Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > New Canon EIS mirrorless system - Four Thirds, but not Four Thirds!

Reply
Thread Tools

New Canon EIS mirrorless system - Four Thirds, but not Four Thirds!

 
 
SMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2010
On 9/14/2010 8:30 AM, Neil Harrington wrote:

> Exactly. I never could see the point of APS -- other than to help Kodak et
> al. sell a lot of expensive photofinishing equipment. The size advantage
> over existing compact 35s was trivial, the ease of loading was really no
> better than that of 35s by that time, and the choice of formats was probably
> of little if any interest to the average buyer who only wanted standard 4 x
> 6 prints anyway.


Well the one nice thing about APS was the small Canon Elph camera,
probably the only APS camera that ever sold very many units.

It was also supposed to be a better way to store negatives, and it would
be easier for automated photo-finishing equipment to process.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Kennedy McEwen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2010
In article <4c8f87aa$0$1620$(E-Mail Removed)>, SMS
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>
>BTW, there was even a 110 SLR.


Actually, there were at least four!
Two from Minolta, the 110 Zoom SLR in 1976
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mi...R_20090412.jpg
followed the more conventionally shaped Mk-II from 1979
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._110_Mk_II.jpg

and the two classics from Pentax, the Auto 110 in 1978
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...x_Auto_110.jpg
followed by the Auto 110 Super in 1982
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...1/DSC03941.JPG

The Pentax models are certainly more memorable though, because they were
backed by a complete system, "System 10", including interchangeable
prime and zoom lenses as well as motor drives and automatic flashes.
http://whitemetal.com/pentax/a110_sl...m/DSC04071.JPG
The Minoltas were fixed zoom lens cameras more akin to what are these
days termed "ZLRs", but they pre-dated the taxonomy.

A neat feature of the Pentax 110 cameras that should have made it to the
modern dSLR is the in-camera iris - stopping dust from ever entering the
camera when the lens was changed. Forget dust cleaning systems, this
would be dust prevention! (I know there are aftermarket kits that serve
a similar function on dSLRs.)

We like to think that electronics enables miniaturisation but, though
the Four-turds format is about the same size as a 110 frame, Olympus has
struggled to make their dSLR range as small as any of the OM full frame
cameras. Meanwhile Minolta and Pentax managed to do this with a
mechanical system back in the 70s, despite the extremely inefficient 110
film cartridge packaging. Progress!
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2010
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
Ofnuts <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 14/09/2010 01:08, Outing Pretend-PhotographerTrolls is FUN! wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:18:31 -0700, SMS<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> One of the biggest reasons
>>> people buy D-SLRs is for the phase-detect focusing which is so much
>>> faster than contrast detect, but that thus far has required a mirror.

>>
>> One of the biggest reasons people avoid D-SLRs is for their phase-detect
>> focusing which is so much less accurate than contrast detect,


> 99.99% of the people not using DSLRs don't even know phase-focusing
> exists (and they don't know about contrast focusing, either).


They just wonder why everything takes ages to focus.

> And, er, "slapping mirror and shutter designed last century which
> prevents any expensive lens attached to it having its resolution reduced
> by half", that reads that the DSLR shutter allows the lens to be used at
> full resolution, right?


Obviously. Contrary to P&S cameras with contrast focus designed
last century which allows even slow spiders to escape from being
photographed. Of course there is one exception, P&S cameras with
fixed focus, a design from 2 centuries ago, which allows one to
snapshot without waiting for the camera.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-17-2010
"SMS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4c8eb7bd$0$22177$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Ofnuts wrote:


>
> Clearly our favorite troll has never used a D-SLR since he does not
> comprehend the advantages it provides.
>
> What he should do to be taken seriously is to learn the trade-offs between
> the different types of digital cameras and to which conditions each one is
> suited.


You're assuming a non-existent sincerity. It specializes in chain pulling.



--
Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-17-2010
On 9/17/10 PDT 5:01 AM, Peter wrote:
> "SMS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:4c8eb7bd$0$22177$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Ofnuts wrote:

>
>>
>> Clearly our favorite troll has never used a D-SLR since he does not
>> comprehend the advantages it provides.
>>
>> What he should do to be taken seriously is to learn the trade-offs
>> between the different types of digital cameras and to which conditions
>> each one is suited.

>
> You're assuming a non-existent sincerity. It specializes in chain pulling.



Crikey, can't you three stop talking about the pest??? There's only a
handful now that feed his ego.

