Canon and Panasonic: updated models
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: LOL! on 28 May 2010 13:22 On Fri, 28 May 2010 10:05:52 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >On 28/05/10 1:52 AM, David J Taylor wrote: > >> Yes, many small-sensor cameras can produce adequate photos under good >> lighting conditions, but many do not work well at higher ISO settings >> (e.g. ISO 3200) and few have the wide-aperture lenses (e.g. f/1.8) >> available to DSLRs. With the DSLR can can buy whatever lens quality you >> wish to afford, with the ZLR you are stuck with what's provided. >> >> Your needs, your money, your choice. > >Many people simply don't care all that much about optimal image quality. >The ZLR is convenient, relatively inexpensive, and suits their needs. >One of my relatives is a Realtor. He needs a wide zoom range for photo >tours of houses. He needs video capability. But he doesn't care about >noise, he doesn't care about shutter/AF lag, and he definitely does not >want to carry around three lenses with him. An SX1 IS was perfect for >him. Of course he has a D-SLR as well for times with image quality _is_ >the most important factor. LOL!!!! Too fuckin' funny. Now that someone in the newsgroup wanted to buy an SX1, suddenly every imaginary relative and imaginary friend that SMS has, also has an SX1. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From: John Navas on 28 May 2010 13:23 On Fri, 28 May 2010 10:05:52 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in <4bfff7fb$0$1663$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>: >On 28/05/10 1:52 AM, David J Taylor wrote: > >> Yes, many small-sensor cameras can produce adequate photos under good >> lighting conditions, but many do not work well at higher ISO settings >> (e.g. ISO 3200) and few have the wide-aperture lenses (e.g. f/1.8) >> available to DSLRs. With the DSLR can can buy whatever lens quality you >> wish to afford, with the ZLR you are stuck with what's provided. >> >> Your needs, your money, your choice. > >Many people simply don't care all that much about optimal image quality. Most real photographers simply don't care all that much about optimal image quality as that term is used here. What they do care about is photographs. >The ZLR is convenient, relatively inexpensive, and suits their needs. >One of my relatives is a Realtor. He needs a wide zoom range for photo >tours of houses. He needs video capability. But he doesn't care about >noise, he doesn't care about shutter/AF lag, and he definitely does not >want to carry around three lenses with him. An SX1 IS was perfect for >him. Of course he has a D-SLR as well for times with image quality _is_ >the most important factor. Which proves nothing. -- Best regards, John "A little learning is a dangerous thing." -Alexander Pope "It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." -Mark Twain "Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn." -Benjamin Franklin
From: John Navas on 28 May 2010 13:23 On Fri, 28 May 2010 12:51:23 -0400, Bowser <Canon(a)Nikon.Panny> wrote in <v3tvv5p7fqollhg1pb8s34vjgr67haom0s(a)4ax.com>: >On Fri, 28 May 2010 07:20:06 -0700, John Navas ><jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >>On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:05:00 -0400, Bowser <Canon(a)Nikon.Panny> wrote in >><tpfvv5tn0cnukom6neniqc14oa1cta5e1b(a)4ax.com>: >> >>>Yes, I know the issue and I know Navas' tactics very well. He makes >>>ridiculous claims and never provides any proof to back them. I'll pass >>>on the banter this time. It's tiring and he's beginning to really bore >>>me. >> >>'Those who have evidence will present their evidence, >>whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man.' > >And your evidence is....where? "Google is your friend." -- Best regards, John "Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
From: John Navas on 28 May 2010 13:26 On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:57:51 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in <4bfff61a$0$1663$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>: >On 28/05/10 3:41 AM, F wrote: > ><snip> > >> The temptation to wait for the next new iteration, however, was never >> very strong. I was just concerned that if I bought today and a new one >> was announced tomorrow I might just have missed something that was >> 'better'. Note the *might*! > >We're really at the point now where there's not going to be any >significant improvements unless there is some new sensor technology that >emerges. Nonsense. Sensors keep getting better year after year. It's why new dSLRs with pixel counts many times those of old dSLRs take better images, just as with compact digital cameras. >[SNIP even more absurd nonsense] -- Best regards, John "A little learning is a dangerous thing." -Alexander Pope "It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." -Mark Twain "Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn." -Benjamin Franklin
From: Dudley Hanks on 28 May 2010 14:18
"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message news:4bffdaf5$0$1600$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net... > On 28/05/10 6:05 AM, Bowser wrote: > >> Yes, I know the issue and I know Navas' tactics very well. He makes >> ridiculous claims and never provides any proof to back them. I'll pass >> on the banter this time. It's tiring and he's beginning to really bore >> me. > > I kill-filed him years ago. His lack of knowledge is not limited just to > digital cameras, but extends to other fields as well. It's amusing at > first, then as you stated, it gets boring. He's a member in good standing of my kill file as well... The sad thing about John is that, as has been previously pointed out, his comments seem more intended to justify his purchase than to explore the art / science of picture taking. As a recent purchaser of a superzoom, I like it, and I believe it can produce better pics than my Rebel XSi in a limited number of situations, but the overall nod has to go to the DSLR because of the larger sensor and lens interchangeability. Take Care, Dudley |