Prev: Where is the camera
Next: Very soon, we'll know. (Nikon's new mirror-less system)
From: RichA on 9 Jul 2010 16:39
This is Samsung's latest P&S's tested, arguably, one of the better
ones out now, such as they are. But try this. Go to the link, and
select Olympus E-EPL1 (and JPEG or RAW) from the drop-downs as one of
the three you can compare. It basically blows away all the P&S's.
And it is the smallest sensored of the "serious" cameras beyond P&S
sensor sizes.

http://dpreview.com/reviews/samsungtl500/page9.asp

From: Bruce on 10 Jul 2010 06:46
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 20:37:18 -0700 (PDT), BD <robert.drea(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>Whether what you say is correct or not is kind of secondary. My gripe
>with you is that EVERYTHING that you post is negative and critical.
>Rather than saying in your header that the EPL-1 is a decent quality
>camera, it's "P&S's suck". You're negative, whiny, and self-indulgent
>if you honestly think you're contributing to the group with your
>constant complaining.


Rich is Canadian. Every Canadian I have ever encountered has been
negative, whiny, and self-indulgent.


From: tony cooper on 10 Jul 2010 12:54
On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 09:13:06 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>. My G11 is one such higher priced
>compact, but it supplements my D300s and has the level of user control
>I want.

All this fuss over terms...I don't see the G11 as "compact". The
mainstream point-and-shoots *are* compact. They a slim, capable of
fitting in a shirt pocket or a trouser pocket without bulge or weight,
and they are truly compact cameras.

The G11 camera body seems to me to be almost as large and bulky as a
slr or dslr with a 55mm (or thereabouts) size lens. Yes, there are
pockets that will accommodate them, but big pockets.

The term "point and shoot" came into use because it described the
simplicity of operation. Then, camera makers started adding options
to these cameras that allow the user to choose between the simple
settings and more advanced settings.

The less complicated the camera, the more compact it can be. The
basic point-and-shoots are more deserving of the description "compact"
than the upper-tier non-dslrs owned by people who object to their
cameras being called "point and shoot" cameras. Yet, they want their
cameras called "compacts" to avoid the perception of owning something
simple.

I really can't understand the distress expressed by those who object
to the "point and shoot" term. It's the photograph that is judged,
not the device that took it.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Bruce on 10 Jul 2010 13:58
On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 09:13:06 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>Rich, the overall tone to your posts is one of gloom. There is very
>little of credit for what might be well done.
>Also, not every camera consumer is looking for a 4/3, or a DSLR, and in
>some cases not even a compact. More and more are happy to have a camera
>in their cell phone, and are never going to spend any more cash to buy
>a dedicated camera.
>
>...and yes I, and many others have noticed some compacts cost as much
>as a D3000 with 2 kit lenses. That is a great entry level DSLR, I would
>recommend a D5000 ahead of it. My G11 is one such higher priced
>compact, but it supplements my D300s and has the level of user control
>I want.
>
>There are going to be buyers of cameras across the quality, size, and
>type spectrum. Some will be happy with what they bought, others will
>move on to grow into something more sophisticated. The great majority,
>as with film will have a camera they do not use on a daily basis, but
>pull out of a drawer for whatever the occasion might be, take a few
>snap shots, put it back in the drawer to be forgotten until the next
>birthday party, or family occasion, visit, etc. comes around.
>...and they will be quite happy regardless of the quality of their
>resulting images. Pretty much the instamatic market.
>
>So lighten up a bit and try not to continually extract the negative.


Well said, sir! I hope Rich listens to your wise advice.

From: Savageduck on 10 Jul 2010 15:20
On 2010-07-10 09:54:53 -0700, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> said:

> On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 09:13:06 -0700, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> . My G11 is one such higher priced
>> compact, but it supplements my D300s and has the level of user control
>> I want.
>
> All this fuss over terms...I don't see the G11 as "compact". The
> mainstream point-and-shoots *are* compact. They a slim, capable of
> fitting in a shirt pocket or a trouser pocket without bulge or weight,
> and they are truly compact cameras.

My G11 is certainly not "shirt pocket" slim, but definately compact,
and fits in a cargo pocket on a pair of shorts.
>
> The G11 camera body seems to me to be almost as large and bulky as a
> slr or dslr with a 55mm (or thereabouts) size lens. Yes, there are
> pockets that will accommodate them, but big pockets.

Compared with a "small" DSLR, my D70, the D70 is 1 1/2 inches wider, 2
1/2 inches taller, G11 body is 1 3/4 inches thick v D70(+35mm f/2.0)
at 4 7/8 inches.
< http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DSCF0166w.jpg >

Yes it is a lump in my pocket, but it will fit, my D70 and D300s will not.
>
> The term "point and shoot" came into use because it described the
> simplicity of operation. Then, camera makers started adding options
> to these cameras that allow the user to choose between the simple
> settings and more advanced settings.

Agreed. Hell one of the first "point and shoot" cameras was the good
old Brownie. What about Instamatics and some of the 35mm "point and
shoot" compacts. My wife loved her Pentax PC35AF.
>
> The less complicated the camera, the more compact it can be. The
> basic point-and-shoots are more deserving of the description "compact"
> than the upper-tier non-dslrs owned by people who object to their
> cameras being called "point and shoot" cameras. Yet, they want their
> cameras called "compacts" to avoid the perception of owning something
> simple.

Agreed.
>
> I really can't understand the distress expressed by those who object
> to the "point and shoot" term. It's the photograph that is judged,
> not the device that took it.

Neither do i.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Where is the camera
Next: Very soon, we'll know. (Nikon's new mirror-less system)