Prev: Newton, up close and personal
Next: Don't view on a full stomach
From: John Navas on 30 Jun 2010 22:53
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:40:29 -0700, in
<4c2bf20a$0$22166$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote:

>On 30/06/10 5:42 PM, Rich wrote:
>
>> Well, if that fixed-lens 4/3rds comes out, it'll mean that at least
>> some P&S'rs will have a camera that can at least try to compete with
>> DSLRs, on an image quality level.
>
>In very limited circumstances, but yes, it's possible.

You're guessing. You have no actual experience.

>> Up to now, you've had the Sony R1
>> (nice camera) and the Sigma and finally the overpriced Leica. But you
>> have to dump the crappy superzooms.
>
>Fixed lens 4/3rds will not save 4/3rds. Mirrorless interchangeable lens
>4/3 might have some marketability, though the first systems are flawed,
>as is Sony's competing NEX system.

You're guessing. You have no actual experience.

>For all the issues with super-zooms, they do have their place. In good
>light, where you don't need fast focusing, and are not overly concerned
>with image quality, they meet the needs of some users.

They can actually produce excellent images, on par with dSLR, in a wide
range of lighting, and with excellent fast focusing, as you might know
if you'd ever actually used one.

--
Best regards,
John

Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer,
it makes you a dSLR owner.
"The single most important component of a camera
is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: Neil Harrington on 1 Jul 2010 00:00

"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4c2bf20a$0$22166$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...

>
> For all the issues with super-zooms, they do have their place. In good
> light, where you don't need fast focusing, and are not overly concerned
> with image quality, they meet the needs of some users.

They do indeed have their place, even for those of us "concerned with image
quality." I have a few of them that I like a lot. My Panasonic FZ15 and FZ35
have really sharp lenses, and fast. The FZ15 is f/2.8 constant aperture,
which is really good to have especially in that kind of camera. I also have
a few cameras in Minolta's old DiMAGE 7 series, and their A200, which I like
a lot. Their superzooms aren't quite as super as those on newer cameras,
only 28-200mm (equiv.), but that is still very handy. I also have Nikon's
old Coolpix 8700 and 8800 which are fine cameras. And I haven't had any
problem with fast focusing. It's not as fast as my DSLRs, but the difference
hasn't been an issue for me.

As you say, good light is pretty much a necessity, since image quality does
fall off at higher ISOs, compared to DSLRs. That and the relatively
miserable quality of the EVFs are the only real drawbacks of the superzoom
compacts as far as I'm concerned. They are still very handy and capable
cameras when you want something with a nice range of focal lengths all in
one compact package, and have good light.


From: Rich on 1 Jul 2010 17:46
Charles Chase <spammenot(a)ipt.aol.com> wrote in
news:n3rn26hnl88nlehse9q1mj2h6iqurk2c50(a)4ax.com:

> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:42:50 -0700 (PDT), Rich <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
>>
>>Well, if that fixed-lens 4/3rds comes out, it'll mean that at least
>>some P&S'rs will have a camera that can at least try to compete with
>>DSLRs, on an image quality level. Up to now, you've had the Sony R1
>>(nice camera) and the Sigma and finally the overpriced Leica. But you
>>have to dump the crappy superzooms.
>
> I see that those mental blinders of yours are still helping you to
> enjoy your deep bliss of total ignorance.
>
> I have a P&S superzoom camera from 2003 that beats the image quality
> of an EOS D60 when images are compared side by side of the same
> subjects in all lighting conditions. A Powershot G9 from three years
> ago beats the image quality of 7D DSLR today.

B.S. As usual. P&S's can even generate a 50 ISO image that is free of
noise.
From: Rich on 1 Jul 2010 17:48
SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in news:4c2bf20a$0$22166
$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net:

> On 30/06/10 5:42 PM, Rich wrote:
>
>> Well, if that fixed-lens 4/3rds comes out, it'll mean that at least
>> some P&S'rs will have a camera that can at least try to compete with
>> DSLRs, on an image quality level.
>
> In very limited circumstances, but yes, it's possible.

At 100-400 ISO, they do fine. Beyond that, it is noisy.

>> Up to now, you've had the Sony R1
>> (nice camera) and the Sigma and finally the overpriced Leica. But you
>> have to dump the crappy superzooms.
>
> Fixed lens 4/3rds will not save 4/3rds. Mirrorless interchangeable lens
> 4/3 might have some marketability, though the first systems are flawed,
> as is Sony's competing NEX system.

True, but micro 4/3rds seems to be doing ok, and is profitable, for now.

> For all the issues with super-zooms, they do have their place.

In the garbage. I've seen them in action and I despise the aberrated
results from their mediocre lenses.
From: John Navas on 2 Jul 2010 11:03
On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 16:46:25 -0500, in
<xeednWJdQ6oskbDRnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Rich <none(a)nowhere.com>
wrote:

>Charles Chase <spammenot(a)ipt.aol.com> wrote in
>news:n3rn26hnl88nlehse9q1mj2h6iqurk2c50(a)4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:42:50 -0700 (PDT), Rich <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
>>>
>>>Well, if that fixed-lens 4/3rds comes out, it'll mean that at least
>>>some P&S'rs will have a camera that can at least try to compete with
>>>DSLRs, on an image quality level. Up to now, you've had the Sony R1
>>>(nice camera) and the Sigma and finally the overpriced Leica. But you
>>>have to dump the crappy superzooms.
>>
>> I see that those mental blinders of yours are still helping you to
>> enjoy your deep bliss of total ignorance.
>>
>> I have a P&S superzoom camera from 2003 that beats the image quality
>> of an EOS D60 when images are compared side by side of the same
>> subjects in all lighting conditions. A Powershot G9 from three years
>> ago beats the image quality of 7D DSLR today.
>
>B.S. As usual. P&S's can even generate a 50 ISO image that is free of
>noise.

Proving yet again that "even a stopped clock is right twice a day". ;)

--
Best regards,
John

Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer,
it makes you a dSLR owner.
"The single most important component of a camera
is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Newton, up close and personal
Next: Don't view on a full stomach