Panasonic digital cameras

Discussion in 'Panasonic Lumix' started by aniramca@gmail.com, Jul 31, 2007.

  1. Guest

    I spent my past times visiting camera shops and electronic stores, and
    look, feel and try various cameras. When I tried to shoot any
    pictures, and check the LCD screen... I found that Panasonic cameras
    appear to have the colour and sharpness that I like. am I biased
    toward this particular brand? I am not just talking about the high end
    Panasonic cameras... but also the cheapest models. They seems to
    produce sharp, colour contrasting images. Tried the FZ8, the LZ2 and
    I usually said to myself... WOW!. However, when I checked the image
    quality rating from camera reviews, Panasonic is not superior from the
    other famous brand names. So, what's happening here? Is it just a
    perception here?

    I also asked previously if any of the readers of these forums know a
    website where they do "torture test" or "long term use test". Do they
    ever show whether one brand camera has better long term consistency in
    its image quality than the others? I think they should have such a
    test to see how good the camera is built. Show a photo taken by the
    camera when it is new, and show it again when it has already taken
    over 10,000 images... or 20,000 images,. etc. But in my previous query
    about this subject... no one ever commented on this question.
    I believe that more expensive and professional cameras, the parts are
    designed better and designed to last, and therefore it will keep on
    working perfectly for longer period or higher shots.
    , Jul 31, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Duncan Guest

    The way digital has changed the marketplace for camera choices we are now
    faced with electronics companies whom previously were not part of the camera
    market.
    However since many of them have gone it alone or purchased or merged with
    the conventional names in the photographic field.

    The Lumix is a very interesting choice with it offering one of the few
    companies sporting a 28mm wide angle and Leica lenses.

    The field now is very wide and makes the choice of camera even more
    difficult. So by the time you've made the choice the new version has arrived
    and the process starts all over again with it being a fraction of the price
    of the one before with better/more features!

    Duncan


    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I spent my past times visiting camera shops and electronic stores, and
    > look, feel and try various cameras. When I tried to shoot any
    > pictures, and check the LCD screen... I found that Panasonic cameras
    > appear to have the colour and sharpness that I like. am I biased
    > toward this particular brand? I am not just talking about the high end
    > Panasonic cameras... but also the cheapest models. They seems to
    > produce sharp, colour contrasting images. Tried the FZ8, the LZ2 and
    > I usually said to myself... WOW!. However, when I checked the image
    > quality rating from camera reviews, Panasonic is not superior from the
    > other famous brand names. So, what's happening here? Is it just a
    > perception here?
    >
    > I also asked previously if any of the readers of these forums know a
    > website where they do "torture test" or "long term use test". Do they
    > ever show whether one brand camera has better long term consistency in
    > its image quality than the others? I think they should have such a
    > test to see how good the camera is built. Show a photo taken by the
    > camera when it is new, and show it again when it has already taken
    > over 10,000 images... or 20,000 images,. etc. But in my previous query
    > about this subject... no one ever commented on this question.
    > I believe that more expensive and professional cameras, the parts are
    > designed better and designed to last, and therefore it will keep on
    > working perfectly for longer period or higher shots.
    >
    Duncan, Jul 31, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Trev Guest

    "Duncan" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > The way digital has changed the marketplace for camera choices we are now
    > faced with electronics companies whom previously were not part of the
    > camera market.
    > However since many of them have gone it alone or purchased or merged with
    > the conventional names in the photographic field.
    >
    > The Lumix is a very interesting choice with it offering one of the few
    > companies sporting a 28mm wide angle and Leica lenses.


    But what is in a name. Leica was the name of a camera body that used Lietz
    lens just like Ziess on Sony and Shnieder There only names.

    > The field now is very wide and makes the choice of camera even more
    > difficult. So by the time you've made the choice the new version has
    > arrived and the process starts all over again with it being a fraction of
    > the price of the one before with better/more features!
    >
    > Duncan
    >
    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I spent my past times visiting camera shops and electronic stores, and
    >> look, feel and try various cameras. When I tried to shoot any
    >> pictures, and check the LCD screen... I found that Panasonic cameras
    >> appear to have the colour and sharpness that I like. am I biased
    >> toward this particular brand? I am not just talking about the high end
    >> Panasonic cameras... but also the cheapest models. They seems to
    >> produce sharp, colour contrasting images. Tried the FZ8, the LZ2 and
    >> I usually said to myself... WOW!. However, when I checked the image
    >> quality rating from camera reviews, Panasonic is not superior from the
    >> other famous brand names. So, what's happening here? Is it just a
    >> perception here?
    >>
    >> I also asked previously if any of the readers of these forums know a
    >> website where they do "torture test" or "long term use test". Do they
    >> ever show whether one brand camera has better long term consistency in
    >> its image quality than the others? I think they should have such a
    >> test to see how good the camera is built. Show a photo taken by the
    >> camera when it is new, and show it again when it has already taken
    >> over 10,000 images... or 20,000 images,. etc. But in my previous query
    >> about this subject... no one ever commented on this question.
    >> I believe that more expensive and professional cameras, the parts are
    >> designed better and designed to last, and therefore it will keep on
    >> working perfectly for longer period or higher shots.
    >>

    >
    >
    Trev, Jul 31, 2007
    #3
  4. SMS Guest

    Duncan wrote:
    > The way digital has changed the marketplace for camera choices we are now
    > faced with electronics companies whom previously were not part of the camera
    > market.


    Panasonic sold film cameras, though I don't think that they ever
    marketed them in the U.S.. They've always been very big in camcorders,
    both consumer and professional, so the progression to digital cameras
    was a logical step. Same for Sony, but I don't think they had any film
    cameras, though they did have an instant camera at one time that
    appeared to be just a relabeled Polaroid.

