User Tag List

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 69 to 85 of 98
  1. #69
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    36,130
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    i actually think the G11 is great. for those people who have a DSLR (esp Canon one) but don't want to haul a huge camera around all the time, the G11 is perfect for gathering and parties. it has a lot of controllability, the noise is only one stop worse than the avg. 4/3 sensor. and what is excellent is that it will talk to a full size Canon flash.

    all these at half the price of a 4/3 camera.

    and no Chris, i am not getting one. i do however, accept gifts, xmas is coming. *hint* *hint*.

  2. #70
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctjcad View Post
    Compare the zoom range between the 2 cameras:
    the way i look at it, the Panasonic Lumix LX3 (if that's the same Leica LX3) only goes as far as 60mm in focal length. Imagine if the LX3 has the same focal range as the S90?? Making a 4x or 5x f/2.0 lens would be a difficult task, and probably make the camera larger, wouldn't it??..
    Zoom range is not as important as lens speed. The LX3 lens speed is F/2.0 and at its worst is only F/2.8, a one stop drop. The S90 has a longer zoom range but it comes at a terrible price of a loss of close to 3 stops. Besides the S90's wide angle is only 28mm, the LX3's 24mm. Canon engineers obviously cannot find a place for that more constant lens speed zoom of between F/2.0 to F/2.8 and a wider wide angle in such a small package.
    Also pls remember a Canon G10 or G11 may be cheaper than a micro four thirds but it has a shorter service life, mainly due to its inability to have lens interchangeability. Lenses depreciate much less than bodies and a micro four thirds system can also use all the other DSLR lenses in the market, almost without exception. This alone enables one to get into the system on a modular basis.

  3. #71
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,645
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Zoom range is not as important as lens speed. The LX3 lens speed is F/2.0 and at its worst is only F/2.8, a one stop drop. The S90 has a longer zoom range but it comes at a terrible price of a loss of close to 3 stops. Besides the S90's wide angle is only 28mm, the LX3's 24mm. Canon engineers obviously cannot find a place for that more constant lens speed zoom of between F/2.0 to F/2.8 and a wider wide angle in such a small package.
    Also pls remember a Canon G10 or G11 may be cheaper than a micro four thirds but it has a shorter service life, mainly due to its inability to have lens interchangeability. Lenses depreciate much less than bodies and a micro four thirds system can also use all the other DSLR lenses in the market, almost without exception. This alone enables one to get into the system on a modular basis.
    Different photographer/photography requires different compromises. Believing in one-size fits all photography is just naive and ignorant. It's akin to saying that the LN N90 + BG65 @ 33lbs + 1/2 cloth grip is the only racket worth playing with.

    As a m4/3 owner, I have already recommended the G11 to several budding photographer friends. The service life of a camera is determined solely by the user (IMHO) and the price to pay for getting into an interchangeable lens system is just one of the many factors. I know of someone who will not bring his D200 on tour but uses his trusty f31fd instead and still makes very good pictures.

  4. #72
    Moderator drifit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Selangor, Malaysia
    Posts
    6,428
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i am still using G7 and take crap photos.....

  5. #73
    Regular Member ryim_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong SAR, China
    Posts
    1,722
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I got my gf a G10 a few months ago and we take it out on days where I don't lug around my D90. I think the cam is really good for its purpose but a faster lens would have been better.

  6. #74
    Regular Member ctjcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    u.s.a.
    Posts
    19,157
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default That's not quite my point..

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Zoom range is not as important as lens speed. The LX3 lens speed is F/2.0 and at its worst is only F/2.8, a one stop drop. The S90 has a longer zoom range but it comes at a terrible price of a loss of close to 3 stops. Besides the S90's wide angle is only 28mm, the LX3's 24mm. Canon engineers obviously cannot find a place for that more constant lens speed zoom of between F/2.0 to F/2.8 and a wider wide angle in such a small package.
    ...
    Mr. T, that's not quite my point.
    My point is, one can't compare both digital cameras as they each have different lens with different focal length.

