Michael Doleman

Lives in United States United States
Has a website at http://mdoleman.blogspot.com
Joined on May 9, 2010


Total: 27, showing: 21 – 27
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

I'm not "unhappy" with Flickr--for the pittance that I pay for a Pro account, it does everything that I think it could be expected to do. The interface & usability experience could stand a bit of sprucing-up, is all, and perhaps a few more interesting "social" features. The way groups/tags are managed could use some re-thinking, too.
On the other hand, though, if Flickr wanted to charge more for various "premium" services, there are some interesting things they could do. The biggest example I could think of would be to offer a true cloud-based storage/backup service for entire archives, and make that service seamlessly integrate with Lightroom, Aperture, iPhoto, etc. Perhaps even go all the way and offer a bona-fide asset management system accessed directly through the site. That would be cool.

Link | Posted on Jul 20, 2012 at 15:49 UTC as 36th comment
On article Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images (640 comments in total)
In reply to:

fberns: If this camera size, sensor andlens is possible, why the heck didn't anyone build a camera like that before???
And why are all the peers much larger?

I'm at the same time happy about the seemingly great package in a small size and wonder what the camera engineers have been working at if not a camera like that?
Dpreview got it exactly right: Size versus image quality and the capability for a shallow depth of field is the main problem that is to solve for a compact enthusiast camera!

My two cents worth would be that it simply took a while for the details of the technology to converge with the will, on the part of a major manufacturer, to go ahead and do it. And finally, too, there seems to be a market for this type of camera. Up until very recently, consumers of pocketable cameras couldn't have cared less about sensor size, nor about lens quality--it was always about pixel count and zoom length. Now there's a market among knowledgeable shooters for a larger sensor camera that can shoot wide, at larger aperture, and that can fit reasonably into a pocket. This is simply the first "true" example of a camera in that class.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2012 at 14:36 UTC
In reply to:

toomanycanons: Did all the major camera makers get together and agree to be done with viewfinders? Is their consensus that us buyers don't want them (WRONG) or what?

I love my DSLRs, don't find them too bulky, love their IQ and versatility. A camera such as this Sony comes along, looks great...but alas, no viewfinder so I immediately cross it off my list of potential next buys. Pentax just did that as well. What gives?

Viewfinders on cameras of this size & class were always (still are) crap, anyway. I think it's great if you don't find the size/heft of a DSLR to be any sort of hindrance. For much of the shooting I do, it definitely is so. Thus, a camera like this fits the bill perfectly for those circumstances. The lack of a VF can be limiting at times, but that's the (minimum) penalty you have to pay for the convenience of a pocketable camera. It works-out fine, IMO. I can compose quite well with modern displays, and now this camera--with a large(ish) sensor and an f1.8 lens? Are you kidding? I'm buying that.

Link | Posted on Jun 7, 2012 at 00:27 UTC
On article Just Posted: Sony DSC-RX100 preview with sample images (640 comments in total)

This will undoubtedly replace my Oly XZ-1.

Link | Posted on Jun 6, 2012 at 23:27 UTC as 72nd comment | 4 replies

This may just bring me back to m4/3, depending on final street price. That's a pretty nice little practical shooter. I guess the rumors of Olympus' demise have been greatly exaggerated...

In a way I'd have rather seen them build an actual DSLR, especially given the styling--I mean, why mimic the OM of yore if it is, conceptually, not even close to the same camera? But, then again, the EVF sounds promising, it's a great-looking camera, it's amazingly compact, and I can certainly understand why Olympus wouldn't want to go up against the latest and greatest DSLRs from Canon and Nikon--it's wise of them to bail out of that market, entirely.

Link | Posted on Feb 8, 2012 at 18:30 UTC as 21st comment

WOW! SIXTEEN megapixels?!? TWENTY-times zoom?!? Pocket-sized?!? Only $250?!? Take my money! Quick!


Link | Posted on Jan 27, 2012 at 00:38 UTC as 15th comment

As much as I'd love to be enthusiastic about another entrant to the "high-end compact/mirrorless" market, I fear that this camera is all but dead on arrival. I cannot for the life of me figure-out where on Earth this camera fits-in. I just don't see why anyone would choose it over any of it's potential competitors. The issue is the sensor. If a truly compact camera were my goal, why would I choose this camera over a Canon S95 or Olympus XZ-1? Or, if I want a small "system" camera, why would I choose this over a 4/3 or APS-C sized camera such as the Olympus EPL series or Samsung NX? It just doesn't add-up. I think it is a huge gamble to build an entirely new lens system around a small-sensor camera like this. I honestly hope I'm wrong, and that this camera finds a niche. But on another note entirely, they haven't helped matters much by creating a... um... let's call it "awkward looking" camera body...

Link | Posted on Jun 27, 2011 at 21:04 UTC as 33rd comment | 2 replies
Total: 27, showing: 21 – 27
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »