Got my Nikon back - still broken.

wrote in message
news
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 13:16:46 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
[ . . . ]

The Sony A100 is a disappointment to me, a glorified P&S.

It's patently foolish to call *any* digital SLR "a glorified P&S."

The term "point and shoot" is grotesquely misused 99.9% of the time
anyway.
It's absurd, for example, to call a highly sophisticated and versatile
camera like the Nikon Coolpix 8800 a "point and shoot," but many users do
for some unfathomable reason. Whence comes the silly notion that anything
not an SLR must be a "point and shoot"?

Look, "point and shoot" was the term coined to mean compact 35mm cameras
with no user controls at all, apart from a few flash modes and self-timer.
Everything else was automatic; the camera made every decision about
exposure
and focus settings by itself and in most cases didn't even give the user a
clue as to what those settings were. All the user could do was, literally,
point and shoot, and hope the camera was making reasonably good guesses.

That has NOTHING WHATEVER in common with the vast majority of digital
cameras today. I have shirt-pocket sized digital cameras that give me more
control over the picture-taking process than most if not all of the 35mm
SLRs I'ved owned over the last 45 years or so. My Nikon 8400, 8700 and
8800
cameras go far beyond any of those 35s in terms of user controls. Why,
then,
"P&S"? It's a nonsense term when applied to such cameras.

I don't have (have never even handled) a Sony Alpha 100. I do have the
Maxxum 5D which of course the A100 is based on, and love the camera.
Probably I will eventually get the Sony too. Minolta's Anti-Shake (now
"Super SteadyShot" in the Sony) is a really great feature and almost sells
the camera by itself -- especially for those of us who already have
closetfuls of Maxxum lenses.

Neil



I agree with you. To me a point&shoot is a camera with a tiny, noisy
sensor, and
a fixed lens, and usually shoots only in fully auto. My 280 was one.

P&S cams always had a few adjustments, but nothing like a DSLR. Some never
had
any manual setting.

I've never seen a camera that I would call a point-and-shoot that had any
real manual settings at all. Most have a motorized zoom in addition to the
auto-everything operation, and as mentioned the choice of a few flash modes
and self-timer, but that was it. In my opinion as soon as you add aperture
and shutter-speed controls to a camera, by that alone you have taken it out
of the P&S category.



I have an expensive newer P&S, the Dimage 7i, it has every adjustment you
can
think of, but the pics are crap compared to my D70.

Sure. I have a D70s as well as Minolta 7i, 7Hi and A200 cameras. I wouldn't
compare the latter three with the D70s for final picture quality, though I
must say I love the Anti-Shake on the A200. There are many low-light
situations in which I don't want to use flash, and AS has been just great
for that.


You might not call it a P&S
technically, but I use that term as the dividing line between sensor size
and
lens mounts.

Maybe we need a third term!

I think we do need a different term. It's not really a question of whether a
non-SLR or other non-interchangeable-lens camera does or doesn't equal a
digital SLR in picture quality. The term "point and shoot" doesn't address
that at all; it only implies absence of direct user control over exposure,
focus etc.

What new term? I dunno. Absent anything better I would suggest simply
"compact." Even though a Nikon 8800 for example isn't a particularly compact
camera, it's sure compact compared to a D70s with its 18-70mm lens! And
certainly "compact" is not as completely, utterly wrong as "point and
shoot."



So many things, so few pigeon holes!

That's true.

Neil

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
. ..

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
[ . . . ]

The Sony A100 is a disappointment to me, a glorified P&S.

It's patently foolish to call *any* digital SLR "a glorified P&S."

The term "point and shoot" is grotesquely misused 99.9% of the time
anyway.
It's absurd, for example, to call a highly sophisticated and versatile
camera like the Nikon Coolpix 8800 a "point and shoot," but many users do
for some unfathomable reason. Whence comes the silly notion that anything
not an SLR must be a "point and shoot"?

Look, "point and shoot" was the term coined to mean compact 35mm cameras
with no user controls at all, apart from a few flash modes and self-timer.
Everything else was automatic; the camera made every decision about
exposure
and focus settings by itself and in most cases didn't even give the user a
clue as to what those settings were. All the user could do was, literally,
point and shoot, and hope the camera was making reasonably good guesses.

That has NOTHING WHATEVER in common with the vast majority of digital
cameras today. I have shirt-pocket sized digital cameras that give me more
control over the picture-taking process than most if not all of the 35mm
SLRs I'ved owned over the last 45 years or so. My Nikon 8400, 8700 and
8800
cameras go far beyond any of those 35s in terms of user controls.

And how was the manual focus on those three cameras?

Greg

"G.T." wrote in message
...

"Neil Harrington" wrote in message
. ..

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
[ . . . ]

The Sony A100 is a disappointment to me, a glorified P&S.

It's patently foolish to call *any* digital SLR "a glorified P&S."

The term "point and shoot" is grotesquely misused 99.9% of the time
anyway.
It's absurd, for example, to call a highly sophisticated and versatile
camera like the Nikon Coolpix 8800 a "point and shoot," but many users do
for some unfathomable reason. Whence comes the silly notion that anything
not an SLR must be a "point and shoot"?

Look, "point and shoot" was the term coined to mean compact 35mm cameras
with no user controls at all, apart from a few flash modes and
self-timer.
Everything else was automatic; the camera made every decision about
exposure
and focus settings by itself and in most cases didn't even give the user
a
clue as to what those settings were. All the user could do was,
literally,
point and shoot, and hope the camera was making reasonably good guesses.

That has NOTHING WHATEVER in common with the vast majority of digital
cameras today. I have shirt-pocket sized digital cameras that give me
more
control over the picture-taking process than most if not all of the 35mm
SLRs I'ved owned over the last 45 years or so. My Nikon 8400, 8700 and
8800
cameras go far beyond any of those 35s in terms of user controls.

And how was the manual focus on those three cameras?

About as good as the manual zoom.

The point is they are not "P&S" or anything remotely like it, any more than
a D2x is "point and shoot" simply because it can be used in full auto mode.

Neil

Greg

"Bill" wrote in message
...
Alan Browne wrote:

The Sony A100 is a disappointment to me, a glorified P&S.

It's patently foolish to call *any* digital SLR "a glorified P&S."

"Super SteadyShot" in the Sony) is a really great feature and almost
sells
the camera by itself -- especially for those of us who already have
closetfuls of Maxxum lenses.

Touchy, touchy. The 5D and the A100 are glorified P&S cameras.
Any camera with pictograms (flowers, etc) is a P&S.

FYI - the Canon 5D does not have any of the dummy modes.

Actually, it has one, the famous "green square" full auto mode.

--
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

Neil Harrington wrote:

And it's not "a glorified P&S" anyway.

You're right... no glory at all.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Neil Harrington wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
[ . . . ]

The Sony A100 is a disappointment to me, a glorified P&S.


It's patently foolish to call *any* digital SLR "a glorified P&S."

The term "point and shoot" is grotesquely misused 99.9% of the time anyway.
It's absurd, for example, to call a highly sophisticated and versatile

STUFF SNIPPED

"Super SteadyShot" in the Sony) is a really great feature and almost sells
the camera by itself -- especially for those of us who already have
closetfuls of Maxxum lenses.

Touchy, touchy. The 5D and the A100 are glorified P&S cameras.
Any camera with pictograms (flowers, etc) is a P&S.

It comes down to the LACK of *photographic* control on body buttons,
dials, levers, switches, etc. The camera forces awkward
button-hold-while-turning-dial and menu diving for somewhat routine
photographic tasks. Try the 5 or 5D in manual exposure mode for a while.

The Maxxum 5, 5D and A100 are not serious photographic cameras. (I have
not handled the A100 either, but its similarity to the 5/5D is all too
clear). My SO has the wonderful Maxxum 5 and it suits her needs very
well ... but it can't come close to my needs.

