T3

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 1, 2003

Comments

Total: 3800, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (305 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Again we hear the lamentations and groaning in the land.
I wanted 60p 4K!
I wanted at least a constant f2 zoom!
I want pocketability!
I want it for $300!!!!.
"let me show you the equivalence shame".

@Photomonkey
How many people are really complaining that it doesn't fit in the pocket? What percentage of people? How many people are really comparing it to an NEX 3? What percentage of people? You're really making some ridiculous generalizations.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 23:11 UTC
In reply to:

ottonis: This is a bad joke, isn't it? A Sony A6000 + kit lens costs around 600 US-Dollars and is just as small or even smaller / more compact than this G1Xmiii camera, while performig as well or better (IQ, AF. fps, video etc)
So, Canon charges more than twice the money for the same (or lesser) value? How is this not a joke?

@Najinsky - "The irony is that A6000 was introduced as the fast AF on the market, but what use fast AF if it's slow to set the AF point?"

I have my A6000 set to Face AF and center-point AF. When there is no face in the scene, the camera defaults to center AF. When a face appears in the scene, it switches to Face AF. Very fast, flexible and effective. This is as fast or faster than touch AF. Touch AF is great, but I've found that the combination of Face AF and center AF to be highly effective. And considering its low price, it's a reasonable compromise. The A6000 is the best bang for your buck in the marketplace right now and has been for quite some time. It's a great camera and packs a lot of performance in a very compact package, for a great price. I've traveled with it throughout the world in all kinds of nasty conditions, and it has survived just fine. Is the G1X III worth several hundred dollars more, and you lose the ability to change lenses? No, I don't think so.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 22:53 UTC
In reply to:

Chris59: Why would anyone buy a Canon G1X Mark III over an SL2? Same sensor, inferior specifications and twice the price...

DLSRs are big. Even the SL2 is a big camera compared to the G1XIII, or even an APS-C mirrorless camera.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#723,715.377,535.360,ha,t

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 22:42 UTC
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: :
It used to be that we bought finished products based on what they did. Now we buy unfinished products based on what they might do in the future. The only immediacy that hasn't changed with the times, is the fact that just as before, we still need to pay them upfront.

We feed the people that make the machines that control us, live in the hopes of one day they delivering as promised, and perpetually stay prisoners of the follow-up purchase that will repeat the cycle.

And you wanna talk about "pictures"? Do you even know what's wrong with THIS picture? Unfortunately, everything!

First of all, no one is making you buy the product right now. People can choose to buy the product as it is right now. Others can wait until later. That's freedom of choice. Frankly, I like that I can buy a good product that has the capability to get even better with further updates.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 20:15 UTC
In reply to:

Peiasdf: Companies should really consider shipping fully developed products instead of having users pay to be beta tester

We're not talking about toothbrushes or shovels here. Products as advanced and complex as today's smartphones are going through a constant state of evolution and maturation. It's like saying, "Don't leave the house until you are a fully mature adult, mentally and physically!" That's not realistic. I think it's great that many of today's products have the opportunity to improve, get better, and gain capabilities even after they've entered the real world...just like people do.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 20:08 UTC
On article Meet the Canon PowerShot G1 X III (305 comments in total)
In reply to:

Photomonkey: Again we hear the lamentations and groaning in the land.
I wanted 60p 4K!
I wanted at least a constant f2 zoom!
I want pocketability!
I want it for $300!!!!.
"let me show you the equivalence shame".

Who here has said that they want a pocketable 4K constant f/2 zoom for $300? I think most critiques have been pretty reasonable.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 17:48 UTC
In reply to:

jwasturias: Makes you wonder that after so many years of digital photography evolution, we can still not make A truly pocketable full frame compact like the contax tvs iii ,35mm film compact with tiny zoom?
Such as this. https://goo.gl/images/Qr17XY

Lens may be slow, but it is small and full frame cover, and truly pocketable.
I almost bought one in the good old days.

I guess we have to wait for variable curved sensors?

@Gmon750- the electronics required for a device to be "a still-camera, video camera, audio-recording, and GPS-mapper" are not that large. You can cram all of those things into an ultra-thin smartphone that is mostly battery, after all. Stills and video are performed by the same components. Audio recording is a trivial matter. And a GPS chip is a tiny little thing.

http://zdnet4.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/2014/10/04/ade723c3-4b73-11e4-b6a0-d4ae52e95e57/18ce61281145ae37ffd8847588750367/iphonegps02bsm.jpg

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 00:07 UTC
In reply to:

whakapu: I don't understand this. I can buy an M5 with 15-45 for 63% of the price of this. With the US$483 thus saved I could buy a tube of metal glue to convert it into a fixed lens camera and a plastic bag to provide weather sealing.

@xi5 - Canon takes a long time to reduce their prices. For example, Canon introduced the EOS M5 in September 2016 at a release price of $1099 with the 15-45mm kit lens. Today, a year later, its street price is $1045.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01LXTX4HC/ref=twister_B01LXUDFV1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

That's less than 5% price reduction.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 23:36 UTC

Does this camera have a silent electronic shutter? I don't see anything about that.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 21:24 UTC as 55th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

CaPi: Did you check out the illustration?
What do seemingly random elements marked as "high precision parts" imply?
"We just winged it for the rest?"
The mysteries of product marketing

Nice one on the OLED VF btw. I like to think of what that might do when switching between screens in bright daylight

Yeah, I noticed the "high precision parts" non-sense too. That basically means, "these pieces fit together really well", LOL.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 21:14 UTC
In reply to:

nicoboston: Whatever the specifications, I will never give $1300 for a compact camera.
The tiny SL2 body costs $500 and is incredibly more versatile.
This new G1X is certainly a decent camera, but why spending $1300 for a (not so) compact camera with fixed and slow 3x lens?

An SL2 is not that small. Try an A6000 instead. An A6000 with 16-50 pancake zoom is smaller than an SL2 body alone.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#723,715.640,535.360,ha,t

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 17:51 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

T3: Wow, this has to be one of the ugliest cameras Canon has ever put out. Not that looks are the end all and be all of cameras, but they don't need to be fugly.

@Paul Boddie - Yeah, you're right, those smartphones will NEVER catch on. They are doomed.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 14:15 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

T3: Wow, this has to be one of the ugliest cameras Canon has ever put out. Not that looks are the end all and be all of cameras, but they don't need to be fugly.

@Gmon750 - No, I never said that I care more about camera looks than the photo it takes. And it doesn't have to be an "either-or" equation. I'm just saying that these days, people want good performance and good-looking design. No one says, "You have to pick one or the other; you can't have both!" The reality is that these days people do consider aesthetic appeal when choosing products, in addition to overall performance. Like I said, we're in the Apple generation. People want their products to look good and perform well. It's not "either-or." And I think it's perfectly fine to say, "It probably performs well, but it's a rather ugly camera." That doesn't mean that I care MORE about how a camera looks than how it takes pictures. Look at all the aesthetic attention that is put into smartphone designs. Good, appealing designs sell. Performance matters, but so does aesthetic appeal. Would the iPhone be as successful if it looked as unappealing as every smartphone that existed before it?

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 06:17 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)
In reply to:

T3: Wow, this has to be one of the ugliest cameras Canon has ever put out. Not that looks are the end all and be all of cameras, but they don't need to be fugly.

@tolleknolle - People have a lot of options these days. And these days, aesthetic design does matter to a lot of people. Blame it on Apple and Steve Jobs, which has influenced an entire generation to expect better, more aesthetically pleasing designs. This isn't the 1970's or 1980's. This is the Apple generation. Design matters. It matters when people pick out cars, refrigerators, laptops, smartphones, etc. Cameras are not as immune to aesthetic considerations as they once might have been in generations past, especially at the consumer level. Sure, a camera doesn't need to be gorgeous. But you don't want a camera to be downright ugly either.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:25 UTC
In reply to:

kobakokh: I think its will be very popular camera, small sensor cameras are canceled step by step from the market and now the new digital cameras' era is began... with M100 and G1X3 by Canon... Manufacturers of the world - switch to aps-c sensors, there is no was to back, 2018 year is coming soon... But ptice!!! LIttle overpriced... Because od entry level great DSLRs cost much less.

I don't thing compact camera buyers care as much about sensor size as you might think. Sure, they don't want it to be so small that it comromises quality. But I don't think APS-C is going to be as big of a draw as you might think. 1" and m4/3 format these days offers plenty of performance.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:20 UTC
On article What you need to know: Canon G1 X Mark III (417 comments in total)

Wow, this has to be one of the ugliest cameras Canon has ever put out. Not that looks are the end all and be all of cameras, but they don't need to be fugly.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 05:13 UTC as 136th comment | 11 replies
In reply to:

Chriscotech: I hope Sigma are watching.

Yeah I can't wait for Sigma to release their own FE lenses.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 18:37 UTC
On article iPhone 8 Plus sample gallery (195 comments in total)
In reply to:

tm8: Pretty mediocre on a technical level...
Dynamic range is poor, colors look desaturated, and the white balance seems to have been fooled in many instances.
The fake bokeh on the portraits actually looks ok, but the edge feathering it does for the light simulation is pretty bad, Either make it more gradual, or make the edges sharp apple...

It's funny how much of what you said are the same things that are said in the comments section of pretty much every camera review. LOL.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 18:35 UTC
In reply to:

darrinlingle: that's great but at that price, it'd rather buy name brand for a little more. even if it was as sharp, didn't lose any features by using a third party lens, there's always quality. will it last without falling apart or breaking years later?

Darrin Lingle, Colorado

No, these lenses won't be "falling apart or breaking years later." Don't be fooled just because it's made by a Chinese company. Everything is made in China these days. They know how to make things well. Apple products are made in China, after all. People still have this outdated notion that things made in China will "fall apart" after a few years. The reality is that China is now the world's manufacturing hub because they have so much expertise and capability.

As for price, you can buy two of these for the price of "name brand." A Canon 35/1.4L II costs $1700. A Sony 35/1.4 cost $1700. Even if the Samyang did "fall apart" after several years, just buy a new one!

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2017 at 14:35 UTC
In reply to:

Bobthearch: I'd love to have a bag that looks like that. But if the main compartment doesn't seal closed and the pockets are just open pouches, the bag is utterly useless.

How often do you turn your camera bag upside down with the flap open? Obviously, there are pros and cons to any design choice. Some designs favor accessibility. Other designs favor closeability at the expense of accessibility. Neither design choice makes a bag "utterly useless." It just depends on what your preferences are. There are pros and cons to everything.

Link | Posted on Oct 12, 2017 at 20:47 UTC
Total: 3800, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »