Impulses

Lives in Puerto Rico Puerto Rico
Works as a student
Joined on Apr 7, 2013

Comments

Total: 1447, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

aliasfox: I just got the GM5 for the fiancee, and it's a great camera from my perspective. Too bad it won't seem to have a proper upgrade, as this seems more like a GF7/8 with a different body shell and updated AF system.

I can see how something like this might be appreciated by less involved folks - the fiancee rarely uses the viewfinder, and she might find the flip screen handy. But the thumb dial is handier than the rotating dial on the 4-way controller, and the metal build is definitely nice. Maybe I'll show her the GX850 - if she takes a shine to it, maybe I'll get to keep the GM5...

My curiosity comes from the body shape, actually. Aside from DFD (which probably doesn't take up additional space/heat), the only other major difference between this and the GF7/GF8 is 4k. Do we know if the extra body volume in the GX850 (vs the GF7/8) is specifically to handle a 4k capable heatsink?

I imagine USB charging in-camera adds some bulk too, and possibly thermal requirements, damn handy tho... Even if you prefer a discrete charger, now your can charge two batteries at a time without bringing a second charger... Probably what I'd do, I already travel only with a slimmer USB charger for my GM1 batteries (and the OEM + a similar slim USB charger for my OM-D).

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 16:14 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fun 4 all: If only it had some type of IBIS. Then it would be just what I want.

The PM2 IBIS pales in comparison to current implementations tho...

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 16:07 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

Osa25: "....And despite looking pretty similar to the GM5, the GX850 has no electronic viewfinder, bringing it more in-line with the GF7/GF8 and GM1. It effectively replaces both the GF8 and the GM5...."

Come on - consumer perspective should drive the article. Not marketing dept dreams.

The camera has no EVF and gone back to the horribly inconvenient GM1 control wheel. So it cannot be a GM5 replacement.

It could be fair to call this product a slightly downmarket, bigger GM1, now updated for 2017 - but that's about it.

GM5 replacement it sure aint. That camera has a small but dedicated cult following, of which it is hard to see any of the faithful letting go of their GM5 for this device.

GM1 had a cult following too mind you, and the forums seemed pretty evenly split on them some months ago, would be interesting to see which sold better in the end (tho the GM1 had a lead time advantage and it dropped <$400 far quicker, half the reason I bought it).

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 16:06 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

rgs_45: I hope there will there be an "ALL black" (lens and body) model slated for the U.S. market? Silver is good but not a fan :)

I think Pany is changing (simplifying) the designation for their "range finder" models.

GX x (GX8 - high end)
GX xx (GX85 - mid)
GX xxx (GX850 - low end) such as the one featured here.

The GX xxx can replace both the GM and GF series. No need to have two small rangefinder model when this can replace both. Some are already "screaming" VF, maybe the next model will get one.

I hope they do the same with the G Series DLSR type

G x - high end
G xx - mid
G xxx - low end (if applicable)

They can leave the GH designation as their top of the line system.

I think this naming convention will simplify Panasonic camera models. My 2 cents :)

Plus they're not letting go of the GH, so you end up with a weird holdout... GX# + GX## + GX### and G# + G## + GH# Yeah, not confusing at all.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 16:03 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

rgs_45: I hope there will there be an "ALL black" (lens and body) model slated for the U.S. market? Silver is good but not a fan :)

I think Pany is changing (simplifying) the designation for their "range finder" models.

GX x (GX8 - high end)
GX xx (GX85 - mid)
GX xxx (GX850 - low end) such as the one featured here.

The GX xxx can replace both the GM and GF series. No need to have two small rangefinder model when this can replace both. Some are already "screaming" VF, maybe the next model will get one.

I hope they do the same with the G Series DLSR type

G x - high end
G xx - mid
G xxx - low end (if applicable)

They can leave the GH designation as their top of the line system.

