How to tell a rank amateur from a seasoned one, or a pro
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Winter is near
Next: CMOS sensors worthless for video?
From: tony cooper on 10 Jul 2010 17:08 On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 15:36:44 -0500, Phil B. <pblackwell(a)spamlessyahoo.com> wrote: >Those who use high-end superzoom cameras see "Superzoom" is another term that fails to describe what people use it to describe. Early-on, when "point and shoot" cameras first came out, they "zoomed" to 3X and 4X. (Higher with the worthless digital zoom) Now they zoom to much higher X factors in a race to catch up with slr and dslr lenses. "Super", though? Can we expect "SuperDuperZoom" and other marketing terms in the future? The superlative is just a marketing ploy to allow the owners to claim super-quality equipment instead of having to rely on results: the photograph. Owners of "high end superzoom" "compact" cameras come up with some very nice photographs. Some, though, are more concerned with the terms associated with their cameras than they are with the output. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Phil B. on 10 Jul 2010 17:18 On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 17:08:44 -0400, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 15:36:44 -0500, Phil B. ><pblackwell(a)spamlessyahoo.com> wrote: > >>Those who use high-end superzoom cameras see > >"Superzoom" is another term that fails to describe what people use it >to describe. Early-on, when "point and shoot" cameras first came out, >they "zoomed" to 3X and 4X. (Higher with the worthless digital zoom) >Now they zoom to much higher X factors in a race to catch up with slr >and dslr lenses. Proving yet again how little you know about any cameras. Digital-zoom is NOT empty zoom. Unless you have access to the RAW data in a camera, digital zoom, upsampling directly from the sensor data in-camera, will provide more detail than can be obtained by simply upsampling a camera's JPG output in post-processing where no further detail can be extracted. Really, must you insist on proving to the whole world what a supreme dolt you are with every post you make? Maybe there should be a marketing category for you too, "SuperDolt". Until you have educated yourself properly please refrain from trying to hand out any advice to anyone anywhere. It's so tiresome for people with more knowledge and experience than you'll ever have in trying to incessantly correct your blatant and highly-biased misinformation.
From: Neil Harrington on 10 Jul 2010 21:09 "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message news:4c38be4d$0$5505$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com... > "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote in message > news:hbmdnf1KIZgLCKrRnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >> > >> If I said things fall DOWN and not UP, you would disagree. Your >> disagreement in this carries no weight, it is just silly. >> > > Obviously you are not from Australia. Correct, but I'm confident up and down remain the same in that hemisphere. I've seen many movies made in Australia and none of them had people walking around on their heads. > I've heard that in Australia the women go up on their men. > Can anyone verify this? <guffaw!> Maybe Australian women are shorter.
From: Neil Harrington on 10 Jul 2010 21:20 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:r9nh369dlrdvjb3h9lmedk3m5spambjhes(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 15:36:44 -0500, Phil B. > <pblackwell(a)spamlessyahoo.com> wrote: > >>Those who use high-end superzoom cameras see > > "Superzoom" is another term that fails to describe what people use it > to describe. Early-on, when "point and shoot" cameras first came out, > they "zoomed" to 3X and 4X. (Higher with the worthless digital zoom) The first point-and-shoot cameras did not zoom at all; they had FFL lenses. I still have one, a Konica Big Mini. I also had a Yashica T4, and before that a Minolta AF-C. All of those and most other P&S at the time were fixed focal length. The flood of P&S zooms came later.
From: nospam on 10 Jul 2010 21:22
In article <XvednVMatMHxgaTRnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil Harrington <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: > The first point-and-shoot cameras did not zoom at all; they had FFL lenses. > I still have one, a Konica Big Mini. big mini? what an odd name. was there a mini mini? |