PhotoBanter.com

PhotoBanter.com (http://www.photobanter.com/index.php)
-   Digital Point & Shoot Cameras (http://www.photobanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Canon and Panasonic: updated models (http://www.photobanter.com/showthread.php?t=112790)

F May 26th 10 11:19 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
I'm looking to replace my ageing Panasonic FZ30 and am considering the
Canon SX1 IS and the Panasonic FZ38. Does anyone know whether or not
either of these is likely to be replaced in the next couple of months?

TIA

--
F


F May 27th 10 12:30 AM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On 26/05/2010 23:58 John Navas wrote:

On Wed, 26 May 2010 23:19:01 +0100, Fnews@nowhere wrote in
:

I'm looking to replace my ageing Panasonic FZ30 and am considering the
Canon SX1 IS and the Panasonic FZ38. Does anyone know whether or not
either of these is likely to be replaced in the next couple of months?


I think it unlikely for the Panasonic to be replaced anytime soon.


Thanks. I wasn't sure whether or not Panasonic released updated/new
models every 12 months.

--
F



Better Info[_6_] May 27th 10 01:24 AM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Wed, 26 May 2010 23:19:01 +0100, F news@nowhere wrote:

I'm looking to replace my ageing Panasonic FZ30 and am considering the
Canon SX1 IS and the Panasonic FZ38. Does anyone know whether or not
either of these is likely to be replaced in the next couple of months?

TIA


Both are excellent cameras. Depending on your level of photography skills
and level of creativity, you might want to consider too that the SX1 has
had CHDK ported to it (nearing the end of its beta phase at the moment,
just a few CHDK features are not enabled yet). See links below. Keep in
mind though that most of the features of CHDK are for *very* advanced
photographers (browse the online user's manual). It may be something that
would be of no use to you. In that case the FZ38 would be just as good.

Don't bother waiting on replacements, that's a fool's game. Unless you know
for certain something is being released in a set amount of time with a
feature that you've been waiting for your whole life. Even then, newer is
not always better. I have found it is often better to buy the tried, true,
and tested camera of this or last year at a lower price than the next model
that has had features crippled or the manufacturer cut quality to cut
costs. I still have one camera made in 2003 with an image quality that
still can't be beat by today's models.

Another point in the SX1's favor is that I found it is best to switch
manufacturers every other camera. Features from one camera company will
often compliment features on another manufacturer's cameras. For example, I
bought a Sony for its infrared-capabilities, an excellent camera, but it
lacked things like stereo video recording, almost essential to the nature
documentary photographer. So my next camera included a CD quality stereo
feature, but that had to be obtained from a different maker. I now have
both capabilities at my disposal. Since you already have the FZ30, the SX1
might give you some features that are lacking in the Panasonic line. Then
you'll have a choice of whichever features you need between the two. I
found too that by becoming comfortable with any camera from any maker that
I am then more spontaneous and creative in using any of them. The camera no
longer becomes such an important part of the photography process. It
becomes just something that exists between you and the photograph that you
want to create. I also don't become stuck in a photographic rut by taking
all my images the same way, constrained by that one maker's features or
limitations.


http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_User_Manual


SMS May 27th 10 04:48 AM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On 26/05/10 3:19 PM, F wrote:
I'm looking to replace my ageing Panasonic FZ30 and am considering the
Canon SX1 IS and the Panasonic FZ38. Does anyone know whether or not
either of these is likely to be replaced in the next couple of months?


The SX2 IS is overdue but it won't necessarily be any better and could
be worse. Not every new model is better than the previous model,
especially on P&S cameras where the manufacturers get into megapixel
wars and end up with ridiculously tiny pixels and high noise. Canon
actually went backward from the G10 to the G11 in terms of pixels, which
was move forward in terms of quality.

The FZ38 is noisier than the SX1 IS, not surprising given Panasonic's
long history of noise boxes. Don't get the FZ38 if you plan on doing
anything in low light/higher than 100 ISO. Some reviews complain about
noise even at 80 ISO!

One advantage of most Canon P&S models is the availability of the free
CHDK software which adds some extra capabilities that more sophisticated
photographers may find useful. See "http://mighty-hoernsche.de/".
There's a beta version available for the SX1 IS. I helped write some of
the CHDK documentation and I'm a big fan (and user) of it.

One advantage of the Panasonic is that it uses a Li-Ion battery, while
Canon cut costs by using AA batteries.

