Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How reviewers shade the truth

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 1:55:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I checked out four magazine reviews.
One for the Nikon D70s, one for the Olympus E-300, one for the Canon
Rebel XT and one for the Canon 20D. They all used a kind
of "sin of omission" or visible data manipulation to
paint a better picture of camera than reader might otherwise
obtain.
In the case of the D70s, they gave the price for the camera body,
the kit ($100 more) but the pictures they shot with it for the article
were done with a much more expensive ED Nikkor zoom. They didn't
mention this fact in the article but did show a picture of the camera
lens combo they used.
For the Olympus E-300, the article made no mention of the noise beyond
ISO 200 issue. In fact, the article was so bad that no definitive
conclusion about the camera could be determined and there was no way
it could be compared against competing brands.
For the Rebel XT, the magazine (Digital Photographer) use the old Time
Magazine trick of massaging graphs to make it look like like somethign
is better or worse than it is. They flatten a curve on a stock market
graph so you get the impression of stability in a stock, etc. The
noise graphs in question (at first glance) give the impression the XT
has virtually the same noise levels as the 20D. But check out the
scales on the left of the paired graphs.
http://usera.imagecave.com/rander3127/Cameratests/digit...

The last magazine article was on the Canon 20D. It went to great
lengths including giving the camera a 95% rating when it came to image
quality, however, it only mentioned the camera's "body price" and
failed to mention what the cost of the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
they used on the camera to do the review. In fact, they didn't mention
the lens at all, they just showed it. Sure, the 20D is capable of
superb quality shots, but not at the $1500 price point that nets you
the body and a far inferior lens. In that case, the article's "95%"
image quality rating would definitely have to be changed. If they
were being clear the camera and tested lens price would have be noted
as around $2400.00.

None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
camera in question.
-Rich

More about : reviewers shade truth

Anonymous
July 20, 2005 1:55:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...

> The last magazine article was on the Canon 20D. It went to great
> lengths including giving the camera a 95% rating when it came to image
> quality, however, it only mentioned the camera's "body price" and
> failed to mention what the cost of the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
> they used on the camera to do the review. In fact, they didn't mention
> the lens at all, they just showed it. Sure, the 20D is capable of
> superb quality shots, but not at the $1500 price point that nets you
> the body and a far inferior lens. In that case, the article's "95%"
> image quality rating would definitely have to be changed. If they
> were being clear the camera and tested lens price would have be noted
> as around $2400.00.
>
> None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
> configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
> product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
> camera in question.
> -Rich

The 75-300 f4-5.6 IS USM might be considered a hindrance rather than a
boon...Not Canon's best zoom lens, by any means. Now, if they used a 24-70
f2.8L or even a 28-135 IS, that would be shading the results by a large
margin.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 3:46:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
> I checked out four magazine reviews.
<SNIP>>
> None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
> configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
> product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
> camera in question.
> -Rich

The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews, user
reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out sample
pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how to
clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens for less
than the price of a new car.
My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and LOVE
it!
Great quality images (when I do my part).
Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
Related resources
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 3:46:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Jack Rosier" <jhrosier@berkshire.net> wrote in message
news:-_qdnV71PY-zVEDfRVn-hA@berkshire.net...
>
> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
> > I checked out four magazine reviews.
> <SNIP>>
> > None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
> > configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
> > product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
> > camera in question.
> > -Rich
>
> The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
> I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews,
user
> reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
> I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out sample
> pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
> I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
> prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
> Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how to
> clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens for
less
> than the price of a new car.
> My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and
LOVE
> it!
> Great quality images (when I do my part).
> Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
> Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
> Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
> Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>

We're happy for you. Now there's no longer a reason for you to be here
except for envy, right?

