Will phase focusing go the way of the dinosaur?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Historical Center at night
Next: Forget Dpreview's B.S., "diplomatic language" NEX 16mm lens is not good
From: C.P. Robbins on 30 Jun 2010 14:13 On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 17:53:47 +0100, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > >"John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >news:nonm2610lrpgsn5luvm36i7cvu3e5u01hn(a)4ax.com... >> eOn Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:08:47 +0100, in >> <i0fmm0$suv$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "David J Taylor" >> <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >> >>>"John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >>>news:3oim26la8kval464eg1c9tbutkd2jqlmju(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:55:14 +0100, in >>>> <i0et92$3uu$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "David J Taylor" >>>> <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>>"John Turco" <jtur(a)concentric.net> wrote in message >>>>>news:4C2AB5E4.709EDD8A(a)concentric.net... >>>>>[] >>>>>> Superior or not, "phase focusing" just isn't enough, to offset >>>>>> super-zoom >>>>>> digicams' overall advantages (versus other market segments). >>>> >>>>>Most of the time I find the opposite. My take includes overall image >>>>>quality, speed of total response, viewfinder quality, and ability to >>>>>isolate the subject by differential focussing. When those factors are >>>>>less important than size, I take my Panasonic compact 28-280mm >>>>>(equivalent) zoom. >>>> >>>> Overall image quality, speed of total response, viewfinder quality, >>>> and >>>> ability to isolate the subject by differential focussing are some of >>>> the >>>> factors that lead me to take my compact Panasonic 27-486mm super-zoom. >>>> >>>> "Different strokes for different folks." >> >>>Yes, you obviously have different standards. >> >> I obviously have different skills -- >> I know how to get good results from such equipment. >> >>>I have owned and used the >>>predecessor to your camera, so I have a good idea how it works in >>>practice. >> >> Since you have no real experience, you're guessing. >> >>>I also have a compact Panasonic 28-280mm zoom which I use when >>>appropriate. >> >> Different camera. >> >>>Having seen the limitations of both cameras - particularly >>>speed of response - is why I now use a DSLR most of the time. >> >> That a dSLR works better for *you* is all well and good, but that >> doesn't mean compact digitals don't work better for *others* who know >> how to use them properly. >> >>>Just two >>>example: - zooming by twisting the ring on a DSLR lens is /far/ faster >>>than having to press a lever one way and then the other, >> >> It's not an issue *if* you know how and are comfortable with the 2-speed >> zoom. I am. You're not. That simple. >> >>>and the precision >>>of framing is far greater on the DSLR with it continuous zoom range than >>>with the stepped zoom of the Panasonic, >> >> Again, not an issue if you know how. >> >>>and of course the DSLR has much >>>less noisy images at the ISOs I wish to use (e.g. ISO 3200). >> >> Then by all means use a dSLR. I almost never have a need for ISO 3200, >> so it's not a significant factor to me. "Different strokes for >> different folks." >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> John > >It must be very satisfying to be always right, John! > >"> I know how to get good results from such equipment." > >So you think I lack skills? You prove it with the words in your posts. > >As I said, I've used the equipment so I know the issues, and I use /both/ >DSLR /and/ compact cameras. > >Cheers, >David
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on 30 Jun 2010 14:19 On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 07:20:59 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >On 29/06/10 8:11 PM, John Turco wrote: > ><snip> > >> Superior or not, "phase focusing" just isn't enough, to offset super-zoom >> digicams' overall advantages (versus other market segments). > >Oh please, the super-zoom has some advantages, such as $/mm of zoom, but >the disadvantages are huge, at least for many users. Slow >contrast-detect focusing, poor low-light capability because of the tiny >sensor, lack of an optical viewfinder, and compromise lenses are the >main disadvantages. It gets worse if you have to start using lens >adapters on top of the already compromised lens. > >If you're only using your super-zoom in good light, in the middle 3/5 or >so of the focal range, and not taking photos of anything moving, then >they're great, and you'd be wasting your money on a D-SLR. > >The appeal of the super-zoom is the low cost, wide-focal range, and >small size (compared to a large D-SLR). The manufacturers love the >super-zooms because they get to sell the consumer the super-zoom, then >when the consumer realizes their mistake the manufacturer gets to sell >them a D-SLR as well. > >At some point they learn that a 25-500mm or so lens is not possible to >do well, and they may even learn about noise and pixel size. Or not, >apparently. You mean like how this 20x, 28mm-560mm, superzoom P&S camera lens beats the pants off an easy to manufacture and design 3x DSLR lens? (This 20x lens also available on the SX20 and SX1.) <http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX10_IS/outdoor_results.shtml> Like that?