Bottom line, the FZ38 while it has impressive specs on paper,
disappoints in actual use.

LOL! May 27th 10 05:40 AM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Wed, 26 May 2010 20:48:48 -0700, SMS wrote:


One advantage of most Canon P&S models is the availability of the free
CHDK software which adds some extra capabilities that more sophisticated
photographers may find useful. See "http://mighty-hoernsche.de/".
There's a beta version available for the SX1 IS. I helped write some of
the CHDK documentation and I'm a big fan (and user) of it.



You don't have it on any camera. You can't even tell someone how it works.
We've already tested and proved that about you. And the WIKI history PROVES
that you've NEVER contributed even ONE WORD to the documentation, you
useless psychotic troll.

LOL!

Dave Cohen May 27th 10 04:07 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On 5/26/2010 6:19 PM, F wrote:
I'm looking to replace my ageing Panasonic FZ30 and am considering the
Canon SX1 IS and the Panasonic FZ38. Does anyone know whether or not
either of these is likely to be replaced in the next couple of months?

TIA

According to the Canon site, the SX1 IS is replaced by SX20 IS. This
seems to be essentially the same except for HD video and more pixels
which it didn't need anyway. There may also be an update to the
processor. Although Canon dosen't list the SX1 IS, reviews state it's
still available. My A95 went kaput and I'm back to using the old A40, a
2mp camera that takes excellent shots withing it's limitations. It's
that 2mp that convinces me that ever more pixels are just a marketing
gimmick plus the reinforcement of comments in this group from people who
are more dedicated photographers than myself.
If I do upgrade again, I would get the SX20 unless the SX1 IS were
available at worthwhile cost saving. I don't find the AA batteries to be
a disadvantage except for a little more size and weight and I insist on
having some form of viewfinder, something that seems to be omitted from
more and more p&s's.

SMS May 27th 10 05:47 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On 27/05/10 8:07 AM, Dave Cohen wrote:
On 5/26/2010 6:19 PM, F wrote:
I'm looking to replace my ageing Panasonic FZ30 and am considering the
Canon SX1 IS and the Panasonic FZ38. Does anyone know whether or not
either of these is likely to be replaced in the next couple of months?

TIA

According to the Canon site, the SX1 IS is replaced by SX20 IS. This
seems to be essentially the same except for HD video and more pixels
which it didn't need anyway.


The SX1 IS does higher resolution HD video than the SX20 IS.

There may also be an update to the
processor. Although Canon dosen't list the SX1 IS, reviews state it's
still available. My A95 went kaput and I'm back to using the old A40, a
2mp camera that takes excellent shots withing it's limitations.


Yeah, I have an old A60 that I got my son many years ago. Great camera,
but I upgraded the kids to two of the A570 IS because of the IS and the
video capability. There's also no CHDK available for the A60, and since
I helped write the documentation for CHDK I wanted cameras that it
supported.

It's
that 2mp that convinces me that ever more pixels are just a marketing
gimmick plus the reinforcement of comments in this group from people who
are more dedicated photographers than myself.


There's definitely some negatives as the pixel count goes up and the
pixel size goes down, but it wasn't reached at 2MP for the P&S cameras.
I really like the Canon models with the 7.1MP sensor, a sweet spot in
P&S for Canon. I also have an SD800 IS which was the only pocket camera
with a wide angle lens AND an optical viewfinder. It was also the only
P&S I ever saw go UP in price during its lifteime, because it was in
very high demand. There is no replacement for it--there are pocket
models with wide angle-lens but no viewfinder, and models with a
viewfinder but no wide-angle lens.

If I do upgrade again, I would get the SX20 unless the SX1 IS were
available at worthwhile cost saving. I don't find the AA batteries to be
a disadvantage except for a little more size and weight and I insist on
having some form of viewfinder, something that seems to be omitted from
more and more p&s's.


Good points, though I find a Li-Ion battery preferable because a) it
lasts much longer, b) it's more reliable in terms of the physical design
of the contacts and battery holder, and c) you get a much better
indication of the remaining energy in the battery because the Li-Ion
battery has a linear voltage/capacity curve. If there are after-market
Li-Ion packs for the camera they're also generally cheaper than buying
the same capacity in Sanyo Eneloops or other low-discharge AA NiMH cells.

