Marty4650

Marty4650

Lives in United States NC, United States
Works as a Retired Industrial Engineer
Joined on May 20, 2005

Comments

Total: 1448, showing: 401 – 420
« First‹ Previous1920212223Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Chaitanya S: Interesting addition to micro 4/3 finally this system is getting tele lenses.

He just left out one qualifier. Add it in, and he is correct.

"Finally this system is getting HIGH QUALITY tele lenses."

Prior to this lens, the best high quality M4/3 tele lens was the 40-150mm pro lens. And this new lens has quite a bit more reach.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 19:10 UTC

Superzooms are safe until the day comes when a smartphone can have a 40X or 50X optical zoom.

My guess is.... that day will never come.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 16:33 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply

The market for cheap compact cameras didn't disappear. It just got a lot smaller. Something like 75% of this market segment has disappeared, being swallowed by smart phones.

And the manufacturers have responded by making fewer models. And the newer models are even cheaper and have more features than the older ones had.

So these cameras should be a big hit with the remaining compact camera users.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2016 at 14:55 UTC as 39th comment | 1 reply
On article Merry Christmas II you: RX1R II sample gallery updated (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

photog4u: I'm just not as enamored with this camera as I thought I would be. That $3,300 price point is just way to high today. For example; an OM-D E-M5II with a Panny 20 1.7 is just $1,117. The combo is every bit as pocket-able as the RII for $2,183 less money and you get tons more versatility and IBIS. Heck you could add a Nocticron if shallow DOF and creamy bokeh is your thing, and still have $800 in your pocket ;)

You are probably the third or fourth person to tell me I had the price wrong!

I probably mixed it up in my mind with the Leica SL, which does cost $7,500. In any case, $4,250 for the Leica Q is still $1,000 more than the price of Sony RX1R II.

Link | Posted on Dec 21, 2015 at 22:31 UTC
On article Merry Christmas II you: RX1R II sample gallery updated (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

photog4u: I'm just not as enamored with this camera as I thought I would be. That $3,300 price point is just way to high today. For example; an OM-D E-M5II with a Panny 20 1.7 is just $1,117. The combo is every bit as pocket-able as the RII for $2,183 less money and you get tons more versatility and IBIS. Heck you could add a Nocticron if shallow DOF and creamy bokeh is your thing, and still have $800 in your pocket ;)

The Sony may not be a good value for many people, but the RX1R II and EM5 II really aren't in the same class.

Full frame cameras cost more. And great lenses cost a lot too.

The appropriate comparison would have been with the Leica Q, which costs $7,500.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 19:19 UTC
On article Merry Christmas II you: RX1R II sample gallery updated (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Doesn't this have the usual Sony DRO modes? The gallery seems to be chock full of slightly-to-wide-DR images rendered as blown JPEGs paired with their reprocessed raws, but in truth I suspect that the in-camera DRO could actually have done at least as well (and maybe better) producing the JPEGs with zero hassle. I get that it's nice to show what can be done with raw processing, but it is good not to forget that the camera itself also has options to automatically take advantage of the same great raw DR.

My mistake. I was intending to reply to photog4u's comment about how expensive it was, and comparing it to an EM5 II with a Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 lens.

Somehow I replied to the wrong person! As you correctly point out, my response has nothing to do with your comment.

Sorry. I just added a response to the right person. I hope I got it right this time!

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 19:15 UTC
On article Gear of the Year Part 4: Dale's pick - Samsung NX1 (407 comments in total)

Dale.... a belated "thank you" for one of the best "Gear of the Year" articles so far.

The series is probably poorly named, because it implies "best camera of the year" rather than "my personal choice," but your article was a truly informative and enjoyable piece to read.

Good work!

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 14:08 UTC as 38th comment | 2 replies
On article Merry Christmas II you: RX1R II sample gallery updated (138 comments in total)
In reply to:

ProfHankD: Doesn't this have the usual Sony DRO modes? The gallery seems to be chock full of slightly-to-wide-DR images rendered as blown JPEGs paired with their reprocessed raws, but in truth I suspect that the in-camera DRO could actually have done at least as well (and maybe better) producing the JPEGs with zero hassle. I get that it's nice to show what can be done with raw processing, but it is good not to forget that the camera itself also has options to automatically take advantage of the same great raw DR.

As a M4/3 fanboy I really hate saying this but your comparison is seriously flawed. Comparing a fixed lens full frame camera to a M4/3 ILC is pretty much like comparing apples to oranges. If sensor size doesn't matter, then why stop at 4/3? You might as well compare the full frame Sony to camera phone, then declare the camera phone much cheaper.

There is ONLY one other camera in the same class as the fixed lens full frame RX1.... and that is the Leica Q. And that camera costs twice as much as the Sony does.

The Sony RX1R II is expensive and isn't for everyone. But if you want this sort of camera, it is the bargain camera in it's admittedly small class.

Link | Posted on Dec 19, 2015 at 14:03 UTC
On article Gear of the Year Part 4: Dale's pick - Samsung NX1 (407 comments in total)

Perhaps Samsung's problem was they waited to long to hit a grand slam home run? They had no OMD EM5, GH4, Alpha7, or XT1 like camera until the NX1. The NX1 certainly is an outstanding camera, but did they wait too long to create it?

They were the first company to offer an APS-C MILC system (yes, even before Sony NEX), then spent the next five years grinding out insipid models. Cameras that couldn't compete with the top tier and were quickly forgotten.

They waited so long, that most of their potential customers had already adopted M4/3, Fuj X, or Sony E/FE. And finally they created a real gem, but it was too late.

Samsung was busy being "pretty good" like Hyundai, while Sony, Fuji, Panasonic and Olympus were busy being superb like Honda, Nissan and Toyota.

There is a lesson to be learned here.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2015 at 13:57 UTC as 100th comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

turvyT: Good for you, Carey. The first really different article I have seen in dpreview, from the beginning of times. Something outside the box in dpr! Keep that attitude and enjoy. And tell us more about it.

While the series is titled "Gear of the Year" I believe it is really about the personal favorites for DPR staff members, and not some "Best Cameras of the Year" list.

At least I hope that was the intent. Because the former is a lot more interesting than the later.

Link | Posted on Dec 11, 2015 at 13:48 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Despite all the mystery there are three things we can safely predict:

1. It will be an outstanding camera. Pentax just doesn't make junk.
2. It will be perfect for Pentax K mount users who want full frame.
3. It will be very competitively priced.

However, one thing it will not do is take market share away from Canon, Nikon or Sony full frame cameras. Nikon and Canon are too firmly entrenched in the full frame market, and Sony is virtually unique having a downsized MILC product.

senn.... you are absolutely right about that.

There really is no point in Pentax creating a full frame DSLR unless they can also incorporate an AF system that is competitive with Canon and Nikon's. My assumption was that they would do this.

If they don't, they won't be able to sell very many of them.

Link | Posted on Dec 2, 2015 at 18:04 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Despite all the mystery there are three things we can safely predict:

1. It will be an outstanding camera. Pentax just doesn't make junk.
2. It will be perfect for Pentax K mount users who want full frame.
3. It will be very competitively priced.

However, one thing it will not do is take market share away from Canon, Nikon or Sony full frame cameras. Nikon and Canon are too firmly entrenched in the full frame market, and Sony is virtually unique having a downsized MILC product.

@ Chris.... I'm not a Pentax user either, but that doesn't prevent me from admiring the quality of their products. They also tend to offer a lot of value for the money, especially for camera bodies.

@ Donnie..... You might be right, but I think those Olympus and Panasonic users have already made a decision for smaller and lighter vs. bigger but better. They have also demonstrated they prefer MILC cameras to DSLRS, so if they felt the urge for FF, they would most likely go to Sony FE.

As far as Sony SLT users go, isn't there a fullframe SLT A99, and perhaps an upgrade coming soon?

Switching systems is a pretty expensive task, especially once you go beyond entry level and kit lenses. I'm sure some folks do it, but most would rather not if they like the lenses they already own.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2015 at 13:35 UTC

Despite all the mystery there are three things we can safely predict:

1. It will be an outstanding camera. Pentax just doesn't make junk.
2. It will be perfect for Pentax K mount users who want full frame.
3. It will be very competitively priced.

However, one thing it will not do is take market share away from Canon, Nikon or Sony full frame cameras. Nikon and Canon are too firmly entrenched in the full frame market, and Sony is virtually unique having a downsized MILC product.

Link | Posted on Dec 1, 2015 at 11:19 UTC as 41st comment | 13 replies
In reply to:

Bob Janes: This is a great shame - in order to have effective competition in the camera market we need all the players we can get: the Uk decision sounds more extensive than the German one (ie not just the NX1 but everything).

Mike.... rrcad might be right.

