RAM"

By the nature of the chip - SoC - those things can't be changed as they are all contained in the one chip along with graphics etc. So you have to commit to your choice of RAM / SSD storage when you order the particular Mac. Same as with iPhones, iPads, which also use the SoC.

Link | Posted on May 5, 2021 at 21:31 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: There you go. Your shiny new M1 is an outdated model already. Time to upgrade.

@hifimacianer

"Maybe there is the M1 for entry level Macs, and M2 for the high end Macs. And in a year it might be M1x and M2x. Who knows?"

It depends if Apple stick to their previous naming conventions. If they do, it will be M1X later this year with more cores, support for more Thunderbolt ports, possibly more RAM & storage, which will go in their higher end Macs.

Then it would be M2 next year (possibly) based on faster processor and smaller nm (4 or even 3?) for longer battery life and cooler running. That would go first in the low end Macs, with the M2X to come later.

But as they say "Apple do what they do, until they don't"!

Link | Posted on May 4, 2021 at 21:20 UTC
In reply to:

24Peter: I've never purchased or owned an Apple product in my life - and I'm well into middle age :-) But the performance of their M1 devices seems downright impressive. Can't say I'll switch from my PC's- but who knows? I do applaud Apple for their innovation - and marketing savvy!

@Mr Bolton

Dont twist my words. I never said "x86 will only run on x86 hardware". I "don't get to argue in favor of x86 emulation on an M1 computer"? Oh, we have suddenly switched from VMs (which YOU raised) to Rosetta 2?

Basics of computing: EMULATORs e.g. Rosetta 2 can run x86 apps on ARM chips. But you were talking about virtualisation which is very different from emulation. An emulator pretends to be a particular platform & runs programs that need that platform. There's a performance hit though the nature of M1 means the hit is small, and Rosetta 2 has been well written. A virtualiser provides means to install an ACTUAL OS in a different environment, e.g. Windows on Mac. As it's the full OS it must pass instructions recognisable to the chip that's present on both host & guest VM. That's why I said you cannot run an x86 VM on ARM. That's not my opinion. It's a fact.

If you want to switch to emulators instead of VMs, then be my guest. Prove you know something deep about computers.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2021 at 21:39 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: There you go. Your shiny new M1 is an outdated model already. Time to upgrade.

@The Lamentable Lens

Quite correct. And the M1 has also just been put in the latest iPad Pro. That won't necessarily get the M2 as it doesn't need it. iPadOS has been designed very differently than MacOS and though it may soon get Pro apps like Final Cut and Logic, it doesn't need the grunt that MacOS uses.

Link | Posted on Apr 30, 2021 at 21:18 UTC
In reply to:

JustSomeone: RIP Intel & x86

(not an Apple fan-boy at all)

@P3R10D8100D5UND4Y

"Intel/AMD had the benefit of scaling their CPU's for decades. Now there is no more room to scale."

You mean... Intel being years behind developing 7 nanometer chips had nothing to do with Apple deserting them? It seems Apple are ready to use 3nm anytime soon, and 2nm is on the way. Perhaps you'd like to think again?

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2021 at 16:06 UTC
In reply to:

24Peter: I've never purchased or owned an Apple product in my life - and I'm well into middle age :-) But the performance of their M1 devices seems downright impressive. Can't say I'll switch from my PC's- but who knows? I do applaud Apple for their innovation - and marketing savvy!

@Mr Bolton

"maybe you'd like to run a virtual machine or two"

NOT a restriction proving that M1 chips are incapable. In fact, it's simply the laws of computing. x86 OS's will only run on x86 (e.g. Intel) chips - that's simply a basic fact. As I use 3 VMs, that's enough to stop me getting an Apple silicon Mac. Parallels have issued v16 that will run on ARM-based machines... but it will only be able to run a Windows 10 ARM VM, or various flavours of Linux that are platform independent.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2021 at 15:58 UTC
In reply to:

TorsteinH: Apple chipset, M something, who cares? How is this of relevance here?

@Zdman

I'm a database user (there probably aren’t so many left now) but I'd be very surprised if FileMaker Pro isn't much more nippy and powerful on the M1.

Emulators? You mean, like Rosetta 2, which runs Windows 10 faster than some respectable PC laptops?

Games... we're back to that age-old complaint are we.. Yes, it's true that high end gaming (a SMALL market sector) has always been better on certain high end or customised PCs with particular dedicated graphics cards, than on any Mac except a customised Mac Pro. But the rest of us who 'just like playing games' (not the high end stuff) find that Macs are equal to most PCs.