Even with the CHDK battery feature on AA powered Canon cameras, which
gives you more information about the state of the battery, it still
can't fix the inherent flat discharge curve of an NiMH battery (if you
use disposable Lithium AA batteries then you don't have the problem).

I'd be very wary of the SX20 IS in terms of noise. It uses a higher
resolution sensor, and it's CCD not CMOS. The SX1 IS is pretty good in
terms of noise because of the CMOS sensor and because they didn't go
crazy in terms of megapixels.

In any case, the original poster should just get the SX1 IS. The battery
type is a minor issue. Even if Panasonic comes out with an FZ-38
replacement it will likely suffer the same noise problems as the FZ-38
unless Panasonic does some radical shift in their designs. It's a shame
about Panasonic because if you look just at the specifications they have
some compelling models that seem like just the perfect camera with
combinations of features that you often can't get from other
manufacturers. But they just have never been able to get a handle on
their noise problems. The most amusing review I read of the FZ-38 was
the faint praise that 'the noise is not much higher than the FZ-28'!
Yeah, I guess that's a good thing, LOL.

One problem with these super-zooms is that their often unfairly compared
to D-SLRs rather than to P&Ss. Of course they'll never be able to be as
good as D-SLR with a much larger, much lower noise sensor, and the
AF/lag will never be as good with contrast detection AF as it is with
phase detect AF. Guess one should "never say never" but it's hard to get
around the basic physics.

nospam May 27th 10 07:19 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
In article , John Navas
wrote:

One problem with these super-zooms is that their often unfairly compared
to D-SLRs rather than to P&Ss. Of course they'll never be able to be as
good as D-SLR with a much larger, much lower noise sensor, and the
AF/lag will never be as good with contrast detection AF as it is with
phase detect AF. Guess one should "never say never" but it's hard to get
around the basic physics.


Total nonsense.


it's not nonsense.

LOL! May 27th 10 09:19 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:47:28 -0700, SMS wrote:


Yeah, I have an old A60 that I got my son many years ago. Great camera,
but I upgraded the kids to two of the A570 IS because of the IS and the
video capability. There's also no CHDK available for the A60, and since
I helped write the documentation for CHDK I wanted cameras that it
supported.



You don't have it on any camera. You can't even tell someone how it works.
We've already tested and proved that about you. And the WIKI history PROVES
that you've NEVER contributed even ONE WORD to the documentation, you
useless psychotic pretend-photographer troll.

LOL!

GGBrowne May 27th 10 09:46 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:47:28 -0700, SMS wrote:


I'd be very wary of the SX20 IS in terms of noise. It uses a higher
resolution sensor, and it's CCD not CMOS. The SX1 IS is pretty good in
terms of noise because of the CMOS sensor and because they didn't go
crazy in terms of megapixels.


Proving yet again that you just make up all these things out of your
delusional pea-brain. CMOS are slightly more noisy than CCD, due to the
smaller photosite sizes caused by the extra circuitry required between
photosites.


Bowser May 28th 10 12:22 AM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:16:02 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:47:28 -0700, SMS
wrote in :

One problem with these super-zooms is that their often unfairly compared
to D-SLRs rather than to P&Ss. Of course they'll never be able to be as
good as D-SLR with a much larger, much lower noise sensor, and the
AF/lag will never be as good with contrast detection AF as it is with
phase detect AF. Guess one should "never say never" but it's hard to get
around the basic physics.


Total nonsense.


Uh, not really. I own an FZ35 and while I love it, it's clearly not in
the same league as any DSLR with regards to image quality or AF speed.
Not to say it's bad; it's quite good. But nowhere near a DSLR.

SMS May 28th 10 02:22 AM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On 27/05/10 4:22 PM, Bowser wrote:

Uh, not really. I own an FZ35 and while I love it, it's clearly not in
the same league as any DSLR with regards to image quality or AF speed.
Not to say it's bad; it's quite good. But nowhere near a DSLR.


You've got to understand the issue here. Apparently our favorite troll
has an FZ-35/FZ-38 so by default that camera becomes the perfect camera
and it can have no faults.

Unlike you and I, who could objectively look at most any item we own and
point out both its highs and lows to someone who inquires about it,
there are people that immediately after purchasing an item feel
compelled to justify the purchase to the entire world and make it clear
that their purchasing decision was in fact the best possible one. It's
deep-seated insecurity that causes this behavior.