Greg
July 20, 2005 8:32:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jack Rosier wrote:
> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
>
>>I checked out four magazine reviews.
>
> <SNIP>>
>
>>None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
>>configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
>>product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
>>camera in question.
>>-Rich
>
>
> The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
> I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews, user
> reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
> I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out sample
> pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
> I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
> prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
> Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how to
> clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens for less
> than the price of a new car.
> My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and LOVE
> it!
> Great quality images (when I do my part).
> Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
> Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
> Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
> Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>
>
It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
But if it's capabilities meet your needs, then it is probably better
than a dslr for you.
I'm not being obscure, but if you don't understand what the advantages
of a dslr might be, then there is IMO very little point in getting one,
as the advantages will probably be seen as frustrations or limitations.
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

frederick wrote:
> Jack Rosier wrote:
>
>> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>> news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
>>
>>> I checked out four magazine reviews.
>>
>>
>> <SNIP>>
>>
>>> None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
>>> configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
>>> product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
>>> camera in question.
>>> -Rich
>>
>>
>>
>> The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
>> I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews,
>> user
>> reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
>> I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out sample
>> pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
>> I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
>> prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
>> Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how to
>> clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens
>> for less
>> than the price of a new car.
>> My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and
>> LOVE
>> it!
>> Great quality images (when I do my part).
>> Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
>> Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
>> Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
>> Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>>
>>
> It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
> But if it's capabilities meet your needs, then it is probably better
> than a dslr for you.
> I'm not being obscure, but if you don't understand what the advantages
> of a dslr might be, then there is IMO very little point in getting one,
> as the advantages will probably be seen as frustrations or limitations.


Agree, people who trump about their FZ20 can do most things a dSLR can
and better are just snapshoters that don't know the virtue of the
flexibility of a dSLR couple with the appropriate lens and the beauty of
high ISO. I don't know if you can put a flash on your FZ20 for bounced
flash but even if possible, I would think it'd look top heavy and funky.
July 20, 2005 8:32:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

frederick wrote:

> Jack Rosier wrote:

>> Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>>
>>
> It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
>

It actually has a GREATER capability than many dSLR's saddled with their
cheap kit lens.
--

Stacey
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

frederick wrote:
> Jack Rosier wrote:
[]
>> I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed
>> to prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
>> Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is
>> how to clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent
>> quality lens for less than the price of a new car.
>> My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months
>> and LOVE it!
>> Great quality images (when I do my part).
>> Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
>> Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
>> Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
>> Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same
>> capability.
> It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
> But if it's capabilities meet your needs, then it is probably better
> than a dslr for you.
> I'm not being obscure, but if you don't understand what the advantages
> of a dslr might be, then there is IMO very little point in getting
> one, as the advantages will probably be seen as frustrations or
> limitations.

It's not necessarily a matter of "understanding advantages of a DSLR",
it's making a decision as to what suits your own particular needs best.
If I wanted a camera for astrophotography, or I didn't mind having to
carry round a bulky set of accessory lenses etc., I would probably have
moved from 35mm SLR to DSLR (and had to buy a new extreme wide-angle
lens). However, I analysed what I actually needed to take the photographs
I wanted, and bought point-and-shoot, and never regretted it!

Like Jack, I also have an image-stabilised Panasonic, the FZ5 in my case,
and quite agree that it has capabilities which were never in my SLR kit
(e.g. hand-held 432mm shots). I also have a Nikon 8400 for its wide-angle
and swivel LCD capability, allowing me to put the camera where I couldn't
put a 35mm SLR and still see the viewfinder.

Different people have different needs, but just because someone chooses
not to buy a DSLR doesn't mean they don't understand the advantages.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3k668vFsqrulU1@individual.net...
> frederick wrote:
>
>> Jack Rosier wrote:
>
>>> Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>>>
>>>
>> It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
>>
>
> It actually has a GREATER capability than many dSLR's saddled with their
> cheap kit lens.
> --
>
> Stacey

Sure it does Chicken Little.
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"l e o" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:CEkDe.1020$0C.848@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> frederick wrote:
>> Jack Rosier wrote:
>>
>>> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> I checked out four magazine reviews.
>>>
>>>
>>> <SNIP>>
>>>
>>>> None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
>>>> configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
>>>> product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
>>>> camera in question.
>>>> -Rich
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
>>> I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews,
>>> user
>>> reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
>>> I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out sample
>>> pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
>>> I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
>>> prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
>>> Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how to
>>> clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens for
>>> less
>>> than the price of a new car.
>>> My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and
>>> LOVE
>>> it!
>>> Great quality images (when I do my part).
>>> Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
>>> Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
>>> Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
>>> Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>>>
>>>
>> It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
>> But if it's capabilities meet your needs, then it is probably better than
>> a dslr for you.
>> I'm not being obscure, but if you don't understand what the advantages of
>> a dslr might be, then there is IMO very little point in getting one, as
>> the advantages will probably be seen as frustrations or limitations.
>
>
> Agree, people who trump about their FZ20 can do most things a dSLR can and
> better are just snapshoters that don't know the virtue of the flexibility
> of a dSLR couple with the appropriate lens and the beauty of high ISO. I
> don't know if you can put a flash on your FZ20 for bounced flash but even
> if possible, I would think it'd look top heavy and funky.

You reckon that would be top heavy, I put an external flash on my Sony V1,
now that is funky, mind you it takes pretty reasonable shots.
July 20, 2005 8:32:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

l e o wrote:

>I don't know if you can put a flash on your FZ20 for bounced
> flash but even if possible, I would think it'd look top heavy and funky.


Yea that's the main advantage of a dSLR, looking cool and stylish. God
forbit your camera looks "funky". We all know it's what the camera LOOKS
like that matters, mainly what brand name is displayed on the front of it.

--

Stacey
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:
> frederick wrote:
>
>>Jack Rosier wrote:
>
> []
>
>>>I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed
>>>to prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
>>>Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is
>>>how to clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent
>>>quality lens for less than the price of a new car.
>>>My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months
>>>and LOVE it!
>>>Great quality images (when I do my part).
>>>Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
>>>Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
>>>Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
>>>Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same
>>>capability.
>>
>>It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
>>But if it's capabilities meet your needs, then it is probably better
>>than a dslr for you.
>>I'm not being obscure, but if you don't understand what the advantages
>>of a dslr might be, then there is IMO very little point in getting
>>one, as the advantages will probably be seen as frustrations or
>>limitations.
>
>
> It's not necessarily a matter of "understanding advantages of a DSLR",
> it's making a decision as to what suits your own particular needs best.
> If I wanted a camera for astrophotography, or I didn't mind having to
> carry round a bulky set of accessory lenses etc., I would probably have
> moved from 35mm SLR to DSLR (and had to buy a new extreme wide-angle
> lens). However, I analysed what I actually needed to take the photographs
> I wanted, and bought point-and-shoot, and never regretted it!
>
> Like Jack, I also have an image-stabilised Panasonic, the FZ5 in my case,
> and quite agree that it has capabilities which were never in my SLR kit
> (e.g. hand-held 432mm shots). I also have a Nikon 8400 for its wide-angle
> and swivel LCD capability, allowing me to put the camera where I couldn't
> put a 35mm SLR and still see the viewfinder.
>
> Different people have different needs, but just because someone chooses
> not to buy a DSLR doesn't mean they don't understand the advantages.
>
> Cheers,
> David

I guess David knows the difference, but from what frederick wrote with
wrong concepts, he's a newbie. I have no doubt that the Pananonic FZ20
is a capable camera for majority of people but don't count on it in more
demanding situations and definitely no need to mention it at all when
the OP was not mentioning P&S.

