I think it is unfair to dogs in general for them to be associated with
certain inadequate cameras.
...Wayne
>
> Moose, my point about the "dog" discussion is that it really is an issue
of
> relativism. If it meets your needs and desires, then it is no dog. But the
> moment you have to fight it, then it becomes a dog.
> However, at what point is something actually a dog even though the person
> using it isn't aware of the dog characteristics?
>
> This lack of awareness may be because of a lack of exposure to better
> solutions, or also as likely that the better solution hasn't been released
yet.
>
> Let's take the Canon EOS-M camera as an example. In a blinder'd view, the
> EOS-M is the greatest thing since sliced bread. No other EOS-mount camera
> has the distinct size advantage of this camera. Is it a dog?
> Without knowing what else is out there, the answer is no. Knowing that
> there are other cameras with massive advantages over it? Yes. I'm sorry,
but
> that thing is a mongrul.
>
> Let's take the Olympus E-M5 camera as an example. In a blinder'd view, the
> E-M5 is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Compared to other
mirrorless
> cameras, it is extremely competent. Compared to regular DSLRs, the
> performance in some areas stinks. It doesn't take a rocket-scientist to
figure
> out that Olympus will have to introduce a better camera that addresses
> those short-comings. Last year, the best sensor available in the Olympus
> mirrorless line was the geriatric Panasonic sensor which chases after
every
> passing car. Was it a dog last year? I said "yes", but the apologists said
"no"
> for the same type of reasons you are giving today.
>
> Is the E-M5 a very good camera? Absolutely. To you and your very specific
> usage parameters, the camera may be no dog. But to others it is. To me and
a
> very specific usage parameter, the E-1 is no dog, but there is no denying
that
> it barks itself hoarse.
>
> Regarding battery life and live-view. It is true that when compared to the
> other cameras (except the Sonys), it is pretty much comparable--and even
> better than Canon and Nikon. But, that doesn't mean you just give it a
pass.
> No. Sorry, but the standard of long-battery life which we enjoy with DSLRs
is
> what we need to compare to. The E-M5 is not a toy, it is a tool. It has to
play
> by the same big-boy rules that tools are subject to. Otherwise, we'll
continue
> with this nonsense where pros have to use two different systems.
>
> --
> Ken Norton
> ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.zone-10.com
> --
> __________________________________________________________
> _______
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|