The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S

Mark Thomas wrote:
dj_nme wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article , Paul Furman
wrote:

The terms do evolve but 'SLR' would be completely meaningless used
for the G1. I'd rather call it a digital rangefinder which is also
wrong g. The distinction is interchangeable lens and that
separates it from P&S.

but it's closer to an slr than it is to anything else.

Well I'd say it's about half way between an SLR & a P&S so 'Bridge'
if you want to lump it somewhere.

'4/3 format interchangeable lens camera'

It's actually Micro 4/3, so that (unfortunately) scans as wrong from
the get-go.
I personally like what the user "chuxter" on the depreview.com forums
came up with:
"EVIL camera" (EVIL = Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens).

Chuxter has been running a gedanken along a very similar line to what
Panasonic and Olympus came up with as their first Micro FourThirds
cameras for about a year and a half.
http://www.here-ugo.com/BridgeBlog/?page_id=27
I don't believe that he actually has the facilities to go into
production and I'd be very surprised if Panasonic or Olympus would
want to pay an outside designer.
Interesting, none the less.
Hmmmmm, my browser threw up...
==========================
What happened when Google visited this site?
Of the 6 pages that we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 4
page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed

I got:
Reported Attack Site!
This web site at www.here-ugo.com has been reported as an attack site
and has been blocked based on your security preferences.

Attack sites try to install programs that steal private information, use
your computer to attack others, or damage your system.

Some attack sites intentionally distribute harmful software, but many
are compromised without the knowledge or permission of their owners.

==========================

I went anyway and survived.. (O: But frankly, he just goes and on and
on.. Can I lazily ask what his camera has/does that the G1 (and it's
likely successors) doesn't/won't?

That thing reminds more of the new Red camera because of the add-on
accessories. People tend to call that a SLR mistakenly.


EVIL will never catch on. With the diversity of camera designs
nowadays, and the already confusing and inappropriate use of dslr, p&s,
compact, bridge, zlr, etc, new terms are unlikely to become widely
adopted *unless* a manufacturer is very successful with a particular
range and promotes it by using a useful term. And they won't pick
'evil', I suspect...


--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

nospam wrote:
In article , savvo
wrote:

and the panasonic g1 is considered an slr even though it lacks a
mirror. it's more like an slr than it is any other category. the
terms evolve.

Not by Panasonic or, well, anyone really.

It's more like a compact because that's what it is.

no, it's more like an slr. the g1 is closer to something like a nikon
d40 than it is any compact camera. the main difference is that there's
an evf and no mirror. otherwise, it feels like a small dslr.

This is rather like arguing whether a hermaphrodite is a man or a woman.

--
Chris Malcolm

David J Taylor wrote:
John Navas wrote:

p.s. Do you really not see how illogical it is to say you're open to
"scientific reason", acknowledge that cameras like the FZ8 are really
no more P&S than dSLRs, and then conclude that you'll continue to use
the term P&S?? That's a big part of why it seems biased.

I'm simply not going to waste my time writing or your time reading "a
small-sensor camera which has a fixed lens" when P&S will do.

What do you write when it's a big sensor camera with a fixed lens?

--
Chris Malcolm

Paul Furman wrote:
John McWilliams wrote:
John Navas wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 20:55:53 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

I rest my case. I think your bias is clear, whether you honestly
don't see it or not, and will take that into account in the future.
John, as you objected to "small-sensor", and said that "compact" was
not appropriate (IIRC), ...

Come on, David, at least be above putting words in my mouth. I did not
say "compact" was not appropriate. I use the term myself. How could
you possibly have missed that?

Well, gentlemen: I did switch to "compact" sometime in the past year,

'Compact' is a good term. It also describes the sensor size in an obliqu
way. So, is that the official new non-discriminatory PC term for P&S?

"Compact" isn't a suitable term for large heavy fixed lens cameras
with big sensors :-)

--
Chris Malcolm

Chris Malcolm wrote:
David J Taylor wrote:
John Navas wrote:

p.s. Do you really not see how illogical it is to say you're open to
"scientific reason", acknowledge that cameras like the FZ8 are really
no more P&S than dSLRs, and then conclude that you'll continue to use
the term P&S?? That's a big part of why it seems biased.

I'm simply not going to waste my time writing or your time reading "a
small-sensor camera which has a fixed lens" when P&S will do.

What do you write when it's a big sensor camera with a fixed lens?

'Sony R1'

Is there another model like that?



--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

On 24 Dec 2008 00:27:05 GMT, Chris Malcolm wrote
in :

nospam wrote:
In article , savvo
wrote:

and the panasonic g1 is considered an slr even though it lacks a
mirror. it's more like an slr than it is any other category. the
terms evolve.

Not by Panasonic or, well, anyone really.

It's more like a compact because that's what it is.

no, it's more like an slr. the g1 is closer to something like a nikon
d40 than it is any compact camera. the main difference is that there's
an evf and no mirror. otherwise, it feels like a small dslr.

This is rather like arguing whether a hermaphrodite is a man or a woman.

LOL!

--
Best regards,
John
Panasonic DMC-FZ8, DMC-FZ20, and several others

On 24 Dec 2008 00:33:05 GMT, Chris Malcolm wrote
in :

David J Taylor wrote:
John Navas wrote:

p.s. Do you really not see how illogical it is to say you're open to
"scientific reason", acknowledge that cameras like the FZ8 are really
no more P&S than dSLRs, and then conclude that you'll continue to use
the term P&S?? That's a big part of why it seems biased.