I heard you, David, many times already, but so far all you've told us is
you stand in one place, doing zooming and framing and click the shutter.
I am still learning in controlling lights, finding interesting angles,
prespectives, creatively using shallow DoF. I sold the Canon 100mm macro
lens. Someday, I'll get the 1x-5x macro and/or tilt and shift lenses and
have some fun. I have learned that digital gradual filter technique and
now need to proceed to shapening and technique to increase dynamic
range. I know the sensor can capture the details, I wish there were
software and/or Photoshop actions that can make getting extended dynamic
range an easy task.
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Pete D wrote:
> "l e o" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
> news:CEkDe.1020$0C.848@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>frederick wrote:
>>
>>>Jack Rosier wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I checked out four magazine reviews.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>><SNIP>>
>>>>
>>>>>None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
>>>>>configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
>>>>>product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
>>>>>camera in question.
>>>>>-Rich
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
>>>>I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews,
>>>>user
>>>>reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
>>>>I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out sample
>>>>pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
>>>>I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
>>>>prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
>>>>Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how to
>>>>clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens for
>>>>less
>>>>than the price of a new car.
>>>>My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and
>>>>LOVE
>>>>it!
>>>>Great quality images (when I do my part).
>>>>Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
>>>>Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
>>>>Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
>>>>Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
>>>But if it's capabilities meet your needs, then it is probably better than
>>>a dslr for you.
>>>I'm not being obscure, but if you don't understand what the advantages of
>>>a dslr might be, then there is IMO very little point in getting one, as
>>>the advantages will probably be seen as frustrations or limitations.
>>
>>
>>Agree, people who trump about their FZ20 can do most things a dSLR can and
>>better are just snapshoters that don't know the virtue of the flexibility
>>of a dSLR couple with the appropriate lens and the beauty of high ISO. I
>>don't know if you can put a flash on your FZ20 for bounced flash but even
>>if possible, I would think it'd look top heavy and funky.
>
>
> You reckon that would be top heavy, I put an external flash on my Sony V1,
> now that is funky, mind you it takes pretty reasonable shots.


I have a V1 too. No, I don't think I'd spend the money on an external
flash for that little thing.
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

We all know it's what the camera LOOKS
> like that matters, mainly what brand name is displayed on the front of it.

Exactly, just like you I guess. :-)
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

l e o wrote:
[]
> I heard you, David, many times already, but so far all you've told us
> is you stand in one place, doing zooming and framing and click the
> shutter. I am still learning in controlling lights, finding
> interesting angles, prespectives, creatively using shallow DoF. I
> sold the Canon 100mm macro lens. Someday, I'll get the 1x-5x macro
> and/or tilt and shift lenses and have some fun. I have learned that
> digital gradual filter technique and now need to proceed to shapening
> and technique to increase dynamic range. I know the sensor can
> capture the details, I wish there were software and/or Photoshop
> actions that can make getting extended dynamic range an easy task.

As I've said, different people have different needs. I'm not a
professional photographer, and I do no studio photography, nor use
external flashguns or strobes. I used to have perspective control lenses
for my 35mm SLR, but today with digital processing I find no need. Whilst
I do appreciate the technical aspects, capturing an event or a personality
probably interests me more now than the "stock" shot. Actually having a
point-and-shoot with you rather than leaving the DSLR at home!

I do completely agree with you about dynamic range, and the limitations
introduced with today's small-sensor cameras, but I don't want to go back
to something as big as 35mm. Perhaps the 4/3 system will eventually suit
me.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:32:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"l e o" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:KFlDe.1036$0C.223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Pete D wrote:
>> "l e o" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
>> news:CEkDe.1020$0C.848@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>>>frederick wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jack Rosier wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I checked out four magazine reviews.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>><SNIP>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
>>>>>>configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
>>>>>>product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
>>>>>>camera in question.
>>>>>>-Rich
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
>>>>>I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews,
>>>>>user
>>>>>reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
>>>>>I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out
>>>>>sample
>>>>>pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
>>>>>I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
>>>>>prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
>>>>>Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how
>>>>>to
>>>>>clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens for
>>>>>less
>>>>>than the price of a new car.
>>>>>My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and
>>>>>LOVE
>>>>>it!
>>>>>Great quality images (when I do my part).
>>>>>Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
>>>>>Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
>>>>>Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
>>>>>Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It does not have the same capability as a DSLR.
>>>>But if it's capabilities meet your needs, then it is probably better
>>>>than a dslr for you.
>>>>I'm not being obscure, but if you don't understand what the advantages
>>>>of a dslr might be, then there is IMO very little point in getting one,
>>>>as the advantages will probably be seen as frustrations or limitations.
>>>
>>>
>>>Agree, people who trump about their FZ20 can do most things a dSLR can
>>>and better are just snapshoters that don't know the virtue of the
>>>flexibility of a dSLR couple with the appropriate lens and the beauty of
>>>high ISO. I don't know if you can put a flash on your FZ20 for bounced
>>>flash but even if possible, I would think it'd look top heavy and funky.
>>
>>
>> You reckon that would be top heavy, I put an external flash on my Sony
>> V1, now that is funky, mind you it takes pretty reasonable shots.
>
>
> I have a V1 too. No, I don't think I'd spend the money on an external
> flash for that little thing.