I think this naming convention will simplify Panasonic camera models. My 2 cents :)

I don't mind it one way or the other, but I don't see how this is simpler... You have 5-6 very similar names with that scheme, the old system had 5-6 models all the same (GF, GM, G, GX, GH), and one could argue they were more clearly differentiated rather than crammed into only two lines a la Olympus (PEN vs OM-D).

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 16:01 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: "in the US in early February for a body-only price of $549" -DPR

In my experience, taking photos without a lens produces poor results.

The 12-32 is probably the easiest system kit lens to flip, and one of the more desirable ones, flip it while eBay is still not saturated with them!

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 15:57 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

aliasfox: I just got the GM5 for the fiancee, and it's a great camera from my perspective. Too bad it won't seem to have a proper upgrade, as this seems more like a GF7/8 with a different body shell and updated AF system.

I can see how something like this might be appreciated by less involved folks - the fiancee rarely uses the viewfinder, and she might find the flip screen handy. But the thumb dial is handier than the rotating dial on the 4-way controller, and the metal build is definitely nice. Maybe I'll show her the GX850 - if she takes a shine to it, maybe I'll get to keep the GM5...

My curiosity comes from the body shape, actually. Aside from DFD (which probably doesn't take up additional space/heat), the only other major difference between this and the GF7/GF8 is 4k. Do we know if the extra body volume in the GX850 (vs the GF7/8) is specifically to handle a 4k capable heatsink?

The flip screen adds some to the thickness too, tho they also gained some space going to mSD, I'm guessing if they did that they aren't just wasting it or recycling GF7 parts... About as wild a guess as anyone's tho. Having the flash centered also makes it taller and probably precludes a quick iteration w/EVF a la GM1->GM5. My guess is the former sold better than the latter but that may just be bias on my part.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 15:53 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

Och Elo: Had the GM1, then the GF7 previously. I like Panasonic's products, but I think overall a 1-inch sensor compact with a fast lens is the better choice. I have the LX10 which so far is a lovely camera, I enjoy using it more than I enjoyed the GM1 or GF7.

This camera does have the ability to change lenses, but if you are going to carry around an extra lens or two, you are probably looking at a bag (thankfully small, since it is M43!). In that case I think the GX85 offers a bit more for the money (I have one, and carry around 3 small lenses - 12-32, 35-100 f/4-5.6, 20mm 1.7 - in a very small bag).

The late model GF/GM/GX### are still excellent for situations where you wanna be really discrete yet have a choice of lenses (concerts, parties, etc) and/or for those of us who like to carry multiple bodies. I can cram an E-M5 II + GM1 + 4 to 5 smaller lenses (1 being pancake) into a bag so small it wouldn't even fit a single DSLR + tele. If I swapped out the GM1 for something as large as a GX80 or larger it wouldn't really work anymore, some people actually carry multiple GMs. GX850 still seems just small enough, I'm glad it's still an option.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 15:48 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)
In reply to:

Impulses: DFD, 4K, and the flip screen alone are big incentives to move up from my GM1... Might wait until it's a bit cheaper, as Panasonic bodies are prone to in short order, but I'm definitely glad Panasonic hasn't given up on smaller bodies AND isn't trying to price them up into the one grand range right off the bat. I'm sure many will bemoan the lack of an EVF, but personally I use my GM1 just as much as my E-M5 II.

It's pretty low indeed, I wouldn't mind buying it grey market or just waiting for the inevitable GX950 tho. It's definitely priced fairly tho, wasn't trying to argue otherwise... It's just not an urgent upgrade to me, tho I do miss having a tilt screen and neither of my current bodies is great at C-AF.

