Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation

On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:17:42 -0400, nospam wrote
in lid:

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

What sort of events, I doubt a slilent camera would be at great
advantage at the Olympic or many sports arenas maybe in a
library.

Tennis, chess, snooker, concerts, churches, museums etc.

tennis?? if you think tennis players can even hear a camera (or
care if they could), you're crazy.

wedding photographers have been using 'noisy slrs' in churches for
decades. nobody gives a **** there either.

museums don't care unless they ban all cameras, in which case a
silent camera won't help.

My guess is that you have never taken a serious interest in any of
those sports. An unexpected sharp noise can cause a distraction. Not
for everyone, but yes for some.

So how have they taken pictures in the past before electronic camera.
Such as when Britain last one wimbodon before Andy Murry ?

and you're hardly very close the the player at these sporting
events,and they rarely ban cameras because of noise it';s usually
security or because the light not the sound can damage delicate colours
in painting and fabrics,
although I've usualy found it to be so they can sel their own pictures
and postcards.

yep.

museums often prohibit *flash* photography, not noisy cameras, or
cameras are banned outright to force you to buy 'official' photos, which
is often done at concerts.

Museums featuring classical paintings often have the lights dimmed. Not
to save electricity as one might think but to protect the artwork from
bleaching due to bright light, just like photographs do. Multiple flashes
have the same effect repeated then over time. Other visitors might be
seriously bothered too!

The other classic is to not allow people to bring umbrellas in...
--
teleportation kills

In article , android
wrote:

The other classic is to not allow people to bring umbrellas in...

and for good reason.

On 8/22/2016 11:38 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

What sort of events, I doubt a slilent camera would be at great advantage
at the Olympic or many sports arenas maybe in a library.

Tennis, chess, snooker, concerts, churches, museums etc.

tennis?? if you think tennis players can even hear a camera (or care if
they could), you're crazy.

wedding photographers have been using 'noisy slrs' in churches for
decades. nobody gives a **** there either.

museums don't care unless they ban all cameras, in which case a silent
camera won't help.

My guess is that you have never taken a serious interest in any of those
sports. An unexpected sharp noise can cause a distraction. Not for
everyone, but yes for some.

as usual, you guess wrong.

there are public tennis courts near where i live, just off a busy
street where trucks frequently pass. a camera is the least of the
distractions.

'noisy slrs' have been used at professional tennis tournaments for
*years*.


As usual, your statement does not refute my point.
And unlike you, I did not say "all." And as for concerts, there is no
question that shutter clicking is a definite distraction from the beauty
of classical music.

--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

What sort of events, I doubt a slilent camera would be at great
advantage
at the Olympic or many sports arenas maybe in a library.

Tennis, chess, snooker, concerts, churches, museums etc.

tennis?? if you think tennis players can even hear a camera (or care if
they could), you're crazy.

wedding photographers have been using 'noisy slrs' in churches for
decades. nobody gives a **** there either.

museums don't care unless they ban all cameras, in which case a silent
camera won't help.

My guess is that you have never taken a serious interest in any of those
sports. An unexpected sharp noise can cause a distraction. Not for
everyone, but yes for some.

as usual, you guess wrong.

there are public tennis courts near where i live, just off a busy
street where trucks frequently pass. a camera is the least of the
distractions.

'noisy slrs' have been used at professional tennis tournaments for
*years*.

As usual, your statement does not refute my point.

you didn't have a point.

And unlike you, I did not say "all."

translated: none.

have you ever played tennis? tennis players aren't going to hear a
shutter click, especially if it's a tournament with the crowd cheering.

And as for concerts, there is no
question that shutter clicking is a definite distraction from the beauty
of classical music.

you were talking about sports, not classical concerts.

On 23/08/2016 10:15, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 22 August 2016 17:02:46 UTC+1, David Taylor wrote:
On 22/08/2016 15:42, Whisky-dave wrote:
[]
but it's not a mirroless camera and I don;t see it as a pro level camera either.

I can't find any mirror in it! Enlighten me!

a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too.

As is the GX7, you were wrong.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pan...-lumix-dmc-gx7

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

I might venture to suggest than any
camera can be a "pro" camera when it's in the hands of a "pro".

Here's a low end mirroless camera that can be used by a pro.

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/...5200/Show.html

Maybe nospam can say why it's a 10 shot film camera, as I've no idea of it's
attraction, unless you're obsessed with hello kitty.

read the description:
Includes 10 shots of Fujifilm Instant Colour Film

On 2016-08-23 09:15:39 +0000, Whisky-dave said:

On Monday, 22 August 2016 17:02:46 UTC+1, David Taylor wrote:
On 22/08/2016 15:42, Whisky-dave wrote:
[]
My GX7 offers an electronic shutter mode,

but it's not a mirroless camera and I don;t see it as a pro level
camera either.

I can't find any mirror in it! Enlighten me!

a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too.

Actually it wasn't.
In the simple "Brownie" viewfinder it had a mirror, and if you had one
which gave you the option of a landscape or portrait orientation (The
three eyed Brownie VF, VF, & lens), it had two. What it didn't have was
a reflex(WYSIWYG), through the lens system which also required a mirror
to make the incoming light from the lens make that turn into the prism
and viewfinder.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 04:48:39 -0700, Savageduck
wrote in
2016082304483966310-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom:

On 2016-08-23 09:15:39 +0000, Whisky-dave said:

On Monday, 22 August 2016 17:02:46 UTC+1, David Taylor wrote:
On 22/08/2016 15:42, Whisky-dave wrote:
[]
My GX7 offers an electronic shutter mode,

but it's not a mirroless camera and I don;t see it as a pro level
camera either.

I can't find any mirror in it! Enlighten me!

a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too.

Actually it wasn't.
In the simple "Brownie" viewfinder it had a mirror, and if you had one
which gave you the option of a landscape or portrait orientation (The
three eyed Brownie VF, VF, & lens), it had two. What it didn't have was
a reflex(WYSIWYG), through the lens system which also required a mirror
to make the incoming light from the lens make that turn into the prism
and viewfinder.

Totally true. it was a precursor to the Rolliflex! :-)

--
teleportation kills

On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 07:33:37 -0400, nospam wrote
in lid:

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

I might venture to suggest than any
camera can be a "pro" camera when it's in the hands of a "pro".

Here's a low end mirroless camera that can be used by a pro.

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/...5200/Show.html

Maybe nospam can say why it's a 10 shot film camera, as I've no idea
of it's
attraction, unless you're obsessed with hello kitty.

read the description:
Includes 10 shots of Fujifilm Instant Colour Film

It will be there as long as "The Impossible Project", me thinks...

https://eu.impossible-project.com/

--
teleportation kills

On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 12:13:44 +0100, David Taylor
wrote in
:

On 23/08/2016 10:15, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 22 August 2016 17:02:46 UTC+1, David Taylor wrote:
On 22/08/2016 15:42, Whisky-dave wrote:
[]
but it's not a mirroless camera and I don;t see it as a pro level
camera either.

I can't find any mirror in it! Enlighten me!

a box brownie was a mirrorless camera too.

As is the GX7, you were wrong.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pan...-lumix-dmc-gx7

I can se the mirror two! Have a looksie:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-gx7/panasonic-gx7A.HTM

It's got a blue tint, but what the...

--
teleportation kills