Apple didn't "break the laws of physics" but they've been developing the ultimate SoC for years, first in iPhones and iPads, now in Macs.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2021 at 15:49 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: There you go. Your shiny new M1 is an outdated model already. Time to upgrade.

Considering that the "shiny new M1" licks the pants off most of its rivals - in fact ALL of its rivals in the market sector so far released into - it doesn't really matter that the next generation will outpower it. It's like saying the latest 1400cc BMW is no good because there's a 1750cc model due soon with a much higher spec. "Different strokes for different folks". I don't suppose many M1 users will be licking their non-existent wounds.

Link | Posted on Apr 29, 2021 at 15:27 UTC
In reply to:

ChrisLumix: "Uses much of the same code as the desktop version"? Won't be as good as Affinity Photos then, which was designed ground up for iOS and is available now, much cheaper I assume.

Affinity Photo was written as a whole from the ground up (not REwritten). It would therefore have been comparatively simple to adapt for iPad. Obviously, not an overnight job, but far easier than for Photoshop.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2018 at 09:27 UTC
In reply to:

ChrisLumix: "Uses much of the same code as the desktop version"? Won't be as good as Affinity Photos then, which was designed ground up for iOS and is available now, much cheaper I assume.

I understand only too well. This, from above... "While much of the underlying code remains the same as its desktop counterpart...". In other words piecemeal, with bits tacked on over the years to make it the behemoth it is now.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2018 at 16:50 UTC

"Uses much of the same code as the desktop version"? Won't be as good as Affinity Photos then, which was designed ground up for iOS and is available now, much cheaper I assume.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2018 at 12:10 UTC as 21st comment | 5 replies
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1289 comments in total)
In reply to:

ofquiet: Wait, they made the camera bigger and more expensive, but removed a piece of necessary hardware (built-in flash)??? At this point it's less of a 4/3s and more of a mini dslr, which is redundant.

No one cares THAT much that the teeny tiny viewfinder now has better resolution, but people who want a small(ish) carry-around camera MIGHT care that they have to lug around a flash now. Major fail. This was the big complaint I heard from people who were into the LX100, at first...

The GX7 was an excellent camera (although with unreliable focus) and Panasonic had a great platform to build on. Too bad they shot off their big toe in the process.

ofquiet - I so agree about flash looking so completely different than not using flash..

That's why I don't use flash.

Link | Posted on Jul 25, 2015 at 08:31 UTC
On article The big beast: hands on with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 (1289 comments in total)
In reply to:

ofquiet: Wait, they made the camera bigger and more expensive, but removed a piece of necessary hardware (built-in flash)??? At this point it's less of a 4/3s and more of a mini dslr, which is redundant.

No one cares THAT much that the teeny tiny viewfinder now has better resolution, but people who want a small(ish) carry-around camera MIGHT care that they have to lug around a flash now. Major fail. This was the big complaint I heard from people who were into the LX100, at first...

The GX7 was an excellent camera (although with unreliable focus) and Panasonic had a great platform to build on. Too bad they shot off their big toe in the process.

I can truly say I have never missed flash in the LX100. And if I really really really need one one time, it's small enough to carry in the smallest pocket and still beats the average built-in job.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2015 at 21:06 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1021 comments in total)
In reply to:

mb65: This camera has amazing specs and it is indeed good value. But it is NOT pocketable. So if you compare it with similar size gear, you may just go for interchangeble lens cameras with similar size sensors (or even APS C). They will be bigger with a zoom, that is true, but similar with a a pancake.
If you do not need 4K (and most do not) I think the Sony RX100 III makes more sense. If you go bigger then go for bigger sensors.
Just my 2 cents.
Mattia

You couldn't possibly get any larger sensor in a zoom compact this small. Right now, it's physically impossible.

Link | Posted on Nov 26, 2014 at 18:28 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1021 comments in total)
In reply to:

fireplace33: This looks like a great camera. I was quite tempted.
Lots of nice „PROS“ but in the end put off by the same „CONS“ as mentioned in the conclusion
I’ve listed those CONS in order of imporatnce for me.

Anyone care to speculate if my "top cons" will be addressed and improved in the next version of this camera?

■ Lens range can be limiting
■ 12MP may not be enough for some users
■ Separate clip-on flash simply inconvenient
■ Manually positioning an AF point is awkward - no touchscreen
■ JPEG noise reduction and sharpening are rather crude at low ISOs
■ Noticeable lag switching from shooting mode to playback
■ Focus peaking often too subtle to see
■ Viewfinder can show 'tearing' effect, which will distract some users

I'd love a longer zoom, but I wouldn't want a bigger camera as a result. I have i-Zoom switched on, and I will make do with 150mm + cropping.

I hope to fix it so the flash pouch loops inside the neck strap so it's 'always there' (even though fill flash will be its main use) - it's very small and light. Perhaps Panny should have made a clip-on carrier?

I dread touch screens - I'd always be accidentally setting something I didn't want. But I can see how some people prefer them. And a tilt would be REALLY USEFUL. Come on, Panasonic!

For me the 12MP isn't even an issue, except when cropping.

You're right - I do love this camera!!!

Link | Posted on Nov 21, 2014 at 15:23 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1021 comments in total)
In reply to:

Pritzl: I think the next iteration of this compact will be incredible. It's a great camera as is. However, if Panasonic threw in an articulating and/or touch-sensitive screen, allowed us to program the Filters/iA buttons, added EC in Manual mode + Auto ISO and possibly a built-in ND filter the LX200 could be a dream camera for me. Better jpeg processing would be nice, if only to cut short any false negative perceptions about IQ. I noted the latter the first time we saw the image samples and everyone was crying "soft!" Appears to be a JPEG-only issue.

So yes, I'm intrigued, but not enough to part with $900 at the moment when I already have a DSLR and a compact. Then again, I have caved and given in to GAS before.

There *is* EC in Manual mode (I was very concerned about this), but not via the EV dial. You set ISO yourself (I have ISO on the Control ring); the on-screen meter shows whether you're within 3 stops +/-

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 17:38 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1021 comments in total)
In reply to:

Daniel Keutmann: In the studio test scene at iso 6400 and raw the panasonic uses aperture f/4 and 1/1250 shutter speed while the g1x mark2 uses f/5.6 and 1/2500.

Since exposure seems to be the same the ISO of one of the two cameras must be quite a bit off...

They use different sensors!! So the "equivalent apertures" will vary.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 17:34 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1021 comments in total)
In reply to:

yfan: I am torn apart by deciding which one to buy, LX100 or G7 X. I am not surprised that LX100 gets Gold Award. But at the end, size matters, I decide to go with G7X. The one in your pocket is the one get used, instead of another nice camera sitting on the bookshelf. Too bad Panasonic can not make it smaller. It seems that they can fit a large sensor into a small body, but not a large lens.

You got it spot on. "The smaller the better"? No way. I have small hands, but something like the RX100 is TOO small for me to use comfortably. And "use" is the operative word here.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 17:31 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1021 comments in total)
In reply to:

mb65: This camera has amazing specs and it is indeed good value. But it is NOT pocketable. So if you compare it with similar size gear, you may just go for interchangeble lens cameras with similar size sensors (or even APS C). They will be bigger with a zoom, that is true, but similar with a a pancake.
If you do not need 4K (and most do not) I think the Sony RX100 III makes more sense. If you go bigger then go for bigger sensors.
Just my 2 cents.
Mattia

It's not SHIRT or JEANS pocketable for sure. But it's pocketable for most jackets, coats, rainwear, anoraks (!), normal trousers, etc etc.

It's noticeably smaller than my FZ38 superzoom, and the sensor in that is 1/8 of the size.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 17:25 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Review (1021 comments in total)
In reply to:

Everlast66: There is something fundamentally wrong with the DPReview categories!

So we have "Enthusiast Large Sensor Compact Camera" category here and the LX100 gets 85%, but the Sony RX1 also falls in this category with several times larger sensor and gets only 79%. Surely the sensor (even with an excellent Zeiss lens) can not alone make any camera a winner, but the designers of the two cameras had clearly different criteria when designing the two cameras and the way they are categorized in the reviews affects the results.

Then Panasonic have two cameras in this category, LX100 and FZ1000, and they both get the highest scores (85 and 82) compared to all other cameras in the category, Canon, Nikon, Sony and Fuji ones that are mostly marked in the order of 77-79%. Either Panasonic have been insanely spot-on with their latest cameras, a DPReviewer is a big fan of Panasonic, or the categorization system is not quite right!

As an enthusiastic new owner of the LX100 I find the statement "Sony cannot make good cameras" to be utterly laughable. I would have the LX100's form factor over the RX100's any day of the week, but there's very little to choose between them, quality-wise.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2014 at 17:20 UTC
Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »