|
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Boater wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote: Boater wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:53:19 -0500, Boater wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:20:19 -0500, Boater wrote: About $8000 for the body only. (Yikes) 24,5 Megapixel in FX-Format 3D Color Matrix II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering 1 - 7 fps 1/8000 to 30 seconds shutter ISO equivalency 100 to 1,600 2 lb 11 oz / 1220 g Price est. $7,995 USD body Another FX-format camera means that Nikon will jump back with both feet into the production of full-frame lenses, updating some of the current ones and introducing new ones. Ain't gonna matter. 4/3rds is going to rule the world. Will that be at the same time or just after eTech Evinrudes "capture" a larger market share than Yamaha four-strokes? :) Same theory actually - the better things are fewer in number. It's an age old axiom that consumer sheeple like you get suckered with every day. What are the advantages of the 4/3rd system vs Canon or Nikon? Well, it has a smaller sensor than the DX cameras! I really have no idea what the 4/3rd group is selling as their advantages, but I had it was a way for those with smaller market share to be able to group together to allow them to compete against Nikon and Canon. There's a good if lengthy rundown on DP Review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse3/page35.asp is the conclusion page. Interestingly, the camera is the same size as the Nikon d300 Olympus 5.6" x 4.6" x 2.9 " 1.9 pounds Nikon 5.8 4.5 2.9 2 pounds I'm sure it is a fine camera. Olympus knows how to build cameras. The advantages of Four-Thirds format in semi-pro cameras remain to be seen. That seemed to be a fairly objective review (very unusual for most mags and web sites selling ads) and highlighted the pros and cons I have read elsewhere. For what it is worth, for a number of years, Nikon definitely trailed behind Canon in both high end and point and shot digital cameras. It was not until recently that they seemed to be the leader/innovator in DSLR, including the prosumer and pro cameras. My guess is the state of the art and the best in category camera will jump back and forth between Canon and Nikon and neither will remain the top dog long enough enough to get anyone to sell all of their glass to change brands. Today, it looks like Nikon's aggressive design improvements has pushed it ahead of Canon in the consumer and prosumer DSLR market. As far as the consumer P&S market. in 2007 Nikon lagged behind Canon, Sony, Kodak, Samsung and Olympus in that order. It wasn't till 2008 that Nikon really started to come up with competitive P&S cameras and expanded it's line of low end DSLR. Coupled with an aggressive marketing campaign, it will be interesting to see what that does to the overall market share for digital cameras. I would be willing to bet that Nikon exceeds Canon sales for the first time in a number of years. From reading about the 4/3's system, it definitely has many advantages and are used by some professionals whose needs are meet by the current lens offered by Olympus. If you are a looking for a prosumer camera, and have a large investment in Olympus glass, most amateurs would have a hard time changing systems, especially if they prefer shooting in jpg vs RAW and are not regularly shooting in low light, where Canon and Nikon have the advantage. Since it really isn't the camera or the glass that takes the photograph, a first class award winning photograph can be taken with any camera, including a hand made pin hole camera. Normally you only see passionate arguments between Canon and Nikon users, so it is is nice to see someone being passionate about Olympus. If you look at B&H enduser reviews, they love the E-3. As I stated, Olympus knows how to build good cameras, as do Nikon, Canon, and many others. I got started in 35mm with a used Kodak Retina. My first new 35SLR was a Pentax, a wonderful camera. I traded that for a Nikormat, and then I got my first Nikon F. That camera accompanied me to Louisiana and Mississippi as a student reporter with some midwestern students who were helping black folks register to vote. I had a thick web strap on that camera, and I used that Nikon to fend off some locals who wanted to tip over our car. Put a tiny dent in the camera. Ever since then, I've had a spot in my heart for Nikon gear. I still like well-made rangefinder cameras, though. They're small, they're quiet. The Nikon F had an incredible noisy shutter and mirror. It was impossible to "sneak" a news photo with it. With a LEICA, if no one saw the camera, no one knew you were taking a photo. |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
On Dec 1, 7:55*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:13:50 -0500, Boater wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:53:19 -0500, Boater wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:20:19 -0500, Boater wrote: About $8000 for the body only. (Yikes) 24,5 Megapixel in FX-Format 3D Color Matrix II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering 1 - 7 fps 1/8000 to 30 seconds shutter ISO equivalency 100 to 1,600 2 lb 11 oz / 1220 g Price est. $7,995 USD body Another FX-format camera means that Nikon will jump back with both feet into the production of full-frame lenses, updating some of the current ones and introducing new ones. Ain't gonna matter. *4/3rds is going to rule the world. Will that be at the same time or just after eTech Evinrudes "capture" a larger market share than Yamaha four-strokes? * :) Same theory actually - the better things are fewer in number. It's an age old axiom that consumer sheeple like you get suckered with every day. It's hard to rule the world with a 1% market penetration, which is about what 4/3rds has now, and eTec has yet to achieve. *:) Like I said - keep following all the other sheeple in your quest to fit in.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - He only knows what he googles. |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Boater wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote: Boater wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:53:19 -0500, Boater wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:20:19 -0500, Boater wrote: About $8000 for the body only. (Yikes) 24,5 Megapixel in FX-Format 3D Color Matrix II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering 1 - 7 fps 1/8000 to 30 seconds shutter ISO equivalency 100 to 1,600 2 lb 11 oz / 1220 g Price est. $7,995 USD body Another FX-format camera means that Nikon will jump back with both feet into the production of full-frame lenses, updating some of the current ones and introducing new ones. Ain't gonna matter. 4/3rds is going to rule the world. Will that be at the same time or just after eTech Evinrudes "capture" a larger market share than Yamaha four-strokes? :) Same theory actually - the better things are fewer in number. It's an age old axiom that consumer sheeple like you get suckered with every day. What are the advantages of the 4/3rd system vs Canon or Nikon? Well, it has a smaller sensor than the DX cameras! I really have no idea what the 4/3rd group is selling as their advantages, but I had it was a way for those with smaller market share to be able to group together to allow them to compete against Nikon and Canon. There's a good if lengthy rundown on DP Review: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse3/page35.asp is the conclusion page. Interestingly, the camera is the same size as the Nikon d300 Olympus 5.6" x 4.6" x 2.9 " 1.9 pounds Nikon 5.8 4.5 2.9 2 pounds I'm sure it is a fine camera. Olympus knows how to build cameras. The advantages of Four-Thirds format in semi-pro cameras remain to be seen. That seemed to be a fairly objective review (very unusual for most mags and web sites selling ads) and highlighted the pros and cons I have read elsewhere. For what it is worth, for a number of years, Nikon definitely trailed behind Canon in both high end and point and shot digital cameras. It was not until recently that they seemed to be the leader/innovator in DSLR, including the prosumer and pro cameras. My guess is the state of the art and the best in category camera will jump back and forth between Canon and Nikon and neither will remain the top dog long enough enough to get anyone to sell all of their glass to change brands. Today, it looks like Nikon's aggressive design improvements has pushed it ahead of Canon in the consumer and prosumer DSLR market. As far as the consumer P&S market. in 2007 Nikon lagged behind Canon, Sony, Kodak, Samsung and Olympus in that order. It wasn't till 2008 that Nikon really started to come up with competitive P&S cameras and expanded it's line of low end DSLR. Coupled with an aggressive marketing campaign, it will be interesting to see what that does to the overall market share for digital cameras. I would be willing to bet that Nikon exceeds Canon sales for the first time in a number of years. From reading about the 4/3's system, it definitely has many advantages and are used by some professionals whose needs are meet by the current lens offered by Olympus. If you are a looking for a prosumer camera, and have a large investment in Olympus glass, most amateurs would have a hard time changing systems, especially if they prefer shooting in jpg vs RAW and are not regularly shooting in low light, where Canon and Nikon have the advantage. Since it really isn't the camera or the glass that takes the photograph, a first class award winning photograph can be taken with any camera, including a hand made pin hole camera. Normally you only see passionate arguments between Canon and Nikon users, so it is is nice to see someone being passionate about Olympus. If you look at B&H enduser reviews, they love the E-3. I meant to add that I dumped my Nikon D200 because I simply could never get used to "DX." It was always creating conflicts between my eyes and what they thought they should see and what remains of my brain, which was trying to figure out why a 28 mm fixed focal length lens was a 42 mm lens, sort of. The camera, though, is fabulous. Now, I am back to "full frame" digital, and the conflict between my eyes and my brain, at least on the focal length issue, is resolved. I also like the much higher ISO performance. ----------------- www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed* Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road ----------------- |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
On Dec 1, 8:50*pm, hk wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:53:32 -0500, Boater wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:53:19 -0500, Boater wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:20:19 -0500, Boater wrote: About $8000 for the body only. (Yikes) 24,5 Megapixel in FX-Format 3D Color Matrix II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering 1 - 7 fps 1/8000 to 30 seconds shutter ISO equivalency 100 to 1,600 2 lb 11 oz / 1220 g Price est. $7,995 USD body Another FX-format camera means that Nikon will jump back with both feet into the production of full-frame lenses, updating some of the current ones and introducing new ones. Ain't gonna matter. *4/3rds is going to rule the world. Will that be at the same time or just after eTech Evinrudes "capture" a larger market share than Yamaha four-strokes? * :) Same theory actually - the better things are fewer in number. It's an age old axiom that consumer sheeple like you get suckered with every day. What are the advantages of the 4/3rd system vs Canon or Nikon? Well, it has a smaller sensor than the DX cameras! Oh...wait...that's not an advantage. Not true at all - it's a full frame system - it's just at a 4:3 rds aspect ratio which is a fairly common standard for high quality film work because of it's anamorphic qualities. I think it was called Super35 or something like that. Argue with this wiki article and diagram: The name of the system comes from the size type of the image sensor used in the cameras. The image sensor is commonly referred to as a 4/3" type or 4/3 type sensor. The common inch-based sizing system is derived from vacuum image-sensing video camera tubes, which are now obsolete. The imaging area of a Four-Thirds sensor is equal to that of a video camera tube of 4/3" diameter. The size of the sensor is 18×13.5 mm (22.5 mm diagonal), with an imaging area of 17.3×13.0 mm (21.6 mm diagonal).[2] Its area is 30–40% less than the APS-C sensors used in most other DSLRs, but around 9 times larger than the 1/2.5" sensors typically used in compact digital cameras (see image sensor format). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SensorSizes.png Note the sentence: *"Its area is 30–40% less than the APS-C sensors used in most other DSLRs, " -----------------www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com- *Completion*Retention*Speed* Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road ------------------ Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Nice googling! What you fail to understand, dumb ass, is that Tom never said the sensor wasn't smaller...... |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
On Dec 1, 9:03*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:50:24 -0500, hk wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:53:32 -0500, Boater wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:53:19 -0500, Boater wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:20:19 -0500, Boater wrote: About $8000 for the body only. (Yikes) 24,5 Megapixel in FX-Format 3D Color Matrix II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering 1 - 7 fps 1/8000 to 30 seconds shutter ISO equivalency 100 to 1,600 2 lb 11 oz / 1220 g Price est. $7,995 USD body Another FX-format camera means that Nikon will jump back with both feet into the production of full-frame lenses, updating some of the current ones and introducing new ones. Ain't gonna matter. *4/3rds is going to rule the world. Will that be at the same time or just after eTech Evinrudes "capture" a larger market share than Yamaha four-strokes? * :) Same theory actually - the better things are fewer in number. It's an age old axiom that consumer sheeple like you get suckered with every day. What are the advantages of the 4/3rd system vs Canon or Nikon? Well, it has a smaller sensor than the DX cameras! Oh...wait...that's not an advantage. Not true at all - it's a full frame system - it's just at a 4:3 rds aspect ratio which is a fairly common standard for high quality film work because of it's anamorphic qualities. I think it was called Super35 or something like that. Argue with this wiki article and diagram: The name of the system comes from the size type of the image sensor used in the cameras. The image sensor is commonly referred to as a 4/3" type or 4/3 type sensor. The common inch-based sizing system is derived from vacuum image-sensing video camera tubes, which are now obsolete. The imaging area of a Four-Thirds sensor is equal to that of a video camera tube of 4/3" diameter. The size of the sensor is 18×13.5 mm (22.5 mm diagonal), with an imaging area of 17.3×13.0 mm (21.6 mm diagonal).[2] Its area is 30–40% less than the APS-C sensors used in most other DSLRs, but around 9 times larger than the 1/2.5" sensors typically used in compact digital cameras (see image sensor format). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SensorSizes.png Note the sentence: *"Its area is 30–40% less than the APS-C sensors used in most other DSLRs, " Yes - It's smaller - I never said it wasn't. IT'S DESIGNED THAT WAY ON PURPOSE TO ACHIEVE FULL FRAME IMAGES AT SHORTER FOCAL LENGTHS AND AT BETTER QUALITY BECAUSE THE LENSES AND SENSOR ARE DESIGNED AS A COMPLETE DIGITAL SYSTEM UNLIKE OTHER SYSTEMS WHICH ARE TRYING TO EMULATE 35 MM SLRS. Honest to pete Harry - wake the **** up.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Impossible. He's clueless on the subject and only knows what he's googled. |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
On Dec 1, 9:11*pm, Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:50:24 -0500, hk wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:53:32 -0500, Boater wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:53:19 -0500, Boater wrote: Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 14:20:19 -0500, Boater wrote: About $8000 for the body only. (Yikes) 24,5 Megapixel in FX-Format 3D Color Matrix II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering 1 - 7 fps 1/8000 to 30 seconds shutter ISO equivalency 100 to 1,600 2 lb 11 oz / 1220 g Price est. $7,995 USD body Another FX-format camera means that Nikon will jump back with both feet into the production of full-frame lenses, updating some of the current ones and introducing new ones. Ain't gonna matter. *4/3rds is going to rule the world. Will that be at the same time or just after eTech Evinrudes "capture" a larger market share than Yamaha four-strokes? * :) Same theory actually - the better things are fewer in number. It's an age old axiom that consumer sheeple like you get suckered with every day. What are the advantages of the 4/3rd system vs Canon or Nikon? Well, it has a smaller sensor than the DX cameras! Oh...wait...that's not an advantage. Not true at all - it's a full frame system - it's just at a 4:3 rds aspect ratio which is a fairly common standard for high quality film work because of it's anamorphic qualities. I think it was called Super35 or something like that. Argue with this wiki article and diagram: The name of the system comes from the size type of the image sensor used in the cameras. The image sensor is commonly referred to as a 4/3" type or 4/3 type sensor. The common inch-based sizing system is derived from vacuum image-sensing video camera tubes, which are now obsolete. The imaging area of a Four-Thirds sensor is equal to that of a video camera tube of 4/3" diameter. The size of the sensor is 18×13.5 mm (22.5 mm diagonal), with an imaging area of 17.3×13.0 mm (21.6 mm diagonal).[2] Its area is 30–40% less than the APS-C sensors used in most other DSLRs, but around 9 times larger than the 1/2.5" sensors typically used in compact digital cameras (see image sensor format). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SensorSizes.png Note the sentence: *"Its area is 30–40% less than the APS-C sensors used in most other DSLRs, " Yes - It's smaller - I never said it wasn't. IT'S DESIGNED THAT WAY ON PURPOSE TO ACHIEVE FULL FRAME IMAGES AT SHORTER FOCAL LENGTHS AND AT BETTER QUALITY BECAUSE THE LENSES AND SENSOR ARE DESIGNED AS A COMPLETE DIGITAL SYSTEM UNLIKE OTHER SYSTEMS WHICH ARE TRYING TO EMULATE 35 MM SLRS. Honest to pete Harry - wake the **** up. Oh, of course. I should buy into the PR. Next time I attend an event in DC at which a zillion press photographers are present, I'll count up all the 4/3'rds cameras, and see how that number stacks up against the Nikons and Canons. The professional photogs, of course, are not using the 4/3'rds cameras because they have no interest in better quality. That's partially true. Press photogs don't need the kind of quality that 4/3rds can produce. |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
"Tim" wrote in message ... On Dec 2, 4:30 am, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 20:25:18 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 1, 9:52 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:30:29 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Dec 1, 7:15 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports Well, the obvious is because I own it and we all know that I am one to emulate being the manly handsome dude that I am. Who? YOU? Of course me - who else? In short, advanced technology - something not everybody appreciates. Who? ME? If the shoe fits... 14's? 14? What - you Shaquille O'Neal? No, I just stand firm. ************************************************** ********** My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe) Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one. |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
"Don White" wrote in message ... My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe) Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one. My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. He's 12 years old. Tall and lanky type. Eisboch |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
On Dec 2, 10:29*am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message ... My #2 son wears size 14. *Had to order all the way from the US to get slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe) Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one. My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. * He's 12 years old.. Tall and lanky type. Eisboch When I was a freshman I started school weighing 135# , was 6"1" and wore a 12. My nephew is now 20,yr. 6''6" 285# and wears 16's Too much growth hormones in the Big Mac's . |
Only 8 large for new nikon camera
"Eisboch" wrote in message ... "Don White" wrote in message ... My #2 son wears size 14. Had to order all the way from the US to get slippers to fit him. (Rochester NY I believe) Wife bought two pairs for Christmas but he's already wearing one. My daughter's oldest son wears a size 13 right now. He's 12 years old. Tall and lanky type. Eisboch Be thankful it is now and not 25 years ago. I wear sz 14 and they used to charge extra for anything 13 and larger and limited selection. Now lots of large sizes available. Send your daughter to Big 5 Sports for tennis shoes. They have lots of closeouts of 13 and larger. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:41 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com