What is your camera of choice while traveling?
#31
Join Date: Jun 2011
Programs: *G, M+ Platinum
Posts: 619
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06...0mmf24lens.asp
If you can't find where these cameras fit for you, don't buy it, no one is making you. I've only been stating (defending feels like the more appropriate word though) how I have found that this will fit into my current uses. Not sure why you have issue with the fact that someone else might have found a different solution.
In the end, I highly doubt you or anyone else will be able to tell if I shot photos with this camera or another of the mirrorless cameras. Like I said, if I want to get really critical with the image quality down to the pixel peeping level, I'll just whip out my D700 and shoot 14-bit uncompressed NEF files using my heavy pro glass though.
But, yes, I think micro 43 crushes it in just about every way that is important to me. Compact size, image quality in low light, and lens selection. The Nikon 1 has awesome frame rate specs, but 5 fps in full res/20 fps @ 4MP from my G3 is good enough for me. Hell, 3fps from my "old" GF1 was good enough for me!
#32
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MCI
Programs: DL
Posts: 248
I actually meant the "real" Pentax d* pancakes, not that Q crap they just put out, sorry for the confusion.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06...0mmf24lens.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06...0mmf24lens.asp
I'm sorry you felt this, and perhaps all conversations, were exclusively about YOU. If you read what I wrote, you will see that I stated this solution makes sense for YOU and people LIKE YOU (those who have a full stable of Nikon glass and want a smaller body that will AF). I will even say there are so many people like you that it justifies the creation of this camera by itself. My point was that for EVERYONE ELSE, I don't see where this camera system makes sense.
Well, if we're going to go down this road, I would argue that for 90+% of the people, in their output of choice (on screen or 5x7 or smaller print) you would be hard pressed to see the image quality difference between your D700 and pro glass and a decent compact (Canon S95, Olympus XZ1, Lumix LX5, etc). At 8x10 in less than optimal conditions (low light) the gap will widen, and bigger prints or bad conditions, certainly you will be able to tell, but that's going to be a tiny minority of the time.
I would ask what is the your issue getting so butt hurt about our discussion of the new camera? Are you not quite so confident it will meet your needs after all? I simply asked why you chose it, and you provided a logical answer. From there, we moved on to discussing the merits (or lack thereof) of this new "system".
But, yes, I think micro 43 crushes it in just about every way that is important to me. Compact size, image quality in low light, and lens selection. The Nikon 1 has awesome frame rate specs, but 5 fps in full res/20 fps @ 4MP from my G3 is good enough for me. Hell, 3fps from my "old" GF1 was good enough for me!
But, yes, I think micro 43 crushes it in just about every way that is important to me. Compact size, image quality in low light, and lens selection. The Nikon 1 has awesome frame rate specs, but 5 fps in full res/20 fps @ 4MP from my G3 is good enough for me. Hell, 3fps from my "old" GF1 was good enough for me!
And it is hard to respect your opinion when you're quick to dismiss anything else without having firsthand experience with it. Like I said, I'm willing to try it out and see what is actually what before passing final judgement. (As to your question about my confidence, it's a pre-order, I can cancel it but I haven't. ) You on the other hand have already passed judgement without any experience with the system at all, just guesses based on other guesses.
#33
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
Actually, yes I can have it both ways. I get to see the actual file I shot while the viewer won't. All they get to see is what I did with that file.
Seriously, what is the issue with you and ~tc~?!? Why are you two so hurt that I might actually be able to make this camera work?!?
Seriously, what is the issue with you and ~tc~?!? Why are you two so hurt that I might actually be able to make this camera work?!?
I have actually held and used the J1. I get it why Nikon users would be drawn to the system since they can use their other lenses. (But when they do so, that takes away from the otherwise compact size.)
On the other hand, I don't understand why Nikon went with such a small sensor when, for example, Sony has one three times as large in a camera body about the same size.
I take quite a few landscapes in the backcountry, but I don't have a 10mm lens to equal a 18mm on a 1.5x crop camera. In processing I can crop, but I can't expand (well, I guess I can in Photoshop, but it is quite difficult). So that means my other Nikon glass doesn't become as useful on the J1.
#34
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MCI
Programs: DL
Posts: 248
What is the issue with me? To say that shows your motivated reasoning. I have made only two (now three) posts in this thread. The primary focus was the sensor size to which you made a response that viewers would probably not be able to tell the difference between the J1 and another mirrorless camera but would between a P&S and a J1. So my second post was solely to point out that if you believe a sensor 1/3 the size would not be as good (J1 v. P&S), then you can't use the same logic to say that another sensor 1/3 the size would be as good (J1 v. NEX).
I have actually held and used the J1. I get it why Nikon users would be drawn to the system since they can use their other lenses. (But when they do so, that takes away from the otherwise compact size.)
On the other hand, I don't understand why Nikon went with such a small sensor when, for example, Sony has one three times as large in a camera body about the same size.
I take quite a few landscapes in the backcountry, but I don't have a 10mm lens to equal a 18mm on a 1.5x crop camera. In processing I can crop, but I can't expand (well, I guess I can in Photoshop, but it is quite difficult). So that means my other Nikon glass doesn't become as useful on the J1.
I have actually held and used the J1. I get it why Nikon users would be drawn to the system since they can use their other lenses. (But when they do so, that takes away from the otherwise compact size.)
On the other hand, I don't understand why Nikon went with such a small sensor when, for example, Sony has one three times as large in a camera body about the same size.
I take quite a few landscapes in the backcountry, but I don't have a 10mm lens to equal a 18mm on a 1.5x crop camera. In processing I can crop, but I can't expand (well, I guess I can in Photoshop, but it is quite difficult). So that means my other Nikon glass doesn't become as useful on the J1.
"The primary focus was the sensor size to which you made a response that viewers would probably not be able to tell the difference between the J1 and another mirrorless camera but would between a P&S and a J1."
That quote from you would be a prime example of how unreasonable you're being and how you're ignoring what I've said. At no point have I said that viewers would be able to tell the difference between a P&S and a J1.
Past posting what you use for a travel camera set-up, all else that you and ~tc~ have done here really is trolling and you two don't seem to know well enough when to stop. End of story. I think the trolling has gone on long enough.
#35
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
"The primary focus was the sensor size to which you made a response that viewers would probably not be able to tell the difference between the J1 and another mirrorless camera but would between a P&S and a J1."
That quote from you would be a prime example of how unreasonable you're being and how you're ignoring what I've said. At no point have I said that viewers would be able to tell the difference between a P&S and a J1.
That quote from you would be a prime example of how unreasonable you're being and how you're ignoring what I've said. At no point have I said that viewers would be able to tell the difference between a P&S and a J1.
It's not trolling just because you say that it is. It's to illustrate that your reasoning on sensor size has to go in both directions. So one of your two statements doesn't stand up. I'm just not sure which one it is (though I have my thoughts).
If you would have just logically addressed the sensor size issue posts ago that would have been the "End of story". Instead you keep dancing around it, which could lead one to believe that it is you doing the trolling.
#36
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MCI
Programs: DL
Posts: 248
Umm, yes, you did:
And that was just after you stated that you highly doubted that anyone could tell the difference in IQ between the J1 and any other mirrorless camera, which would include those with sensors 3x the size of the J1.
It's not trolling just because you say that it is. It's to illustrate that your reasoning on sensor size has to go in both directions. So one of your two statements doesn't stand up. I'm just not sure which one it is (though I have my thoughts).
If you would have just logically addressed the sensor size issue posts ago that would have been the "End of story". Instead you keep dancing around it, which could lead one to believe that it is you doing the trolling.
And that was just after you stated that you highly doubted that anyone could tell the difference in IQ between the J1 and any other mirrorless camera, which would include those with sensors 3x the size of the J1.
It's not trolling just because you say that it is. It's to illustrate that your reasoning on sensor size has to go in both directions. So one of your two statements doesn't stand up. I'm just not sure which one it is (though I have my thoughts).