Thats okay, I have a boxfull from my SLR's and D-SLR.
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 1:14:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Jack Rosier" <jhrosier@berkshire.net> wrote in message
news:-_qdnV71PY-zVEDfRVn-hA@berkshire.net...
>
> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
> > I checked out four magazine reviews.
> <SNIP>>
> > None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
> > configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
> > product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
> > camera in question.
> > -Rich
>
> The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
> I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews,
user
> reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
> I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out sample
> pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
> I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
> prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
> Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how to
> clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens for
less
> than the price of a new car.
> My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and
LOVE
> it!
> Great quality images (when I do my part).
> Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
> Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
> Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
> Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>
>
Howabout that for stirring up a hornet's nest!
You DSLR guys really should calm down and try to have some fun, like the
rest of us.
FWIW, I had a couple of top-end Nikon SLR's a couple of decades ago.
They were absolutely the best thing short of medium format.
When I quit using them to make money, they were too valuable to keep around
for making casual snaphots, so they were passed on to a working professional
photg.
Point being, I have a pretty good idea of the distinction between an SLR and
a "superzoom".
That being said, I stand resolutely behind every word in my original post
(donning asbestos suit).
carry on....
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 5:04:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:
> l e o wrote:
> []
>
>>I heard you, David, many times already, but so far all you've told us
>>is you stand in one place, doing zooming and framing and click the
>> shutter. I am still learning in controlling lights, finding
>>interesting angles, prespectives, creatively using shallow DoF. I
>>sold the Canon 100mm macro lens. Someday, I'll get the 1x-5x macro
>>and/or tilt and shift lenses and have some fun. I have learned that
>>digital gradual filter technique and now need to proceed to shapening
>>and technique to increase dynamic range. I know the sensor can
>>capture the details, I wish there were software and/or Photoshop
>>actions that can make getting extended dynamic range an easy task.
>
>
> As I've said, different people have different needs. I'm not a
> professional photographer, and I do no studio photography, nor use
> external flashguns or strobes. I used to have perspective control lenses
> for my 35mm SLR, but today with digital processing I find no need. Whilst
> I do appreciate the technical aspects, capturing an event or a personality
> probably interests me more now than the "stock" shot. Actually having a
> point-and-shoot with you rather than leaving the DSLR at home!
>
> I do completely agree with you about dynamic range, and the limitations
> introduced with today's small-sensor cameras, but I don't want to go back
> to something as big as 35mm. Perhaps the 4/3 system will eventually suit
> me.
>
> Cheers,
> David


Nobody is arguing with you about the benefits (small and excellent
quality in good lighting) of a P&S and in fact, many people can see and
understand it without you repeating the same line of reasoning, esp. in
a slr group.

