Jump to content

The Official Head-Case Photography Thread.


Knuckledragger

Recommended Posts

I already have a camera with swappable glass and a pile of lenses, Crappy. At some point in the future Canon will make a new body that I actually want to pay for and I'll replace my 30D. Either that or I will say "fuck it," knock over a liquor store and buy a sodding D3S. What I need in the interim is a good point & shoot. One with a max aperture of F/2 or larger. If I didn't loathe Olympus quite so strongly, I'd seriously be considering the XZ-1. If I pop too many Irrational Pills, I will sell all my Canon kit, go "lol DSLRs!" and buy a Fuji X-100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, why don't you like Olympus?

Olympus point & shoots used to be absolutely awful, and I had to both use and support them when I worked at Amherst College. I had a hard enough time getting the sodding things to do what I wanted, nevermind trying to explain that to AmhCol students and (shudder) faculty. My recent experience with Olympus cameras has been limited, but my reaction is still basically the same: their UI is lightyears better than it used to be, but it's still pretty awful by today's standards. Being able to interact quickly with a camera is key for capturing candid shots, particularly in low light. Point & shoots are inherently sloweer than DSLRs, and it is essential that the UI and menus be as intuitive as possible. Truth be told, Fuji's menu system in the X100 is only okay, but the camera itself has so many dedicated physical controls that the UI is much less of an issue.

if you pop the irrational pills and take a batshit crazy cocktail, you might as well go for the m9 :evil:

Not gonna lie, I have no real interest in the M9. Even disregarding it's eye-watering price tag, the sensor in it is simply not that good. It's high ISO performance is only decent, and it gets some weird color artifacts with super wide lenses (which is supposed to be an area of strength for rangefinders.) To continue the above thread, the M9's UI is pretty piss poor. That is unforgivable in a $9000 camera. In terms of interface, the M9 is bested by the X100. Even Leicaphile and noted Froot Loop K-Rock prefers the comparatively humble Fuji to the M9. If I were going to shoot Leica, I'd rather have a film body anyway. Give me an M7 and a 35mm F/2 Summicron, and I'd be all set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first digital P&S was an OIympus that my step-father gave me when he bought a new camera - it was one of the early Camedia models. I probably still have it somewhere in the abyss that is my basement (or one of the closets). All I remember about using that camera is the incredibly long shutter lag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 1 System isn't something marketed for those of us who have FX or DX.

Nikon made a good decision on smaller size sensor because shallow DOF isn't what average Facebook shooter would prefer.

Shallow DOF makes it harder to get subjects in focus for these causal shooters.

The "Smart Photo Selector" mode is very useful for them too. It takes 20 full-resolution images from a single shutter-button press (including some captured before the button is fully depressed), then analyses them,saving what it judges to be the best five (even recommending the very best of the bunch).

That a look at Who's it for on Dpreview

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I get it, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Nikon had just better make darn sure this new system is better received than most of their Coolpix of the last five years or so. Because it is a non-starter for the semi-serious to pro markets, so if it doesn't do well with consumers, eek!

Here's a shot from Tuesday evening, high on a granite ridge in Yosemite, after a torrent of angry afternoon weather:

p991526797-5.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5D Mark III seen in the wild? Here's hoping it's not boasting a 48MP and with worse high ISO performance than the now 4 year old Nikon D3.

Someone's gotta stop the megapixel war, right? Canon did it (kind of) in the compact segment so why not in the dSLR as well.

Maybe they'll even make a sub-$2000 full frame camera, cutting cost by focusing solely on still image and not including video features.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.