  7. #75
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctjcad View Post
    Mr. T, that's not quite my point.
    My point is, one can't compare both digital cameras as they each have different lens with different focal length.
    Given a certain fixed size, let us say a P&S size, one has to choose zoom range vs lens speed. You cannot have both. Extreme zoom range comes at a tremendous price-it is silly having a zoom range with an F/5.6 lens speed just to strive for 5 to 10 times zoom. The pot of gold for P&S cameras is to go for F/2.0 constant if possible across the whole zoom range, or at least no worse than F/2.8 at its worst. Also much desired is a wider angle, down to 21mm (in FF terms). Zoom range is best restricted to 2 to 3 times. But how do you squeeze these requirements into such a small body? Plastics may be cheap but for the given thickness it lacks structural strength and integrity. More exotic materials have to be used so that the body structure can be kept to its minimum thickness to make more room for the other important "innards". This will mean higher costs. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

  8. #76
    Regular Member ctjcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    u.s.a.
    Posts
    19,157
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default That's exactly the point and the question..

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Given a certain fixed size, let us say a P&S size, one has to choose zoom range vs lens speed. You cannot have both. Extreme zoom range comes at a tremendous price-it is silly having a zoom range with an F/5.6 lens speed just to strive for 5 to 10 times zoom. The pot of gold for P&S cameras is to go for F/2.0 constant if possible across the whole zoom range, or at least no worse than F/2.8 at its worst. Also much desired is a wider angle, down to 21mm (in FF terms). Zoom range is best restricted to 2 to 3 times. But how do you squeeze these requirements into such a small body? Plastics may be cheap but for the given thickness it lacks structural strength and integrity. More exotic materials have to be used so that the body structure can be kept to its minimum thickness to make more room for the other important "innards". This will mean higher costs. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
    (See post #69) Of course, like already mentioned, it's almost impossible to "fit" everything in 1 body or 1 camera. And it'll cost a bundle if one could fit it all in a small body chassis. It's a no brainer.
    That's why, like i already mentioned, you can't compare your LX3 and the S90 or SD880.
    If Leica can come up with a pocket size digital camera, the same physical size as the LX3, which has the same focal length zoom lens capability like the S90 while still keeping a F/2.0 aperture, then i'd give it to Leica & you can talk and brag away. If not, then there's no point of picking on the S90.
    Last edited by ctjcad; 12-21-2009 at 04:12 AM.

  9. #77
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctjcad View Post
    (See post #69) Of course, like already mentioned, it's almost impossible to "fit" everything in 1 body or 1 camera. And it'll cost a bundle if one could fit it all in a small body chassis. It's a no brainer.
    That's why, like i already mentioned, you can't compare your LX3 and the S90 or SD880.
    If Leica can come up with a pocket size digital camera, the same physical size as the LX3, which has the same focal length zoom lens capability like the S90 while still keeping a F/2.0 aperture, then i'd give it to Leica & you can talk and brag away. If not, then there's no point of picking on the S90.
    The S90 is a lower class P&S than the LX3, with the F/2.0 to F/2.8 lens speed across the LX3's zoom many magnitudes higher than the S90's F/2.0 to F/4.9 lens speed, even with the LX3's larger sensor. Such a drastic drop in lens speed in the S90 across the zoom is typical of lower end zooms. You can see this in the zooms of almost all other manufacturers, the standard class having a zoom lens speed falling by as much a 3 stops whereas the higher class of zooms have a more constant lens speed zoom. I think Canon is not prepared to incur the higher cost of a more constant lens speed, and has wisely positioned the S90 as a lower alternative to the LX3.

  10. #78
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,645
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    The S90 is a lower class P&S than the LX3, with the F/2.0 to F/2.8 lens speed across the LX3's zoom many magnitudes higher than the S90's F/2.0 to F/4.9 lens speed, even with the LX3's larger sensor. Such a drastic drop in lens speed in the S90 across the zoom is typical of lower end zooms. You can see this in the zooms of almost all other manufacturers, the standard class having a zoom lens speed falling by as much a 3 stops whereas the higher class of zooms have a more constant lens speed zoom. I think Canon is not prepared to incur the higher cost of a more constant lens speed, and has wisely positioned the S90 as a lower alternative to the LX3.
    Why stop at f/2.0 and 21mm? Why not have the zoom range 7mm - 900mm at a constant f/0.9? That will be testament to an celestial class zoom. Not all bridges are made of gold although it might look nice. Canon is not restricted by cost (although that celestial zoom might as well be) but how much their consumer is willing to pay.

  11. #79
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by weeyeh View Post
    Why stop at f/2.0 and 21mm? Why not have the zoom range 7mm - 900mm at a constant f/0.9? That will be testament to an celestial class zoom. Not all bridges are made of gold although it might look nice. Canon is not restricted by cost (although that celestial zoom might as well be) but how much their consumer is willing to pay.
    It is physically impossible to design a zoom lens for a 1/1.7" size sensor with a lens speed of even F/2.0 to cover a zoom range from 7mm to 900mm on a P&S size camera, regardless of costs. Not even for a billion dollars.
    The LX3's aperture of F/2.0 to F/2.8 on a zoom range from 24mm to 60mm is already on the theoritical size limit of a P&S. If you push the zoom to say 100mm then something will have to be shrunked, and that is the lens speed from F/2.0 at 24mm to perhaps F/5.6 at 100mm.
    As a rough rule of thumb a big fat lens with a huge diameter is an indication of fast lens speed, even if the zoom range is limited. In contrast, a small and thin lens may indicate a large zoom range with pin-hole size apertures of perhaps F/5.6 to F/6.4. Give me a fat lens anytime. With fat lenses there is a lot of glass across and it means more light.

  12. #80
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Perhaps not many owners of P&S cameras realize that the LX3 is an unrivalled flagship in the P&S field. Just look around you and see if there are other P&S cameras offering a 24mm wide angle plus an almost constant zoom aperture from a very fast F/2.0 to F/2.8 lens speed. This is quite extraordinary and incredible, but it seems it is lost on many. Its so called rival the Canon S90 has a very modest F/2.0 to F/4.9 aperture through its zoom. In fact that F/4.9 is a disgrace to its F/2.0 at its wide angle side. It brings disgrace to what a blue blood F/2.0 is. This type of extremes of lens speeds through its zoom range belongs to the lower tier of P&S cameras.

  13. #81
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    14,198
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Panasonic LX3 35mm Equiv.: 24-60mm f2.0-f2.8

    Canon S90 35mm equiv 28-105mm f/2.0-4.9

    Surprised you missed this part Taneepak. The maximum apertures at the long end are not comparable in focal lengths. We should compare the maximum aperture of the S90 is at the 60mm (35mm equiv). I suspect the maximum apeture is larger than f4.9....unless I've missed something obvious.

  14. #82
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    home
    Posts
    278
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    guys,

    just ditch those itsy bitsy p&s and get a D3 (Nikon, that is.) and nikkor lenses!

    MetalOrange

  15. #83
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheung View Post
    Panasonic LX3 35mm Equiv.: 24-60mm f2.0-f2.8

    Canon S90 35mm equiv 28-105mm f/2.0-4.9

    Surprised you missed this part Taneepak. The maximum apertures at the long end are not comparable in focal lengths. We should compare the maximum aperture of the S90 is at the 60mm (35mm equiv). I suspect the maximum apeture is larger than f4.9....unless I've missed something obvious.
    I think with such a drastic drop in aperture over the zoom, the loss in lens speed from F/2.0, which is only available at 28mm focal length, will start immediately after 28mm. The drop will be close to F/3.5, close to one and a half stops, as early as 35mm and will probably hit F/4.9 at about over 50mm. This can be guestimated based on the size of the lens versus the zoom range. The longer the zoom range the faster the drop in lens speed. If the zoom range had been restricted to 28mm-70mm, then yes a more classy lens speed over the zoom range of about F/2.0 to F/2.8 would be possible.

  16. #84
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MetalOrange View Post
    guys,

    just ditch those itsy bitsy p&s and get a D3 (Nikon, that is.) and nikkor lenses!

    MetalOrange
    This is a non-explanation. We are talking about mosquito weight contenders. Bringing in a super-heavy weight to stop the debate once and for all is like not wanting to lean more.

  17. #85
    Regular Member ctjcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    u.s.a.
    Posts
    19,157
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Off topic-It's like "Dooohh!!!"..

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    The S90 is a lower class P&S than the LX3, with the F/2.0 to F/2.8 lens speed across the LX3's zoom many magnitudes higher than the S90's F/2.0 to F/4.9 lens speed, even with the LX3's larger sensor. Such a drastic drop in lens speed in the S90 across the zoom is typical of lower end zooms. You can see this in the zooms of almost all other manufacturers, the standard class having a zoom lens speed falling by as much a 3 stops whereas the higher class of zooms have a more constant lens speed zoom. I think Canon is not prepared to incur the higher cost of a more constant lens speed, and has wisely positioned the S90 as a lower alternative to the LX3.
    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......Mr. T, that's a no brainer and not a surprise.
    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    ...
    The LX3's aperture of F/2.0 to F/2.8 on a zoom range from 24mm to 60mm is already on the theoritical size limit of a P&S. If you push the zoom to say 100mm then something will have to be shrunked, and that is the lens speed from F/2.0 at 24mm to perhaps F/5.6 at 100mm.
    ...
    ..you've just summarized and confirmed, once again, my whole point on your comparison between the LX3 and the S90.*sigh*..So, what is there to brag abt the LX3??*sigh*
    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Perhaps not many owners of P&S cameras realize that the LX3 is an unrivalled flagship in the P&S field. Just look around you and see if there are other P&S cameras offering a 24mm wide angle plus an almost constant zoom aperture from a very fast F/2.0 to F/2.8 lens speed. This is quite extraordinary and incredible, but it seems it is lost on many. Its so called rival the Canon S90 has a very modest F/2.0 to F/4.9 aperture through its zoom. In fact that F/4.9 is a disgrace to its F/2.0 at its wide angle side. It brings disgrace to what a blue blood F/2.0 is. This type of extremes of lens speeds through its zoom range belongs to the lower tier of P&S cameras.
    There is nothing "quite extraordinary and incredible" abt the LX3 having those features. In fact, many of the previous "bulkier" models (even its own brand) had the same aperture feature while boasting a lens w/a longer focal zoom length (longer than what the LX3 offers). LX3 only wins in the compactness of its body.
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp
    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    I think with such a drastic drop in aperture over the zoom, the loss in lens speed from F/2.0, which is only available at 28mm focal length, will start immediately after 28mm. The drop will be close to F/3.5, close to one and a half stops, as early as 35mm and will probably hit F/4.9 at about over 50mm. This can be guestimated based on the size of the lens versus the zoom range. The longer the zoom range the faster the drop in lens speed. If the zoom range had been restricted to 28mm-70mm, then yes a more classy lens speed over the zoom range of about F/2.0 to F/2.8 would be possible.
    ..remember also, the S90 has a (5x) digital zoom while the LX3 does not. All in all, i would guesstimate, the LX3's features would fall in the same line as the S90, if given the same lens specs as the S90.
    And until the LX3 comes out with the same lens specs as the S90, this comparison shouldn't even exist.
    Last edited by ctjcad; 12-21-2009 at 01:31 PM.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Canon EOS-1D X
    By drifit in forum Badminton Photography
    Replies: 6
    : 12-29-2012, 02:07 PM
  2. Canon sx1 IS
    By cheeyf in forum Badminton Photography
    Replies: 4
    : 12-17-2008, 08:22 AM
  3. Anyone getting the Canon 40D?
    By Sealman in forum Badminton Photography
    Replies: 12
    : 10-05-2007, 04:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •