On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Ken Waller wrote:
> Godfrey is there a significant delay in the viewing system?
> I used a Nikon Coolpix 5700 for several years in my job and while it was a
> very good piece for static images - which is all I shot on the job - it was
> all but unusable for any ac
release and the image capture - was simply intolerable.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi"
Subject: Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)
Micro-FourThirds is FourThirds revised for all electron
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
>> It couldn't have been. The development of sufficient quality
>> electronic viewfinders is only now coming to fruition.
>>
> And for this they had to release a system that wasn't up to its compactness
> promises.
I guess I never interprete
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 01:46:04PM -0400, Miserere wrote:
>
> I agree with your conclusion, Dario. I have a large print (about 35x46
> cm) taken with a 6MP P&S; nobody ever guesses it wasn't taken with a
> DSLR.
I've got an 8x10 in my portfolio of motorsports images taken using a
Canon Powershot
On 22 October 2010 13:04, Dario Bonazza wrote:
> Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
>
>> Dario's answer is: lens 'ecosystem' and IQ is not that important.
>
> IQ is important, but it is not always the main factor in determining
> success.
The other problem with IQ is that it's an intangible quantity that
cann
Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
Dario's answer is: lens 'ecosystem' and IQ is not that important.
IQ is important, but it is not always the main factor in determining
success. Sure IQ is important for us. But we are a minority in the market.
Furthermore, if we had to rank the current cameras in order
.
" So, in conclusion...I don't like where the industry is going !! ;-)"
I think this is the most accurate statement many could make. I have
adapted to my E-p1 and would not hesitate to buy another EVIL/ILC.
Since i am obviously not alone, their will be a market for these kinds
of systems and the
- Mensaje original
> De: Godfrey DiGiorgi
> Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Enviado: vie,22 octubre, 2010 17:54
> Asunto: Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 (was: OT: new camera)
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
> > I agree with you and Godfrey
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
> I agree with you and Godfrey in that m4/3 is what 4/3 should have been from
> the
> beginning.
It couldn't have been. The development of sufficient quality
electronic viewfinders is only now coming to fruition.
> But I think that we diffe
- Mensaje original
> De: Dario Bonazza
> The 'micro-systems' arena is a different game, open to different ending.
> Think
>of the following:
> 1 - Canon and Nikon are not yet playing there (while they were rulers in
>APS-C),
> 2 - m-APS cannot find one ot two de-facto standards, l
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
I have no interest in the "Nikon vs Canon" or "everyone else vs Olympus"
brand wars.
Godfrey, have you noticed I changed the topic line for not spoiling your
thread, which had a different taste?
I was just telling Jaume the reasons (including the market strength of the
Micro-FourThirds is FourThirds revised for all electronic viewing
systems. That's all.
All electronic viewing systems are simply more effective for the size
of the format than optical reflex view finders. The shorter mount
register possible with an all electronic viewfinder is also a better
fit fo
Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
Interesting discussion...
If Canikon comes out with their own 'Nex'-like...I am afraid that all
those
buyers will be attracted again by their powerful brands (as they are when
jumping to entry level DSLRs).
Sure, but... See below.
But I agree in that a m-APSC standar
13 matches
Mail list logo