If you would have just logically addressed the sensor size issue posts ago that would have been the "End of story". Instead you keep dancing around it, which could lead one to believe that it is you doing the trolling.
#37
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: North of DFW
Programs: AA PLT, HH Gold, TSA Disparager Gold, going for Platnium
Posts: 1,535
I always have a camera on me, but its one of 5 possibilities: 5dmkII, 7D, and a 50D converted to IR S95 and a G12. Then i have a whole slew of lens(8mm- 400mm) and flashes. What i take depends on the trip and what i need so theres quite a range.
#40
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
Ah, I see your issue here. You aren't reading what I'm actually saying. You might want to mull it over a bit more. I am the shooter. I am the one working with the image files. The viewer doesn't see that, they see the end product. Is that clearer? What I see as the person working with the files is very different than what the viewer sees since I prefer to work with RAW files.
#41
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: MCI
Programs: DL
Posts: 248
Oh, so you always included another variable into the equation, which would be Photoshop, so that "viewers" wouldn't be able to discern the difference, but you would pre-processing? Can't we agree that all other things being equal, a larger sensor will provide a better IQ, especially when the sensor is 3x larger? That was the only point I have been making.
#43
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
I only asked a simple question and get called a troll more than once as a deflection when the poster continues to not answer it. I don't understand why we can't agree that all other things being equal, a larger sensor will provide a better IQ, especially when the sensor is 3x larger. That was the only point I have been making. Otherwise that leaves a false impression with some that might read this thread.
#44
Join Date: Jun 2011
Programs: *G, M+ Platinum
Posts: 619
Comparison photos of the V1 have been added to the dpreview database.
For those looking to upgrade their compact, I would say there's no compelling reason to change unless you need >ISO1600 where it does seem to perform a little better. It is thoroughly outclassed at every ISO by the larger sensored (m43, APSC, etc) compact system cameras and DSLRs.
For those looking to upgrade their compact, I would say there's no compelling reason to change unless you need >ISO1600 where it does seem to perform a little better. It is thoroughly outclassed at every ISO by the larger sensored (m43, APSC, etc) compact system cameras and DSLRs.
#45
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 107
Cameras for travel
To try and lighten the mood, and the load!
I'm using SLR's and a variety of lenses everyday for work, so when I'm on a day off or on holiday I take a Canon G11.
The G11 is small enough to slip in the pocket and fit in the hand, so I can take pictures inconspicuously. the image quality is more than adequate for what I want from my 'leisure' pictures. the camera is actually good enough to use in a rehearsal studio to get pictures of a band without disturbing their work.
I find I actually take more pictures with the G11 when I'm on holiday and exploring than I did when using an SLR. It's enjoyable, and a challenge, to try getting the best pictures I can from a small camera.
Other people may enjoy using a SLR and different lenses while traveling, but having a simple, but advanced P&S works well for me. The G11 gives me all the image control I have in SLR's but in a lighter and smaller package.
Ultimately, the most important part of photography is the vision and imagination of the person pressing the shutter, good equipment helps, but is not the defining factor.
I'm using SLR's and a variety of lenses everyday for work, so when I'm on a day off or on holiday I take a Canon G11.
The G11 is small enough to slip in the pocket and fit in the hand, so I can take pictures inconspicuously. the image quality is more than adequate for what I want from my 'leisure' pictures. the camera is actually good enough to use in a rehearsal studio to get pictures of a band without disturbing their work.
I find I actually take more pictures with the G11 when I'm on holiday and exploring than I did when using an SLR. It's enjoyable, and a challenge, to try getting the best pictures I can from a small camera.
Other people may enjoy using a SLR and different lenses while traveling, but having a simple, but advanced P&S works well for me. The G11 gives me all the image control I have in SLR's but in a lighter and smaller package.
Ultimately, the most important part of photography is the vision and imagination of the person pressing the shutter, good equipment helps, but is not the defining factor.
Last edited by PDPhoto; Oct 22, 2011 at 1:51 pm Reason: Additional thoughts