BTW, the 4/3 format doesn't demonstrate it to be any smaller. The
Olympus E300 is roughly the same size as Pentax *ist DS and HEAVIER. The
only good thing I see is 4:3 ratio and 2x opening that minimizes
vignetting at the corners. However, I hate pictures in 4:3 ratio.
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 6:03:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jack Rosier wrote:
> "Jack Rosier" <jhrosier@berkshire.net> wrote in message
> news:-_qdnV71PY-zVEDfRVn-hA@berkshire.net...
>
>>"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
>>news:4nbrd1pf0j48ok6hsbnau7okh0e7npdmdk@4ax.com...
>>
>>>I checked out four magazine reviews.
>>
>><SNIP>>
>>
>>>None of these reviewers outright lied about anything. But they
>>>configure the reviews with the clear intention to "sell" you the
>>>product instead of providing a scrupulously honest examination of the
>>>camera in question.
>>>-Rich
>>
>>The larger the cost, the more careful the research should be up front.
>>I spent all of my free time for about 3 weeks checking online reviews,
>
> user
>
>>reviews and lurking on many forums before buying my current camera.
>>I read literally hundreds of reviews, compared specs, checked out sample
>>pictures and asked LOTS of questions.
>>I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the pros seemed to
>>prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP cameras.
>>Then I read a lot of NG's where the main topic of conversation is how to
>>clean or keep the sensor clean and how to get a decent quality lens for
>
> less
>
>>than the price of a new car.
>>My choice was a Panasonic FZ20. I've had it for a couple of months and
>
> LOVE
>
>>it!
>>Great quality images (when I do my part).
>>Full manual controls when I need them, Program mode when I want it.
>>Menus and controls are mostly intuitive and simple.
>>Handheld shots at 432mm! Who would of thought?
>>Cost about a third of what the DSLR would have for the same capability.
>>
>>
>
> Howabout that for stirring up a hornet's nest!
> You DSLR guys really should calm down and try to have some fun, like the
> rest of us.
> FWIW, I had a couple of top-end Nikon SLR's a couple of decades ago.
> They were absolutely the best thing short of medium format.
> When I quit using them to make money, they were too valuable to keep around
> for making casual snaphots, so they were passed on to a working professional
> photg.
> Point being, I have a pretty good idea of the distinction between an SLR and
> a "superzoom".
> That being said, I stand resolutely behind every word in my original post
> (donning asbestos suit).
> carry on....


When you say "I started out wanting a 8MP DSLR. Then I found that the
pros seemed to prefer the image quality of the 5MP cameras over the 8MP
cameras," without acknowledging the picture quality of an 8MP in a
22.5mmx15mm sensor is vastly different from an 8MP in a 8.8mmx6.6mm
sensor, you're showing that you don't know much about digital cameras
and you might as well think RAW is the same as JPEG. If you're impressed
by the FZ20 and think that's is all you ever need, you're in the wrong
group and in fact you ARE in the wrong group.
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 11:28:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

l e o wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
[]
>> I do completely agree with you about dynamic range, and the
>> limitations introduced with today's small-sensor cameras, but I
>> don't want to go back to something as big as 35mm. Perhaps the 4/3
>> system will eventually suit me.
[]
> BTW, the 4/3 format doesn't demonstrate it to be any smaller. The
> Olympus E300 is roughly the same size as Pentax *ist DS and HEAVIER.
> The only good thing I see is 4:3 ratio and 2x opening that minimizes
> vignetting at the corners. However, I hate pictures in 4:3 ratio.

Yes, that's why I said "eventually". The present implementation of 4/3
doesn't impress me.

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 11:54:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:
> l e o wrote:
>
>>David J Taylor wrote:
>
> []
>
>>>I do completely agree with you about dynamic range, and the
>>>limitations introduced with today's small-sensor cameras, but I
>>>don't want to go back to something as big as 35mm. Perhaps the 4/3
>>>system will eventually suit me.
>
> []
>
>>BTW, the 4/3 format doesn't demonstrate it to be any smaller. The
>>Olympus E300 is roughly the same size as Pentax *ist DS and HEAVIER.
>>The only good thing I see is 4:3 ratio and 2x opening that minimizes
>>vignetting at the corners. However, I hate pictures in 4:3 ratio.
>
>
> Yes, that's why I said "eventually". The present implementation of 4/3
> doesn't impress me.
>
> Cheers,
> David

The lens mount is about the same size as an APS-C camera. If you talk
about size strictly, it has no advantage over other d-SLR
cameras...unless you like 4/3 format for some other reasons, like 4:3
ratio or appreciate the fact that it won't be a Canon or Nikon.
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 4:44:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 07:54:47 GMT, l e o wrote:
> The lens mount is about the same size as an APS-C camera.

You saye the lens mount of FourThirds is the same as an APS-C camera?

Which cameras do you refer to? I know just Olympus 4:3, and I don't know
any APS-C camera, since all of those I know are backwards compatible to
the full format.

- Martin
!