The reality is that it at low ISO settings the FZ-35/FZ-38 produces
acceptable results, and it has many highly desirable features.
But it is neither the best quality ZLR in terms of noise or image
quality, nor is it anywhere close to quality of a D-SLR.

F May 28th 10 11:41 AM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On 27/05/2010 16:07 Dave Cohen wrote:

If I do upgrade again, I would get the SX20 unless the SX1 IS were
available at worthwhile cost saving. I don't find the AA batteries to be
a disadvantage except for a little more size and weight and I insist on
having some form of viewfinder, something that seems to be omitted from
more and more p&s's.


Thanks to everyone for their suggestions and pointers. I now have an SX1
IS on order.

I was more than pleased with my FZ30, it did all that I wanted of it,
and it did it well. My main reasons for seeking a replacement were not
because I was disappointed with it but because the flash release button
had come away and was going to cost too much to repair, some images were
starting to be corrupted when they were saved and I wanted a longer
zoom. The possibility of HD video was also a temptation.

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*!

As for the SX1, as well as good reviews, it's very 'controllable', it
has a fast burst mode, it has a viewfinder (which I consider vital), the
LCD can be rotated (again, very useful and missing on the later
Panasonics) and it uses AA batteries. Oh, and there's currently a £50
cashback offer on it from Canon. The only downside I can see is that,
like the later Panasonics, it doesn't have the manual zoom ring of the FZ30.

Time will tell on whether or not I made the right decision...

--
F



Bowser May 28th 10 02:02 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:45:06 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 19:22:29 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:16:02 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:47:28 -0700, SMS
wrote in :

One problem with these super-zooms is that their often unfairly compared
to D-SLRs rather than to P&Ss. Of course they'll never be able to be as
good as D-SLR with a much larger, much lower noise sensor, and the
AF/lag will never be as good with contrast detection AF as it is with
phase detect AF. Guess one should "never say never" but it's hard to get
around the basic physics.

Total nonsense.


Uh, not really. I own an FZ35 and while I love it, it's clearly not in
the same league as any DSLR with regards to image quality or AF speed.
Not to say it's bad; it's quite good. But nowhere near a DSLR.


Uh, really. I own an FZ28, which is excellent, and the FZ35 I borrowed
for a day was ever better. Autofocus speed is excellent *if* you
configure the cameras properly. Image quality likewise.
I routinely get better shots (in all respects) than those shooting the
same subjects with dSLR cameras. Perhaps you need more practice with
the FZ35.


Nah, it's configured just fine. Every time we go down this road I ask
you to prove what you say, we banter, and you never provide proof.
Some other time, John.

Bowser May 28th 10 02:05 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Thu, 27 May 2010 18:22:59 -0700, SMS
wrote:

On 27/05/10 4:22 PM, Bowser wrote:

Uh, not really. I own an FZ35 and while I love it, it's clearly not in
the same league as any DSLR with regards to image quality or AF speed.
Not to say it's bad; it's quite good. But nowhere near a DSLR.


You've got to understand the issue here. Apparently our favorite troll
has an FZ-35/FZ-38 so by default that camera becomes the perfect camera
and it can have no faults.

Unlike you and I, who could objectively look at most any item we own and
point out both its highs and lows to someone who inquires about it,
there are people that immediately after purchasing an item feel
compelled to justify the purchase to the entire world and make it clear
that their purchasing decision was in fact the best possible one. It's
deep-seated insecurity that causes this behavior.

The reality is that it at low ISO settings the FZ-35/FZ-38 produces
acceptable results, and it has many highly desirable features.
But it is neither the best quality ZLR in terms of noise or image
quality, nor is it anywhere close to quality of a D-SLR.


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.

SMS May 28th 10 03:59 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On 28/05/10 3:41 AM, F wrote:

snip

As for the SX1, as well as good reviews, it's very 'controllable', it
has a fast burst mode, it has a viewfinder (which I consider vital), the
LCD can be rotated (again, very useful and missing on the later
Panasonics) and it uses AA batteries. Oh, and there's currently a £50
cashback offer on it from Canon. The only downside I can see is that,
like the later Panasonics, it doesn't have the manual zoom ring of the
FZ30.


Yeah, manual zoom rings are great, but unfortunately that's a feature
that's been decontented out of most ZLRs.

Good choice. Consider trying CHDK on it. The SX1 already has many of the
features that CHDK provides to the lower end Canon models, but there's
still some useful stuff in there. If you have any questions on CHDK let
me know. I wrote a lot of documentation for it and I'm very familiar
with it.


SMS May 28th 10 04:02 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
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.

LOL! May 28th 10 05:17 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 07:59:11 -0700, SMS wrote:

On 28/05/10 3:41 AM, F wrote:

snip

As for the SX1, as well as good reviews, it's very 'controllable', it
has a fast burst mode, it has a viewfinder (which I consider vital), the
LCD can be rotated (again, very useful and missing on the later
Panasonics) and it uses AA batteries. Oh, and there's currently a £50
cashback offer on it from Canon. The only downside I can see is that,
like the later Panasonics, it doesn't have the manual zoom ring of the
FZ30.


Yeah, manual zoom rings are great, but unfortunately that's a feature
that's been decontented out of most ZLRs.

Good choice. Consider trying CHDK on it. The SX1 already has many of the
features that CHDK provides to the lower end Canon models, but there's
still some useful stuff in there. If you have any questions on CHDK let
me know. I wrote a lot of documentation for it and I'm very familiar
with it.


Oh, PLEASE do ask SMS how to use any part of CHDK. This is a laugh whenever
this happens. This psychotic SMS troll who has NEVER touched CHDK doesn't
know a damn thing about it. Even if you ask him how to install it he gets
that wrong! Dozens of people have asked him things about CHDK in the past
and he conveniently ignores their questions, pretending he never saw them.

LOL!


Bowser May 28th 10 05:50 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 07:17:56 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:02:59 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 16:45:06 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Thu, 27 May 2010 19:22:29 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:


Uh, not really. I own an FZ35 and while I love it, it's clearly not in
the same league as any DSLR with regards to image quality or AF speed.
Not to say it's bad; it's quite good. But nowhere near a DSLR.

Uh, really. I own an FZ28, which is excellent, and the FZ35 I borrowed
for a day was ever better. Autofocus speed is excellent *if* you
configure the cameras properly. Image quality likewise.
I routinely get better shots (in all respects) than those shooting the
same subjects with dSLR cameras. Perhaps you need more practice with
the FZ35.


Nah, it's configured just fine.


Apparently not.

Every time we go down this road I ask
you to prove what you say, we banter, and you never provide proof.
Some other time, John.


I've provided more than adequate proof repeatedly (again today), but you
are still entitled to your opinion, no matter how unfounded.


OK, just this once:

You claim that the Panny FZ35 AF is as fast as a DSLR. Prove it. Not
your opinion, not a statement that "it's fast" but real proof. Some
third party testing that shows it's as fast as, say, my Canon 5D II.

When you've conquered that one, post a few samples shot at ISO 3200
that match the 5D II.

We're all waiting.

Bowser May 28th 10 05:51 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 07:20:06 -0700, John Navas
wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:05:00 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

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?

SMS May 28th 10 05:57 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
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. Other than SLRs with larger sensors, even the megapixel wars
seem to have mostly ended because the manufacturers don't want to
further reduce the high ISO performance or increase noise. Also, what
often happens is the replacement model is worse than the one it
replaces, not better, because features that are deemed too costly are
removed, i.e. optical viewfinder, articulated LCD, etc.

The interchangeable lens non-DSLRs are the new market segment that Sony
and the Micro 4:3 consortium is trying to promote but it's unclear that
there's any demand for such a system that lacks many of the advantages
of D-SLRs, and addresses only the question of physical size.

Dudley Hanks[_4_] May 28th 10 07:18 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 

"SMS" wrote in message
...
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



nospam May 28th 10 07:31 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
In article XNTLn.5310$z%6.360@edtnps83, Dudley Hanks
wrote:

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.


very true, and he considers anything other than what he purchased is
junk. point out an advantage of a different product and it's "i don't
need that feature." that's wonderful but other people might.

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.


of course. it depends whether someone wants convenience and portability
versus quality and flexibility. there's a reason why pro photographers
don't use compact digicams.

SMS May 28th 10 08:04 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On 28/05/10 11:18 AM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
wrote in message
...
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.


It's always amusing, though rather sad, to see Usenet (and other forum)
posts where the sole purpose of the poster is to try to justify their
purchase. It's as if it's a personal insult when someone points out even
the slightest flaw in the product and why some other product might be
better.

For most people, there's not a single item they've ever purchased that
they could not point out some issue with, and often they were well aware
of the issue prior to the purchase. If someone asks about something they
own, they're likely to be honest about it and point out both the pros
and cons, and why they made their selection.

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.


For outdoor photos in good light with non-moving subjects, a superzoom
can produce good results, and is certainly more convenient than a D-SLR.
The reason why D-SLR sales are going up so much faster is the situations
where they excel--low light, moving subjects, and better wide angle and
telephoto lenses than the compromise lenses on the ZLRs.

C. Werner May 28th 10 08:11 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 11:55:01 -0700 (PDT), DanP
wrote:

On May 28, 2:40*am, John Navas wrote:
On Thu, 27 May 2010 18:22:59 -0700, SMS
wrote in :





On 27/05/10 4:22 PM, Bowser wrote:


Uh, not really. I own an FZ35 and while I love it, it's clearly not in
the same league as any DSLR with regards to image quality or AF speed.
Not to say it's bad; it's quite good. But nowhere near a DSLR.


You've got to understand the issue here. Apparently our favorite troll
has an FZ-35/FZ-38 so by default that camera becomes the perfect camera
and it can have no faults.


Unlike you and I, who could objectively look at most any item we own and
point out both its highs and lows to someone who inquires about it,
there are people that immediately after purchasing an item feel
compelled to justify the purchase to the entire world and make it clear
that their purchasing decision was in fact the best possible one. It's
deep-seated insecurity that causes this behavior.


The reality is that it at low ISO settings the FZ-35/FZ-38 produces
acceptable results, and it has many highly desirable features.
But it is neither the best quality ZLR in terms of noise or image
quality, nor is it anywhere close to quality of a D-SLR.


The actual reality is that you have zero experience with any of these
cameras, and have no idea what you're talking about.

--
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


Erm, have you ever tried a DSLR?


DanP


I sold my favorite one (and gave a couple away) when I found out that
high-quality P&S cameras were far more adaptable and versatile with just as
good, if not better, image quality in some of them. You might want to
actually compare cameras some day and put them through their paces instead
of listening to all the insecure trolls online trying to justify why they
wasted so much money trying to get their DSLRs to get decent snapshots. If
you had as many wide-ranging creative requirements as I do for my
photographic gear, and could actually think for yourself, you'd ditch your
DSLRs too.


LOL! May 28th 10 08:14 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 18:18:31 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


"SMS" wrote in message
...
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.


And you would know this because ....

You actually see the images you take?

News Flash: Blind Photographer hired by DPReview to do all their latest
camera and lens reviews. Word has it that he's even better than their
present camera reviewers. (Actually, there wouldn't be much difference.)

LOL!



Russ D May 28th 10 08:16 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 11:31:52 -0700, nospam wrote:

In article XNTLn.5310$z%6.360@edtnps83, Dudley Hanks
wrote:

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.


very true, and he considers anything other than what he purchased is
junk. point out an advantage of a different product and it's "i don't
need that feature." that's wonderful but other people might.

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.


of course. it depends whether someone wants convenience and portability
versus quality and flexibility. there's a reason why pro photographers
don't use compact digicams.


More words coming from a role-playing pretend-photographer troll.

MANY Pros use P&S cameras. I being one of them.

You forget, nospam, that we've PROVED that you have never used any camera
in your lifetime. You only know about the imaginary ones you hold inside
that little head of yours.


Henry Olson May 28th 10 08:26 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 12:04:11 -0700, SMS wrote:

On 28/05/10 11:18 AM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
wrote in message
...
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.


It's always amusing, though rather sad, to see Usenet (and other forum)
posts where the sole purpose of the poster is to try to justify their
purchase. It's as if it's a personal insult when someone points out even
the slightest flaw in the product and why some other product might be
better.

For most people, there's not a single item they've ever purchased that
they could not point out some issue with, and often they were well aware
of the issue prior to the purchase. If someone asks about something they
own, they're likely to be honest about it and point out both the pros
and cons, and why they made their selection.

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.


For outdoor photos in good light with non-moving subjects, a superzoom
can produce good results, and is certainly more convenient than a D-SLR.
The reason why D-SLR sales are going up so much faster is the situations
where they excel--low light, moving subjects, and better wide angle and
telephoto lenses than the compromise lenses on the ZLRs.


That's all complete and total nonsense coming from a troll that has never
used any of these cameras. EVER.