Of those ten MILC camera makers, five of them tried very hard to market DSLRs (Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, Leica and Samsung), but failed at it. They couldn't compete with Canon and Nikon, so they did something very different instead.

Samsung's problem was compounded by the fact that they did nothing that someone else wasn't also doing. If you wanted an APSC MILC, you had five different brands to pick from. Actually six, if you count the Pentax K-01. There was nothing unique enough about the Samsung version.

On the other hand, if you want a full frame MILC camera, Sony is your only choice. If you want a MILC camera with a 1" sensor, then Nikon 1 is your only choice (yes, I do know about the Samsung Mini, but there are very few lenses for that mini system.) If you want a MILC camera with a 4/3 sensor, then it is Olympus or Panasonic. If you want a MILC camera with a really small sensor, then Pentax Q is your only option.

Plus, marketing was poor too.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 18:44 UTC
In reply to:

Bob Janes: This is a great shame - in order to have effective competition in the camera market we need all the players we can get: the Uk decision sounds more extensive than the German one (ie not just the NX1 but everything).

Mike, the sad thing is that Samsung had some really nice products. And if they truly are moving out of the digital camera business, they will be missed by their customers and by camera enthusiasts in general.

But sometimes it takes more than good products to be successful. You have to be more than good. You have to fill a need, or solve a problem.

This might be why Sony keeps reinventing itself. They set themselves apart with full frame MILC cameras that might be hard to top.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 11:55 UTC
In reply to:

Bob Janes: This is a great shame - in order to have effective competition in the camera market we need all the players we can get: the Uk decision sounds more extensive than the German one (ie not just the NX1 but everything).

Competition is necessary for a free market, but sometimes you can have too many players. In this players case there are too many players in a very small market.

The net result of "too much competition" is that most are losing money, and many will end up like Samsung withdrawing from markets. This isn't a good thing for customers.

The entire MILC market is half the size of the DSLR market, and we have ten companies competing there:

Canon
Fuji
Kodak
Leica
Nikon
Olympus
Panasonic
Pentax
Samsung
Sony

The much larger DSLR market only has three players.

Sooner or later, something has to give. There has to be a market shakeout coming, and we will probably end up with four or five left standing.

Link | Posted on Nov 27, 2015 at 11:35 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: While they are very popular on this particular website, MILC cameras are really a very small part of an overall declining camera market. And there were ten different manufacturers in this small market, with five of them making MILC cameras with APSC sensors (Canon, Fuji, Leica, Sony, and Samsung.)

Something had to give. The market just isn't large enough to sustain so many competitors who make very similar products.

The much larger DSLR market has only two competitors now (three if you count the yet to arrive Pentax FF DSLR) so it is hard to imagine how the market could sustain five companies selling APSC based MILC cameras with 3X zoom kit lenses.

And so.... the market shakeout begins....

Scott... if that were true, wouldn't it make MORE SENSE for Samsung to say so?

example: "We are curtailing sales in Europe because we cannot keep up with the huge demand for our products in Asia."

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 14:59 UTC
In reply to:

Nukunukoo: I wonder if Samsung instead opted to MFT to begin with?

OK.... believe it or not, Samung NX was the FIRST of those five APSC based MILC camera makers, beating Sony NEX to market by four months in 2010. Fuji X, Leica T, and Canon EOS M came later. There even was a Pentax based APSC system (K-01) briefly.

And they might also be the first to go.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 14:09 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: While they are very popular on this particular website, MILC cameras are really a very small part of an overall declining camera market. And there were ten different manufacturers in this small market, with five of them making MILC cameras with APSC sensors (Canon, Fuji, Leica, Sony, and Samsung.)

Something had to give. The market just isn't large enough to sustain so many competitors who make very similar products.

The much larger DSLR market has only two competitors now (three if you count the yet to arrive Pentax FF DSLR) so it is hard to imagine how the market could sustain five companies selling APSC based MILC cameras with 3X zoom kit lenses.

And so.... the market shakeout begins....

Yes, but they still ship TWICE as many DSLRs as MILC cameras.

Can the MILC market sustain five companies selling APSC based systems? M4/3, Sony FE and Nikon 1 are unique due to their sensor size, but the five APSC players are pretty much offering very similar products.

In the end, the market will decide.

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 14:02 UTC

WOW.... only $5,200!

When can I preorder one?

:)

Link | Posted on Nov 20, 2015 at 11:40 UTC as 38th comment
Total: 1448, showing: 401 – 420
« First‹ Previous1920212223Next ›Last »