Link | Posted on Jan 6, 2017 at 15:40 UTC
On article A comfortable fit: Panasonic Lumix GX850 overview (117 comments in total)

DFD, 4K, and the flip screen alone are big incentives to move up from my GM1... Might wait until it's a bit cheaper, as Panasonic bodies are prone to in short order, but I'm definitely glad Panasonic hasn't given up on smaller bodies AND isn't trying to price them up into the one grand range right off the bat. I'm sure many will bemoan the lack of an EVF, but personally I use my GM1 just as much as my E-M5 II.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 02:13 UTC as 20th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

AstroStan: "color distracts you from the image"

And goosed-up color, even more so. I can't help but notice that nearly every photo in the recent awards is hyper-saturated. But I suppose that's what grabs the competition for eyeballs, even if it's only a 1-3 second glance. This aesthetic runs rampant in pretty pic astro-imaging.

TVs in stores are hardly representative of anything, other than the fact that marketing people know that louder/brighter/bolder tends to grab more eyeballs (in the short term), in all kinds of ways. It's the same way people will favor a slightly louder speaker in most comparisons if they aren't precisely matched... Seriously tho, in store TVs are usually tuned to be way over saturated and way bright on purpose, and the store's overhead lighting sure doesn't help.

Link | Posted on Jan 1, 2017 at 08:32 UTC
In reply to:

Gesture: This is an article for PCNet or WikiHow. DPReview is/should be well above this level.

That kinda attitude is part of what has made dedicated cameras a niche instead on a thriving market, at a time when the general interest in photography is at an all time high. Don't be a snob, nobody forced you to click thru and read it.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 06:09 UTC
In reply to:

jonathanj: Personally I'd add an LCD screen protector - camera LCDs seem far more prone to pick up scratches than phones or tablets. Generally I take the camera down to a local phone shop and ask them to cut a clear phone protector to fit - not all of the will make the effort, but those that do can generally do it faster and neater than I can.

Hmm, I could see how a camera would be more prone to scratches than a phone if you tend to hang it on your body and don't pay attention to what it might rub against... Zippers and jean rivets could easily do a number on the screen. Hasn't really been an issue for me at all tho. Likewise, I had a screen protector on my first smartphone, five phones ago... Didn't care for it, been fine without it since.

The only time I'd absolutely say it's an essential is if you spend a lot of time are the beach or other dirty environments with fine particulate, that'll scratch a screen easier than any bigger object like keys, zippers, etc.

Link | Posted on Dec 28, 2016 at 06:06 UTC
On article Google Pixel users reporting camera app issue (39 comments in total)
In reply to:

DualSystemGuy: No issues with mine after about 3,000 photos and dozens of videos at all resolutions and frame rates.

Hopefully we aren't going to see a news article now every time an unknown amount of people have a problem with a smartphone app! :)

No issues with mine but I still appreciate the article and the heads up, good to know what to look for in case of weird behavior.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 08:10 UTC
On article Google Pixel users reporting camera app issue (39 comments in total)
In reply to:

Giklab: Gotta say, I'm amazed what issues appear sometimes. Poor phone signal and the camera borks itself.

It's possible it's a heat issue, low signal means the phone is more aggressive in searching for a better tower which in turn burns more battery power and generates more heat... Never really understood why most phones behave like that for extended periods in low signal areas, you'd think there'd be some logic that after 15 min says "hey signal is still crap and I'm not moving, best to stop searching so aggressively".

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 08:09 UTC
On article Google Pixel users reporting camera app issue (39 comments in total)
In reply to:

bubblyboo: Google never really did well with their hardware launches. Had Nexus 4 and 5 on release, both plagued with various issues (tablets were even worse from what I heard). Usually a combo of both hardware and software too. You'd think Google would be better at testing with how much money and resources they have.

My Nexus 5 was pretty painless, as was my Nexus 7 2013... Sure there were some Android OS bugs are launch but nothing critical that impacted major functionality, I think the 5X was worse off at launch than older Nexus devices and it took months for updates to smooth out random issues. My Pixel has been great out of the box, though not flawless... I'm pretty sure I'll always figure out a way to make Chrome crash somehow tho.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 08:06 UTC
On article Google Pixel users reporting camera app issue (39 comments in total)
In reply to:

sh10453: Aren't Google phone made by others (Motorola, LG, and Huawie)???