Dudley Hanks[_4_] May 28th 10 08:29 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 

"SMS" wrote in message
...
On 28/05/10 11:18 AM, Dudley Hanks wrote:
wrote in message
...
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.


It's always amusing, though rather sad, to see Usenet (and other forum)
posts where the sole purpose of the poster is to try to justify their
purchase. It's as if it's a personal insult when someone points out even
the slightest flaw in the product and why some other product might be
better.

For most people, there's not a single item they've ever purchased that
they could not point out some issue with, and often they were well aware
of the issue prior to the purchase. If someone asks about something they
own, they're likely to be honest about it and point out both the pros and
cons, and why they made their selection.

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.


For outdoor photos in good light with non-moving subjects, a superzoom can
produce good results, and is certainly more convenient than a D-SLR. The
reason why D-SLR sales are going up so much faster is the situations where
they excel--low light, moving subjects, and better wide angle and
telephoto lenses than the compromise lenses on the ZLRs.


In my case, my SX120 has a f/2.8 IS lens and an ISO 3200 setting which help
it outperform my XSi in certain low-light situations, since I don't have a
large-apertured, long focal-length lens for the XSi.

It goes without saying that, if I were to pick up a f/2.8 70 - 200mm EOS
lens, the situation would quickly reverse itself, as the quicker DSLR
performance, lower noise sensorand superior optics of the lens could not be
surpassed in a $250 P&S package.

Also, given I don't have a macro lens for the XSi, it's pretty easy for the
SX120 to beat the XSi in that catagory. :)

As an aside, I've had good feedback, initially, about the SX120's HDR-like
wider latitude than the XSi. It seems to do a good job of pulling out
shadow detail and keeping highlights from blowing in most situations.

But, my XSi is a few years old, and newer DSLR's in that price range are
quite likely to have better dynamic range than my cam.

On the flip side, distortion and purple-fringing in SX120 pics is worse than
I'd expected, even after reading several reviews containing warnings about
these problems. It's a good thing my aim isn't spot on at longer focal
lengths, so I'm unlikely to shoot many pics in the longer zoom range.

Take Care,
Dudley



Jeff Jones May 28th 10 08:40 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:29:44 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


On the flip side, distortion and purple-fringing in SX120 pics is worse than
I'd expected, even after reading several reviews containing warnings about
these problems.


I highly doubt that anyone in your family would know what you were talking
about (judging by the poor quality of photos that they let you post to the
net) let alone them knowing how to compare those things between different
cameras.

You truly are blind. In more ways than one. As are any that would believe
your equipment reviews.




Dudley Hanks[_4_] May 28th 10 08:57 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 

"LOL!" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 May 2010 18:18:31 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


"SMS" wrote in message
.. .
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.


And you would know this because ....

You actually see the images you take?

News Flash: Blind Photographer hired by DPReview to do all their latest
camera and lens reviews. Word has it that he's even better than their
present camera reviewers. (Actually, there wouldn't be much difference.)

LOL!



It's comments like that that expose your narrow-minded,
more-than-a-bit-out-of-touch mentality for what it is: socially limiting
and not conducive to technical innovation...

There's an old saying in the armed forces: "If you want to know the easiest
and quickest method of how to get something done, assign the problem to the
laziest troop in the platoon."

Regarding myself, if my limited sight sees something better in one camera /
image over another, then there is obviously something desirable there.

For instance, I shot a pic the other night of Mich wandering off-leash as I
took the garbage out. It's a shot you would call "a crap shot," but it
caught my eye as I was reviewing it because my eye, with its weird way of
seeing things, picked out part of Mich's silhouette superimposed over a
sidewalk, and a highlight along the edge of his tail. To me, Mich was
delinieated by both shadow and highlight.

Later, when my son was looking at the same picture, he saw an underexposed
pic of Mich, with neither the silhouette or the tail highlight drawing much
attention.

So, what does this have to do with what a sighted person would care about in
the purchase of a camera, or in reflecting upon the work of a blind
photographer?

Well, The pic illustrates the nice dynamic range of the SX120. Even in an
extremely low-light situation, outdoors with the light of only a single bulb
, it can produce some very delicate highlight detail in shadow areas. So
delicate in fact that sighted persons might not even notice, but which still
have the potential of making a good pic better than it otherwise would have
been.

Take Care,
Dudley



Dudley Hanks[_4_] May 28th 10 09:08 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 

"Jeff Jones" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:29:44 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:


On the flip side, distortion and purple-fringing in SX120 pics is worse
than
I'd expected, even after reading several reviews containing warnings about
these problems.


I highly doubt that anyone in your family would know what you were talking
about (judging by the poor quality of photos that they let you post to the
net) let alone them knowing how to compare those things between different
cameras.

You truly are blind. In more ways than one. As are any that would believe
your equipment reviews.




Who said I was referring to family members? And, who says they "let" me
post pics?

I choose what to show after asking a variety of questions to various friends
and family members. They are encouraged not to express a personal
preference, only to convey to me as objectively as possible what they see in
the image.

After an image is posted, I receive feedback from persons who post responses
to the host where I placed my links, and also from users who e-mail their
responses. You might be surprised at who views my shots...

Take Care,
Dudley



Jeff Jones May 28th 10 10:08 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 20:08:08 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

You might be surprised at who views my shots...


I wouldn't be surprised at all. I've already seen the kind of dreck
crapshots posted by those that encourage you here. Why should others that
do the same (encourage you) be any less terrible at their own photography
because they use email.


Dudley Hanks[_4_] May 28th 10 10:14 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 

"Jeff Jones" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 May 2010 20:08:08 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

You might be surprised at who views my shots...


I wouldn't be surprised at all. I've already seen the kind of dreck
crapshots posted by those that encourage you here. Why should others that
do the same (encourage you) be any less terrible at their own photography
because they use email.


Jeff / LOL / GR, the difference between you and I is that you start with
your own ideas / opinions / prejudices and devote your energy to bringing
the world down to your level, while I start with my own abilities and
consult the world in order to improve both my abilities and the
understanding of others as to the arbitrary nature of societies
understanding of persons with disabilities.

Take Care,
Dudley



Jeff Jones May 28th 10 10:22 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:14:36 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

the difference between you and I is that you start with
your own ideas / opinions / prejudices and devote your energy to bringing
the world down to your level


Quite the contrary. I short out the wheat from the chaff. I'm a
photographer. I find those rarest of gems in the most unlikely places. It's
part of being a photographer. Looking for gold amongst the world's trash.
Your photography is trash. That simple.


Jeff Jones May 28th 10 10:24 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 
On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:14:36 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:

the difference between you and I is that you start with
your own ideas / opinions / prejudices and devote your energy to bringing
the world down to your level


Quite the contrary. I sort out the wheat from the chaff. I'm a
photographer. I find those rarest of gems in the most unlikely places. It's
part of being a photographer. Looking for gold amongst the world's trash.
Your photography is trash. That simple.


David J Taylor[_16_] May 29th 10 08:48 AM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:IQULn.5311$z%6.2582@edtnps83...
[]
In my case, my SX120 has a f/2.8 IS lens and an ISO 3200 setting which
help it outperform my XSi in certain low-light situations, since I don't
have a large-apertured, long focal-length lens for the XSi.


Nor do you with the SX120 - at its longest focal length (60mm, 360mm
equivalent), it's f/4.3, not f/2.8.

The ISO 3200 image I found with a quick search was not full resolution,
but 1600 x 1200.

Cheers,
David


George Kerby May 29th 10 03:24 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 



On 5/28/10 9:20 AM, in article ,
"John Navas" wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:05:00 -0400, Bowser wrote in
:

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.'


"Cleverness is not wisdom."

--Euripides

NavAss, you have neither...


George Kerby May 29th 10 03:26 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 



On 5/28/10 10:02 AM, in article ,
"SMS" wrote:

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.


Yep. He bounces from group to group. When he make a big enough ass of
himself in one, he leaves and shows up at another.

The guy needs a life.


George Kerby May 29th 10 03:28 PM

Canon and Panasonic: updated models
 



On 5/28/10 10:02 AM, in article ,
"John Navas" wrote:

On Fri, 28 May 2010 07:59:11 -0700, SMS
wrote in :

Good choice. Consider trying CHDK on it. The SX1 already has many of the
features that CHDK provides to the lower end Canon models, but there's
still some useful stuff in there. If you have any questions on CHDK let
me know. I wrote a lot of documentation for it and I'm very familiar
with it.


Only in your dreams.


"Dreams are today's answers to tomorrow's questions."

--Edgar Cayce

The question here is: "When are you going to go away, NavAss?"



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:46 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com