I'm simply not going to waste my time writing or your time reading "a
small-sensor camera which has a fixed lens" when P&S will do.

What do you write when it's a big sensor camera with a fixed lens?

Which one?

--
Best regards,
John
Panasonic DMC-FZ8, DMC-FZ20, and several others

On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:37:29 -0800, John Navas
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:20:43 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:

I'm happy to discuss well-reasoned arguments with anyone, without agenda,
and I'm open to views which have the backing of scientific reason and
examples. I try not to have any intentional bias, and to state as fact
only that which I can verify for myself. Of course, I will not always
achieve that!

Surely you also consider the _perception_ of what you're trying to
communicate -- that is, after all, the essence of communication. Isn't
communication your objective? Calling your wife "fat" may be objective
and scientifically accurate, but not likely to have a good result, now
is it?

Having considered what you have said, I think that I will continue to use
the terms P&S and compact camera as they seem the least likely to be
misunderstood, although I do feel that small-sensor camera actually
describes them better. Any word can be used in a derogatory way if you
try hard enough!

The point is that some can be used in a derogatory way without trying,
as I'm sure you know. And as you should now know, I consider the term
"P&S" to be derogatory when used to refer to a "bridge" camera like the
Panasonic FZ8, unlike the term "compact camera". If you do that,
knowing how I feel, and why, how could you really expect to have a good
constructive relationship with me? Just like how you would feel if you
perceived me to be insulting you.

It's still beyond me why anyone would consider a commonly used
description of a camera type to be derogatory in any way.

It's just a camera. If the classification that most people give it
offends you, then I'd suggest that you're into photography for the
wrong reasons.

On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:49:03 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

John Navas wrote:
[]
Surely you also consider the _perception_ of what you're trying to
communicate -- that is, after all, the essence of communication.
Isn't communication your objective? Calling your wife "fat" may be
objective and scientifically accurate, but not likely to have a good
result, now is it?

I do not consider my camera to have the same sensitivities as my wife.
Calling my camera "DSLR" or "P&S" is unlikely to influence the results it
produces.


The point is that some can be used in a derogatory way without trying,
as I'm sure you know. And as you should now know, I consider the term
"P&S" to be derogatory when used to refer to a "bridge" camera like
the Panasonic FZ8, unlike the term "compact camera". If you do that,
knowing how I feel, and why, how could you really expect to have a
good constructive relationship with me? Just like how you would feel
if you perceived me to be insulting you.


Sorry, but only in the most exceptional circumstances would I consider not
calling a P&S a P&S. Even a DSLR can be a P&S camera - mine even has a
special position on the command-dial for it, marked in green, so it's easy
to find! In normal use of my DSLR and non-DLSR cameras, I regularly make
use of automatic exposure and automatic focussing. Does that make them
P&S? G

David

And I'll add to that: Whenever I go to get my camera, I never, ever
think, "I'm going to go pick up my dslr." It's a camera, period. I
could care less if someone calls it a moon rock... it's what I do
with it that matters. Period.

But the fact remains that the larger sensor in a dslr camera will
outperform the smaller sensor in a p&s every time under the same
conditions. If small size and convenience are more important to you
than image quality, by all means use the smaller one. However, if
image quality and flexibility are more important to you, then choose
the larger one.

On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:04:00 -0800, John Navas
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:49:03 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote in
:

John Navas wrote:
[]
Surely you also consider the _perception_ of what you're trying to
communicate -- that is, after all, the essence of communication.
Isn't communication your objective? Calling your wife "fat" may be
objective and scientifically accurate, but not likely to have a good
result, now is it?

I do not consider my camera to have the same sensitivities as my wife.
Calling my camera "DSLR" or "P&S" is unlikely to influence the results it
produces.

That comes across as disingenuous and deliberately dense -- if you told
your wife she bought a pathetic outfit (with words she perceived to
connote pathetic), I'm sure she would be offended. It you didn't
consider the impact of your words when you speak to her, you probably
wouldn't be married long. I'm reminded of my ex, who frequently said
things like, "Whatever possessed you to buy _that_ shirt?" It's a big
part of why she's now my ex.

John, his wife is a human being with feelings. Your camera is a piece
of metal, plastic and glass. Nothing more. It is an unfeeling
piece of machinery that doesn't even know it exists. A camera is
something you own and use, not something you have a relationship with.

Maybe if you had responded to your ex with words like, "Can you help
me choose a shirt that you like better?" then perhaps she might not be
your ex?


The point is that some can be used in a derogatory way without trying,
as I'm sure you know. And as you should now know, I consider the term
"P&S" to be derogatory when used to refer to a "bridge" camera like
the Panasonic FZ8, unlike the term "compact camera". If you do that,
knowing how I feel, and why, how could you really expect to have a
good constructive relationship with me? Just like how you would feel
if you perceived me to be insulting you.

Sorry, but only in the most exceptional circumstances would I consider not
calling a P&S a P&S. ...

If that's your choice, consciously and deliberately using a term that
you know I feel is insulting to me (even though I don't insult your
choices), then I don't see how we can possibly have a good relationship.
Life is too short.


It sounds to me like you might be much too sensitive to things that
really don't matter in life, no matter how short it is.