--
lsmft

 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-17-2010
"John McWilliams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:i700gh$ng1$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
> On 9/17/10 PDT 5:01 AM, Peter wrote:
>> "SMS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:4c8eb7bd$0$22177$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Ofnuts wrote:

>>
>>>
>>> Clearly our favorite troll has never used a D-SLR since he does not
>>> comprehend the advantages it provides.
>>>
>>> What he should do to be taken seriously is to learn the trade-offs
>>> between the different types of digital cameras and to which conditions
>>> each one is suited.

>>
>> You're assuming a non-existent sincerity. It specializes in chain
>> pulling.

>
>
> Crikey, can't you three stop talking about the pest??? There's only a
> handful now that feed his ego.



Including you?

--
Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
SMS
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-17-2010
On 9/17/2010 5:01 AM, Peter wrote:
> "SMS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:4c8eb7bd$0$22177$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Ofnuts wrote:

>
>>
>> Clearly our favorite troll has never used a D-SLR since he does not
>> comprehend the advantages it provides.
>>
>> What he should do to be taken seriously is to learn the trade-offs
>> between the different types of digital cameras and to which conditions
>> each one is suited.

>
> You're assuming a non-existent sincerity. It specializes in chain pulling.


People can change. Perhaps he'll eventually tire of his current shtick
and decide to educate himself. I do wish he'd stop promoting CHDK, and
stop claiming that he's a contributor to the CHDK effort, as he hurts
the reputation of CHDK by association. Every time I load CHDK now, I
cringe to think that our favorite troll promotes it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-17-2010
"SMS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4c93940d$0$1613$(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 9/17/2010 5:01 AM, Peter wrote:
>> "SMS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:4c8eb7bd$0$22177$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Ofnuts wrote:

>>
>>>
>>> Clearly our favorite troll has never used a D-SLR since he does not
>>> comprehend the advantages it provides.
>>>
>>> What he should do to be taken seriously is to learn the trade-offs
>>> between the different types of digital cameras and to which conditions
>>> each one is suited.

>>
>> You're assuming a non-existent sincerity. It specializes in chain
>> pulling.

>
> People can change. Perhaps he'll eventually tire of his current shtick and
> decide to educate himself. I do wish he'd stop promoting CHDK, and stop
> claiming that he's a contributor to the CHDK effort, as he hurts the
> reputation of CHDK by association. Every time I load CHDK now, I cringe to
> think that our favorite troll promotes it.



Since you don't know it's real identity, even if you personally have met
every contributor to CHDK, how can you tell the truth?
Just think logic.


--
Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-17-2010
SMS <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> People can change.


People, yes. Slime molds and trolls? I doubt it.

> Perhaps he'll eventually tire of his current shtick
> and decide to educate himself.


It alreads is educated (as far as it can ever be). After all,
it uses DSLR pictures and claims they were done by P&S cameras.

It just won't tire of it's stick. Maybe a usenet death
penalty would cure it over half a year (i.e. nobody even gets
to read what it writes), but people still feed it.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-18-2010
On 9/17/10 PDT 8:55 AM, Peter wrote:
> "John McWilliams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:i700gh$ng1$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>> On 9/17/10 PDT 5:01 AM, Peter wrote:
>>> "SMS" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:4c8eb7bd$0$22177$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> Ofnuts wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Clearly our favorite troll has never used a D-SLR since he does not
>>>> comprehend the advantages it provides.
>>>>
>>>> What he should do to be taken seriously is to learn the trade-offs
>>>> between the different types of digital cameras and to which conditions
>>>> each one is suited.
>>>
>>> You're assuming a non-existent sincerity. It specializes in chain
>>> pulling.

>>
>>
>> Crikey, can't you three stop talking about the pest??? There's only a
>> handful now that feed his ego.

>
>
> Including you?
>


Yes, including me. It's very tiresome. Now only you and a half dozen
others are continuing the practice.

--
lsmft
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon mirrorless let-down (maybe) RichA Digital Photography 27 07-28-2012 09:52 PM
Canon, Nikon mirrorless = Disney and FOX on DVD RichA Digital Photography 9 09-15-2011 04:57 PM
Canon; Only loser companies need compact mirrorless RichA Digital Photography 1 03-21-2011 11:25 PM
Nikon's patent applications for mirrorless camera system? Bruce Digital Photography 25 11-28-2010 01:55 AM
Canon and Nikon mirrorless remind me of FOX and Disney at theinception of DVD RichA Digital Photography 2 09-08-2010 01:13 PM



Advertisments