There's a subtle difference between the Pixel and past Nexus lines tho, those previous phones were very clearly advertised and branded (literally, on the back) as made in partnership with XYZ OEM... With the Pixels, Google has now taken a more hands on approach and claimed more ownership over things like design and support. There's no mention of HTC anywhere whatsoever, they end up playing an ODM role very much akin to Foxxcon's contract work for Apple.

How is any of this relevant to the news article? Not very, except that the buck stops with Google and it's on them to fix any issues, can't pass the blame around.

Link | Posted on Dec 3, 2016 at 08:02 UTC
In reply to:

write2alan: Apple gets much of the publicity free of charge by being an *ss. No headphone jack and no SD slot. Very clever! I won't bite again.

Yeah I think both moves were premature tho not that big a deal in the grand scheme...

I think taking away the headphone jack on phones was way more pointless and potentially more of an inconvenience overall... Putting a dongle in a laptop bag's putting one in your pocket basically. Tho it probably made weather sealing the phones a little easier, and the mainstream user is going more and more towards Bluetooth anyway.

There's a lot of reasons why they'll get away with either, and they know it, but their phone market share is way bigger than their laptop marketshare so that move has more ramifications (not to mention they're still clinging to a proprietary port there where USB Type C is an open standard).

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2016 at 20:00 UTC
In reply to:

Impulses: A couple of the cables on sale might actually be decent deals for Google Pixel owners, considering what a mess the Type C aftermarket space currently is (lots of out of spec cables and chargers) and the prices of stuff verified to be spec compliant and safe. Might have to go over the list myself...

I bought two USB 3.1/Thunderbolt Type-C to C 3ft cables right after I ordered my Pixel... The better built one of the two ran me over $20 (a Kanex, really nice), and the cheapest decent one I could find was still like $13 (the shielding isn't as nice and the plugs are folded/stamped rather than extruded from one piece, pretty solid otherwise).

The third party market is such a mess that Google's $35 charger + 6ft USB 2.0 cable (slower for data but still great for charging) is actually a good deal... If we were talking micro USB & 2.0 that'd be highway robbery, granted full speed Type C cables *are* considerably more complex internally (way more conductors, e-marker chip, etc).

Their newer 2m charging cable (USB 2.0) does end up being a decent deal at $20, particularly if you have higher wattage devices like a MBP (duh)... Not so much for a Pixel phone owner because for $15 more you can get a good charger too in Google's bundle, but the cable in Google's bundle only goes up to 60W (Apple's linked below does 100W - mostly relevant to laptops).

http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MLL82AM/A/usb-c-charge-cable-2-m

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2016 at 19:56 UTC
In reply to:

Impulses: A couple of the cables on sale might actually be decent deals for Google Pixel owners, considering what a mess the Type C aftermarket space currently is (lots of out of spec cables and chargers) and the prices of stuff verified to be spec compliant and safe. Might have to go over the list myself...

I bought two USB 3.1/Thunderbolt Type-C to C 3ft cables right after I ordered my Pixel... The better built one of the two ran me over $20 (a Kanex, really nice), and the cheapest decent one I could find was still like $13 (the shielding isn't as nice and the plugs are folded/stamped rather than extruded from one piece, pretty solid otherwise).

The third party market is such a mess that Google's $35 charger + 6ft USB 2.0 cable (slower for data but still great for charging) is actually a good deal... If we were talking micro USB & 2.0 that'd be highway robbery, granted full speed Type C cables *are* considerably more complex internally (way more conductors, e-marker chip, etc).

Of note, Apple also seems to be using some retail partners to flush out inventory of some of their older and not spec compliant cables... Said cables could very well cause problems with the top end MBP 2016 models and they're not even selling it themselves anymore, but only issued a voluntary recall and they're allowing remaining inventory to sell elsewhere... Pretty poor form IMO.

https://plus.google.com/102612254593917101378/posts/dcLuKzGeeuH

Link | Posted on Nov 6, 2016 at 19:29 UTC
Total: 1447, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »