Lives in United States Fuquay Varina, NC, United States
Works as a Recruiter
Joined on Aug 17, 2011


Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8
In reply to:

yabokkie: this looks the same as BSI but with possibly lower cost.

it underscores Pana's move to m4/3", that Oly's original 4/3" looks just stupid. probably the worst design in camera history except one part, the f-number cheating which is part of Pana's current strategy.

You clearly show your ignorance by this statement. There is no perfect sensor size or design methodology in photography. There never has been, and there probably never will be. I use a D800 for work because of the high Megapixel required. I use my GH3 for creative work, size, features and ease of use. Do I wish my GH3 had sensor specifications (but with the same 4/3 size) as the D800? Sure! Do I wish the D800 was as easy to use and as flexible as the GH3? Absolutely. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. Technology does change perspective. The GH4 can outperform a D300s from 2009 in all aspects. As technology improves, the difference between larger and smaller sensors decreases, and the advantage of a WYSIWYG digital viewfinder start to outperform an optical viewfinder. Somethings will never change because of physics. Want shorter depth of field with the same f-stop? Go with a larger sensor. Want smaller more capable and manageable lenses? Go with a smaller sensor.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2014 at 14:24 UTC

I always get a kick out all these comments. Yes the lens is a little pricey, but in order to get the 2.8 constant f-stop in a zoom certainly raises the price as it does with any 24mm – 70mm equivalent. I love my 25mm Leica/Lumix 1.4 lens, but I sure would love a zoom with some more speed than the present 3.5-4.0 variety. This is on my wish list for sure.

Yes you do lose some DOF with smaller sensor cameras, but you can’t change physics. You want a lot of DOF the get a full format sensor camera and lug around a large suitcase full of large lenses. I can carry a camera, a 200-600mm (equiv.), a macro, a fast 50mm (equiv.), and a 28-240mm (equiv.) all in a small over the shoulder camera case. My camera and my 300mm are just about the same size as my wife’s Nikon 5100 with its standard 18-55mm lens. That is what M4/3rds is all about!

The real trade off is the lack of color depth with the smaller sensors. Hopefully future technology will fill this gap. (GH3?)

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2012 at 15:23 UTC as 6th comment
On article Panasonic unveils DMC-GX1 Micro Four Thirds camera (74 comments in total)
In reply to:

simon65: It all looks great, but what is the IQ of that new pancake 14-42mm I wonder?

Panasonic are making an enormous contribution to photography with the constant innovation, but if they want the GX1 to treated seriously they need to demonstrate the lens is up to standard. I for one was disappointed that it wasn't a Leica.

In this case it couldn't be a Leica. It uses electronic modification to correct lens distortions. This concept is brand new in the industry and may be the wave of the future. Leica uses pure, but considerably more expensive, multiple element fine optics.(no distortions to correct) I have the 45mm Leica lens and my next one will be 25mm Leica. That being said, I’m looking with great interest at this new lower cost, high quality technology alternative.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2011 at 09:16 UTC
On article Panasonic unveils DMC-GX1 Micro Four Thirds camera (74 comments in total)
In reply to:

whtchocla7e: I'm actually starting to feel sad for the m4/3 guys.
I thought they would eventually get their nex-7 competitor but this is a disappointment..

Agreed. I don't understand the direct comparison between the NEX7 and the M43 cameras. The M43rds sensors are 30% smaller meaning comparable lenses are 30% smaller. My camera with 200mm (400mm equivalent) zoom is about the same size as my wife’s 55mm Nikon (82mm equivalent). Understandably the larger sensor in the Nikon has some dynamic range advantage, but I have better focus and much smaller comparative size. The NEX7 is a small body with huge lenses (compared with M43rds) If I wanted larger sensors with corresponding larger lenses, I would go with a full DSLR.

Link | Posted on Nov 23, 2011 at 09:04 UTC
In reply to:

jaykumarr: panasonic says : "you want flip LCD and RAW? ok.. take this FZ150 and get hell out of here.. no manual focus or manual zoom..no FZ60. Such manual zoom, manual focus FZ60 will screw sales our G series. We prefer G sereis getting screwed by Fuji HS30 "

You really need to try the G3. It really does handle all the weaknesses of the FZ series but obviously with a larger sensor, you don’t get 24X zoom. Fujitsu is a nice camera, but it will never compete with the G3.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2011 at 13:06 UTC
In reply to:

John McCormack: Love the Freudian slip in the PR release:
"A new 12-Megapixel High Sensibility MOS sensor..."

Good job, Panny. What more could want. This baby has got all the bells and whistles and what appears to be quite good image quality.

GPS would be nice, especially since this camera is so good for travel. Panoramic Stitching can be done with the included PhotoFunStudio software. The manual focus ring would be fabulous. Manual focusing on the FZ100 was a bear. My new G3 has wonderful Manual Focus ring. That is truly a weak point that should have been handled with his release. Of course the other weakness is the low resolution viewfinder. Again, my new G3 viewfinder is great.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2011 at 12:54 UTC
In reply to:

coastcontact: After driving the same old cars for 10 years I rented a near new vehicle for a drive from JFK to Monticello. Although the car was not an outstanding model the difference between that rental and my old cars was stark. Within a year I had bought a new car. The difference between the new car and the following year’s model was so negligible that there really was no justification in buying yet another new car.

Thus Panasonic’s 2011 models vary little from last year’s models. In fact new cameras have not experienced any significant improvements over the past few years. It’s not just Panasonic. Tweaked improvements are mostly cosmetic and do little to improve photo quality. Unless DPR or some other organization can resoundingly say that the FZ150 has made some serious leap, there really is no justification for a new camera.

I had the FZ100 and found it to be an incredibly fast, versatile and compact camera worthy of all the praise it received in its many reviews. Its demise however, was the sensor. I just couldn't get the picture clarity that I wanted. The FZ150 picture gallery indicates that the clarity has been improved making it a very worthwhile replacement for the FZ100. It might just be the best “Bridge Camera”

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2011 at 12:43 UTC
In reply to:

Tom K.: The viewfinder is still a low-res POS. Stupid.

Agreed, I had the FZ100 and admittedly, the viewfinder was very limited. Unfortunately, they stayed with the same viewfinder in the FZ150. My new G3 however, has a wonderful electronic viewfinder. I actually prefer it to my wife’s Nikon optical viewfinder.

Link | Posted on Sep 5, 2011 at 12:27 UTC
Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8