The Maxxum 7 and 7D are very close to ideal, yet both have several
shortcomings. (I have a 7D as well as a 7xi and 9).
http://www.aliasimages.com/Max7Drev.htm

The Maxxum 9 is the THE reference photographic tool from Minolta and
that is what we hope Sony will strive to achieve in a high end digital
camera. The Maxxum 9 rivals the EOS-1V and F5 in many ways and
surpasses both of them in several areas.

I don't have a "closetful" of Maxxum lenses, but the 6 I have are worth
more than most people spend on photographic equipment in their
lifetimes... My interest in the Sony DSLR is as intense as anyone's ...
which is why I am critical of what Sony has achieved ... or in the case
of the A100, what they haven't ...

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne wrote:
The Maxxum 9 is the THE reference photographic tool from Minolta and
that is what we hope Sony will strive to achieve in a high end digital
camera. The Maxxum 9 rivals the EOS-1V and F5 in many ways and
surpasses both of them in several areas.

I bought a D200 4 months ago and it's a great camera. I switched from a
7xi and an XD7. I preferred the XD7, so I never bought anything beyond
the 28-105 for the 7xi, while I have several lenses for the XD7. As you
probably know, the 7xi is a great camera (especially for its time), but
the interface is a bit strange (and I should better not comment on the
intelligent power zoom...).

I only handled the Dynax 9 because a friend owns it, but it is an
excellent camera in terms of handling. It is the only camera I've
handled that comes close to the D200 in terms of naturalness of use. If
something equivalent was available when I got my D200, I'd have bought
it without a second thought. However, they were too late. A shame,
since Minolta obviously learned their lesson: I also have a Dimage Z3
which, bizarely, allows easier control than the 7xi! eg exp comp with
just buttons, no button holding; easy manual mode (up/down and
left-right control aperture and speed); same for choosing the af area,
etc. I mean, I still remember how to select af sensor on the 7xi: FUNC
FUNC, front dial rotates sensor (no problem, since I always used the
central sensor, but I see now with the D200 how it should be done)...
Spot/honeycomb metering: FUNC FUNC, rear dial... Oh dear. Even after 14
years, it seems a bit strange. And when they got it right, they stop!

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
Neil Harrington wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
[ . . . ]

The Sony A100 is a disappointment to me, a glorified P&S.


It's patently foolish to call *any* digital SLR "a glorified P&S."

The term "point and shoot" is grotesquely misused 99.9% of the time
anyway. It's absurd, for example, to call a highly sophisticated and
versatile

STUFF SNIPPED

"Super SteadyShot" in the Sony) is a really great feature and almost
sells the camera by itself -- especially for those of us who already have
closetfuls of Maxxum lenses.

Touchy, touchy. The 5D and the A100 are glorified P&S cameras.
Any camera with pictograms (flowers, etc) is a P&S.

Oh, it's the *pictograms* that make it so?!

Then you should call 'em pictogram cameras, not P&S. They are certainly not
point-and-shoots.

By your definition ("Any camera with pictograms") a Nikon D2H or D2x is a
P&S. I doubt you'll find many who agree with you on this.



It comes down to the LACK of *photographic* control on body buttons,
dials, levers, switches, etc.

And is there some specific *number* of "body buttons, dials, levers,
switches, etc." that in your mind take a camera out of the contemptible P&S
category? By that measure I guess most of the 35mm SLRs I've owned would
have been "P&S" in your view.


The camera forces awkward button-hold-while-turning-dial and menu diving
for somewhat routine photographic tasks. Try the 5 or 5D in manual
exposure mode for a while.

To what purpose? From the early 1950s to the mid-1970s I used cameras that
were *all* manual, *all* the time, exposure, focus, film advance and rewind,
many of them without even any metering capability. Been there, done that --
only on rare occasions have any need or desire to do it again.



The Maxxum 5, 5D and A100 are not serious photographic cameras.