From: George Kerby on 30 Jun 2010 14:35 On 6/30/10 11:53 AM, in article i0fsqs$li4$1(a)news.eternal-september.org, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > > "John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message > news:nonm2610lrpgsn5luvm36i7cvu3e5u01hn(a)4ax.com... >> eOn Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:08:47 +0100, in >> <i0fmm0$suv$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "David J Taylor" >> <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >> >>> "John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >>> news:3oim26la8kval464eg1c9tbutkd2jqlmju(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:55:14 +0100, in >>>> <i0et92$3uu$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "David J Taylor" >>>> <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>> "John Turco" <jtur(a)concentric.net> wrote in message >>>>> news:4C2AB5E4.709EDD8A(a)concentric.net... >>>>> [] >>>>>> Superior or not, "phase focusing" just isn't enough, to offset >>>>>> super-zoom >>>>>> digicams' overall advantages (versus other market segments). >>>> >>>>> Most of the time I find the opposite. My take includes overall image >>>>> quality, speed of total response, viewfinder quality, and ability to >>>>> isolate the subject by differential focussing. When those factors are >>>>> less important than size, I take my Panasonic compact 28-280mm >>>>> (equivalent) zoom. >>>> >>>> Overall image quality, speed of total response, viewfinder quality, >>>> and >>>> ability to isolate the subject by differential focussing are some of >>>> the >>>> factors that lead me to take my compact Panasonic 27-486mm super-zoom. >>>> >>>> "Different strokes for different folks." >> >>> Yes, you obviously have different standards. >> >> I obviously have different skills -- >> I know how to get good results from such equipment. >> >>> I have owned and used the >>> predecessor to your camera, so I have a good idea how it works in >>> practice. >> >> Since you have no real experience, you're guessing. >> >>> I also have a compact Panasonic 28-280mm zoom which I use when >>> appropriate. >> >> Different camera. >> >>> Having seen the limitations of both cameras - particularly >>> speed of response - is why I now use a DSLR most of the time. >> >> That a dSLR works better for *you* is all well and good, but that >> doesn't mean compact digitals don't work better for *others* who know >> how to use them properly. >> >>> Just two >>> example: - zooming by twisting the ring on a DSLR lens is /far/ faster >>> than having to press a lever one way and then the other, >> >> It's not an issue *if* you know how and are comfortable with the 2-speed >> zoom. I am. You're not. That simple. >> >>> and the precision >>> of framing is far greater on the DSLR with it continuous zoom range than >>> with the stepped zoom of the Panasonic, >> >> Again, not an issue if you know how. >> >>> and of course the DSLR has much >>> less noisy images at the ISOs I wish to use (e.g. ISO 3200). >> >> Then by all means use a dSLR. I almost never have a need for ISO 3200, >> so it's not a significant factor to me. "Different strokes for >> different folks." >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> John > > It must be very satisfying to be always right, John! It's called "Mental Masturbation". > > "> I know how to get good results from such equipment." > > So you think I lack skills? EVERYONE lacks the skills of The NavASS. You haven't figured that out by now?!? Shame! > > As I said, I've used the equipment so I know the issues, and I use /both/ > DSLR /and/ compact cameras. > NavASS says to use that DSLR as an anchor for your yacht. What? You don't have a yacht?!? The NavASS says "Get one!". > Cheers, > David >
From: David J Taylor on 30 Jun 2010 15:14 "John Navas" <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:il0n2610ntfl3hi3b2bmnu1qqiau9eq594(a)4ax.com... [] > You haven't used my equipment by your own admission. Regardless, that > doesn't mean your limitations and judgments apply to me or anybody else > who knows how to use it without such difficulties. That it doesn't work > well for you doesn't mean it won't work well for others. > > I say my compact digital works better for me than any dSLR i've tried. > You say your dSLR works better for you than any compact digital you've > tried. Both are equally valid statements. Neither is any sort of > universal truth. > > -- > Best regards, > John I haven't used your precise model of camera, no, but I have used two models the same class of equipment from the same manufacturer to be aware of its limitations. I'm not talking about "trying", I'm talking about using as main camera for extended periods of time. BTW: I did not make the statement you wish to attribute to me - I use both DSLR and compact, choosing according to my needs at the time. Each have their own advantages, but fast operation and excellent low-light capabilities and not amongst the advantages of the small-sensor, contrast-detection auto-focus cameras. Cheers, David
From: John Navas on 30 Jun 2010 17:01
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:20:41 -0700, in <nonm2610lrpgsn5luvm36i7cvu3e5u01hn(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <jncl1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: >eOn Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:08:47 +0100, in ><i0fmm0$suv$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, "David J Taylor" ><david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: >>Just two >>example: - zooming by twisting the ring on a DSLR lens is /far/ faster >>than having to press a lever one way and then the other, > >It's not an issue *if* you know how and are comfortable with the 2-speed >zoom. I am. You're not. That simple. > >>and the precision >>of framing is far greater on the DSLR with it continuous zoom range than >>with the stepped zoom of the Panasonic, > >Again, not an issue if you know how. Imaging Resource agrees with me <http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/FZ28/FZ28A.HTM>: The Lumix FZ28's zoom is quiet, smooth, and fast. It also has quite a few steps to choose from along its zoom range, while a great many cameras just zoom in large blocks that make framing your image precisely very difficult. NOT A PROBLEM WITH THE FZ28. [emphasis added] -- 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 |