How to tell a rank amateur from a seasoned one, or a pro
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Winter is near
Next: CMOS sensors worthless for video?
From: John Navas on 8 Jul 2010 00:58 On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 00:05:46 -0400, in <hrudnW_5HOM_06jRnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: >"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >news:2010070715231316807-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >> On 2010-07-07 13:33:19 -0700, "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> >> said: >> a year later I bought a D70 for less, and never used the 5700 again. > >I have hardly used my 8700 at all. But it's a treasured part of my Nikon >collection. Likewise the FZ35 apparently. ;) >> I think one of the big problems with many of the "Superzooms" is, they are >> still mostly a compromise. They are a solution for the traveler wanting a >> single camera with a wide zoom range, and a bit more heft than a >> "pocketable" compact. ...but as good as they are, to claim that they have >> the flexibility, or image quality potential of a DSLR is just being >> argumentative. > >Absolutely. I have several, like them very much as intriguing instruments >and marvels of design, but seldom actually use them. Painfully obvious from the off-the-mark criticisms of them. Yet you presume to judge them even though your not familiar with them. >To claim (as a couple >here do) that they are in any way equal to DSLRs is just plain nonsensical. I'm certainly not saying that. What I am saying is that they are better tools for the kind of photography I do, as they are. dSLR cameras are better suited of certain other kinds of photography. "Different strokes for different folks." (How many times must I repeat it before you get it?) >> They are still limited with small sensors, over packed to silly pixel >> density. Maxing those out at around 10MP as with the G11 makes more sense. > >Definitely. I wish Nikon would follow Canon's lead in that respect. Yet the FZ35 ranks higher in image quality than the FZ28, just as the FZ28 ranks higher than prior generations with less megapixels. In other words, that claim is patent nonsense. >> They are mostly marketed to photographers making the transition from the >> lesser compacts. They might be lacking a feature such as RAW capture, and >> emphasize shooting "scene-program/modes." The experienced/talented >> photographer, who buys one, and uses the user controls rather than the >> "scene-program/modes" is the exception rather than the rule. For the most >> part they will be using all that potential as a DSLR looking, scene-mode, >> point and shoot camera, regardless of the capability of the camera. > >They are handy when one needs a compact camera with a wide range of focal >lengths without carrying anything beside the camera itself, and THERE WILL >BE PLENTY OF LIGHT. I took my FZ35 to Florida this last winter, just a few >days' trip and traveling very light. It was the only time in I've taken a >trip without an SLR of some kind in at least the last 40 years. I wanted to >get some shots of pelicans and other sea birds, and with the strong Florida >sun I think it would've been ideal for that. But in the event I was occupied >with other things and didn't get to do any of that anyway. Offensive put-downs from dSLR fans threatened by them. Shame on you. Are you really that insecure? -- John "Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on 8 Jul 2010 01:22 On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 21:57:21 -0700, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: > >your standards are lower. How would you know this about anyone nor any camera? You've never used ANY camera. We've proved that.
From: David J Taylor on 8 Jul 2010 02:15 "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote in message news:MJ6dndNMn4CffKnRnZ2dnUVZ_o2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > > "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote in > message news:i0uijd$nn$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... [] >> There's only one person who objects to "P&S" > > I think two of us, at least. > >> - the rest of us are quite happy! I own both and have no problem with >> the term. > > My objection is that it stands for "point and shoot," which does not > properly describe most of the cameras one sees referenced in that way. > > If it stood for "Pittsburgh and Seattle," or "phenolphthalein and > sugar," I would object that those terms are not relevant -- though > hardly less so than "point and shoot." There are many terms in both British and American English which I don't feel are 100% accurate, but they are in such common usage that it would be difficult to change them. The term ZLR was used for a while for SLR-like cameras without a mirror - cameras like my FZ5 and FZ20, John's FZ28, and your FZ35 - but that term didn't stick. What term would you suggest for such cameras - they certainly aren't "compact". Cheers, David
From: David J Taylor on 8 Jul 2010 02:20 "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote in message news:UeydnQBCeaSTdqnRnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d(a)giganews.com... [] > DSLRs I suppose can reasonably be subdivided by intended market, or by > size. For example, the Nikon D3X is a camera intended for professional > use. I wouldn't want one. It would be possible to quibble about whether > a D300s is "professional" or "semiprofessional," or whether a D90 is > "semiprofessional" or "enthusiast" level, etc. Any camera in the D40 > family can fairly be discribed as a "compact" or "entry level" DSLR. I > can't imagine anyone being offended by the use of any of these terms, so > I see no reason for concern there. What DSLR could be described as unprofessional? David
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on 8 Jul 2010 02:27
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 07:20:00 +0100, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor(a)blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> wrote: > >"Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote in message >news:UeydnQBCeaSTdqnRnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d(a)giganews.com... >[] >> DSLRs I suppose can reasonably be subdivided by intended market, or by >> size. For example, the Nikon D3X is a camera intended for professional >> use. I wouldn't want one. It would be possible to quibble about whether >> a D300s is "professional" or "semiprofessional," or whether a D90 is >> "semiprofessional" or "enthusiast" level, etc. Any camera in the D40 >> family can fairly be discribed as a "compact" or "entry level" DSLR. I >> can't imagine anyone being offended by the use of any of these terms, so >> I see no reason for concern there. > >What DSLR could be described as unprofessional? > >David Are you SO ignorant to have to even ask? Any in the hand of a non-pro. This amounts to 99.99% of them. |