We must have a very different way of looking at these things. From my point
of view it's the photographer who's "serious" or not, not the tool he uses.


(I have not handled the A100 either, but its similarity to the 5/5D is all
too clear). My SO has the wonderful Maxxum 5 and it suits her needs very
well ... but it can't come close to my needs.

The Maxxum 7 and 7D are very close to ideal, yet both have several
shortcomings. (I have a 7D as well as a 7xi and 9).
http://www.aliasimages.com/Max7Drev.htm

The Maxxum 9 is the THE reference photographic tool from Minolta and that
is what we hope Sony will strive to achieve in a high end digital camera.
The Maxxum 9 rivals the EOS-1V and F5 in many ways and surpasses both of
them in several areas.

I don't have a "closetful" of Maxxum lenses, but the 6 I have are worth
more than most people spend on photographic equipment in their
lifetimes... My interest in the Sony DSLR is as intense as anyone's ...
which is why I am critical of what Sony has achieved ... or in the case of
the A100, what they haven't ...

I will be very surprised if the A100 is not just the beginning of a long and
successful line of dSLRs marketed over a wide range of price points. It's
hard to imagine Sony even bothering to get into it otherwise.

Neil

On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 20:09:19 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

Touchy, touchy. The 5D and the A100 are glorified P&S cameras.
Any camera with pictograms (flowers, etc) is a P&S.

your opinion...

It comes down to the LACK of *photographic* control on body buttons,
dials, levers, switches, etc. The camera forces awkward
button-hold-while-turning-dial and menu diving for somewhat routine
photographic tasks.

NO it doesn't! No need to hold anything, just touch any button and let go, turn
the dial at your leisure. Everything shows up on one page on the screen, very
little menu diving needed.

P mode is like the D70, turn the dial to change combinations, touch the +/- and
dial in the compensation - shown on the back in BIG digits! Not easy to miss
like the D70.

I find it MUCH faster and convenient to find items then with the Nikon 30 item
deep menus.

Try the 5 or 5D in manual exposure mode for a while.

The Maxxum 5, 5D and A100 are not serious photographic cameras. (I have
not handled the A100 either, but its similarity to the 5/5D is all too
clear). My SO has the wonderful Maxxum 5 and it suits her needs very
well ... but it can't come close to my needs.

The Maxxum 7 and 7D are very close to ideal, yet both have several
shortcomings. (I have a 7D as well as a 7xi and 9).
http://www.aliasimages.com/Max7Drev.htm

The Maxxum 9 is the THE reference photographic tool from Minolta and
that is what we hope Sony will strive to achieve in a high end digital
camera. The Maxxum 9 rivals the EOS-1V and F5 in many ways and
surpasses both of them in several areas.

I don't have a "closetful" of Maxxum lenses, but the 6 I have are worth
more than most people spend on photographic equipment in their
lifetimes... My interest in the Sony DSLR is as intense as anyone's ...
which is why I am critical of what Sony has achieved ... or in the case
of the A100, what they haven't ...

For $999 ? Show me better... I'd say they achieved quite a lot! Sure this is
a 'toy' for serious pros, but I'm sure Sony will improve once they get their
feet wet in this business. The bottom line is - what do the pictures look like
and how hard was it to take them? We'll see....


Cheers,
Alan.

Alan Browne wrote:


Touchy, touchy. The 5D and the A100 are glorified P&S cameras.
Any camera with pictograms (flowers, etc) is a P&S.


I guess if you want to make up your own definitions of things you are
free to do so. But don't be surprised if no one understands what you
are talking about.

The accepted and most widely used definition of point and shoot camera
is exactly as described -- a camera that has almost no user control;
you just point, shoot, and hope for the best. I would allow a point and
shoot to have a few programmed modes; most users of such cameras will
not even use those.

But to suggest that any camera that has pre-programmed exposure modes
is a point and shoot is utterly ridiculous. Every modern camera would
be a point and shoot by such a broad definition.