Prev: Canon 5D II firmware update - audio bug
Next: Panasonic LZ5 audio recording
From: Robert Spanjaard on 22 Mar 2010 12:45
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:14:02 -0700, Mike Russell wrote:

> The funny thing is, I agree with what's-his-face's point that SLR's will
> *eventually* be supplanted by high quality non-reflex cameras, EVIL and
> the next generation of integrated lens/sensor cameras.

Does that mean you agree with him? The only thing I see in his posts is
the part about the mirror, let's say the E -part. He doesn't agree with
you about the IL part. He claims that superzooms with tiny sensors and a
couple of adapters are much better. Not because he really thinks so, but
just to upset SLR owners.

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
From: Bruce on 22 Mar 2010 16:39
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:14:02 -0700, Mike Russell
<groupsRE(a)MOVEcurvemeister.com> wrote:
>
>Actually, I'm not arguing with him - he's blocked. I pity the people who
>don't have this choice, and must be around him on a daily basis. Can you
>imagine? LOL.


Yes, that's one of his names - LOL. ;-)

From: Mike Russell on 22 Mar 2010 18:15
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 17:45:27 +0100, Robert Spanjaard wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:14:02 -0700, Mike Russell wrote:
>
>> The funny thing is, I agree with what's-his-face's point that SLR's will
>> *eventually* be supplanted by high quality non-reflex cameras, EVIL and
>> the next generation of integrated lens/sensor cameras.
>
> Does that mean you agree with him?

I do on a lot of the technical issues. Where I emphatically part company
is in using this as a way to just stir things up.

> The only thing I see in his posts is
> the part about the mirror, let's say the E -part. He doesn't agree with
> you about the IL part. He claims that superzooms with tiny sensors and a
> couple of adapters are much better. Not because he really thinks so, but
> just to upset SLR owners.

Well, there n a way agree more with what's his name on the very narrow
technical issue: lenses and sensors should (or will) be designed as a unit.
I'm looking to the next camera after EVIL. This would be a camera that
uses interchangeable lenses whose sensor is fused to the rear element of
the lens. I believe this will result in significant increases in quality,
price, and flexibility. For example, how about a landscape lens that takes
a wide format image, and has IR pixels mixed in with the normal RGB pixels,
to help with cutting through haze?

The DSLR is here for a while yet - 5 or 10 years, or longer perhaps. There
are a lot of fun possibilities in the future that would be interesting to
discuss.

No matter what camera you use, what really matters is the images you
capture, and I have great respect for Savageduck and others who create
excellent images.
--
Mike Russell - http://www.curvemeister.com
From: Robert Spanjaard on 22 Mar 2010 18:35
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 15:15:11 -0700, Mike Russell wrote:

>> The only thing I see in his posts is
>> the part about the mirror, let's say the E -part. He doesn't agree with
>> you about the IL part. He claims that superzooms with tiny sensors and
>> a couple of adapters are much better. Not because he really thinks so,
>> but just to upset SLR owners.
>
> Well, there n a way agree more with what's his name on the very narrow
> technical issue: lenses and sensors should (or will) be designed as a
> unit. I'm looking to the next camera after EVIL. This would be a camera
> that uses interchangeable lenses whose sensor is fused to the rear
> element of the lens. I believe this will result in significant
> increases in quality, price, and flexibility.

So far, the Ricoh GXR doesn't live up to those expectations.

> For example, how about a
> landscape lens that takes a wide format image, and has IR pixels mixed
> in with the normal RGB pixels, to help with cutting through haze?

Sounds like a very specialised, and therefor expensive unit. I'd never use
it for my landscapes.
Current IL-designs give me all the flexibility I need. And the seperate
sensor allows me to upgrade it for all my lenses at once when I feel the
need to do so.

--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com





--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com
From: Mike Russell on 22 Mar 2010 20:17
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 23:35:34 +0100, Robert Spanjaard wrote:

> So far, the Ricoh GXR doesn't live up to those expectations.

Interesting. I hadn't heard of this camera. This is the sort of direction
I'm thinking things will take, though with more variation in the optics and
sensor configurations.
--
Mike Russell - http://www.curvemeister.com
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Canon 5D II firmware update - audio bug
Next: Panasonic LZ5 audio recording