    > The Lumix is a very interesting choice with it offering one of the few
    > companies sporting a 28mm wide angle and Leica lenses.


    Yes, this is true. If you want a smaller P&S with a 28mm lens your
    choices are very limited. If you want a small P&S with 28mm at the wide
    end of a zoom lens, image stabilization, and an optical viewfinder, your
    choices are only one Canon model. Fortunately for the camera
    manufacturers, apparently very few P&S camera buyers understand the
    value of a wider angle lens, and instead get carried away with the
    telephoto side of the zoom (after all, big numbers are better than small
    numbers!).

    > The field now is very wide and makes the choice of camera even more
    > difficult.


    It's not so difficult, especially if you want that 28mm. Applying just
    some very basic requirements you can eliminate most cameras from
    consideration:

    1. Low-noise
    2. Optical Viewfinder (or at least an EVF)
    3. Zoom of at least 28mm at the wide end

    Here's what you end up with (let me know if I've missed any):

    Pocket
    ------
    Canon SD800 IS


    Compact
    -------
    None


    ZLR
    ---
    Fuji FinePix S8000fd (probably...too new to know about the noise)


    If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
    there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
    end with the use of a conversion lens. But if you're going to muck with
    conversion lenses, which are relatively low quality, you may as well get
    a D-SLR, and get low shutter/auto-focus lag in the bargain.
    SMS, Jul 31, 2007
    #4
  5. Henry Hank Guest

    Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:37:20 -0700, SMS <> wrote:

    >If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
    >there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
    >end with the use of a conversion lens.


    Who started this bizarre and totally wrong "ZLR" acronym? It makes absolutely no
    sense whatsoever. People who keep using it are just parroting others that
    invented this misnomer without realizing the error.

    ZLR, Zoom-Lens-Reflex for a long-zoom P&S camera? The R needs to be thrown out.
    "Reflex" in SLR (single lens reflex) and d-SLR (digital single lens reflex)
    stands for the ancient mirror and reflected light path required in that camera
    design. If R is thrown out to be more accurate, then you have a ZL (zoom lens)
    camera? Great, so every P&S camera with 1.1x to 18x qualifies as a ZL camera.
    You can be more accurate with UZPS (ultra-zoom P&S), since everyone keeps
    calling non-DSLR cameras as P&S cameras, even though DSLRs are revered for being
    even more of a P&S camera than P&S cameras. Again, just more nonsense on the
    net.

    Don't you just hate it when erroneous information and nonsense catch-phrases
    start spreading like wildfire on the net, everyone repeating it without even
    understanding why they are saying it, then everyone starts looking like idiots.
    They think it means something because someone else said it, looking just as
    foolish as the first person that used it.

    Get your acts together people. Find words and acronyms that accurately describe
    these different cameras or don't talk about them at all until you figure it out.


    I propose, for accuracy, that:

    * P&S should be done away with completely, since ALL cameras today are P&S
    cameras, especially DSLRs. Instead use "SLDC" for "Single Lens Digital Camera".

    * An "SLDC" with ultra-zoom (10x optical-zoom or more) as "UZDC", "Ultra-Zoom
    Digital Camera", since they are generally in a class of their own the last few
    years and everyone knows what design you are referring to. The UZDC being just a
    subset of all SLDCs

    * DSLR can remain DSLR. Or if being praised for how fast they perform
    automatically then a "DSLR-P&S" if you want to be accurate.

    Of course this is never going to happen because the DSLR crowd loves throwing
    around the P&S acronym as a handy (but totally inaccurate) and childish insult
    to anyone that doesn't buy a DSLR. Even though their DSLR is a high-priced P&S
    but they won't admit it. (This is no different than christians that run around
    calling people Pagans and Heathens never knowing what Pagan really means, or
    that Heathen just means one who lives on the Heath. Or the wealthy who run
    around calling everyone who has less as "hicks" just so they can feel better
    about being greedy.) Calling an SLDC as a P&S is one of the few ways they can
    pretend to be superior, they'll never give up that. Sometimes it's all they have
    left in light of the new advances in SLDC and UZDC designs.

    So there you have it, "SLDC" and "UZDC" to describe these cameras. Start using
    them or something just as accurate. Or appear to look the fool forever more --
    just as you have been appearing since the use of "P&S" became commonplace.
    Henry Hank, Jul 31, 2007
    #5
  6. Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digitalcameras

    Henry Hank wrote:

    > Who started this bizarre and totally wrong "ZLR" acronym? It makes absolutely no
    > sense whatsoever. People who keep using it are just parroting others that
    > invented this misnomer without realizing the error.
    >
    > ZLR, Zoom-Lens-Reflex for a long-zoom P&S camera? The R needs to be thrown out.
    > "Reflex" in SLR (single lens reflex) and d-SLR (digital single lens reflex)
    > stands for the ancient mirror and reflected light path required in that camera
    > design. If R is thrown out to be more accurate, then you have a ZL (zoom lens)
    > camera? Great, so every P&S camera with 1.1x to 18x qualifies as a ZL camera.
    > You can be more accurate with UZPS (ultra-zoom P&S), since everyone keeps
    > calling non-DSLR cameras as P&S cameras, even though DSLRs are revered for being
    > even more of a P&S camera than P&S cameras. Again, just more nonsense on the
    > net.
    >
    > Don't you just hate it when erroneous information and nonsense catch-phrases
    > start spreading like wildfire on the net, everyone repeating it without even
    > understanding why they are saying it, then everyone starts looking like idiots.
    > They think it means something because someone else said it, looking just as
    > foolish as the first person that used it.
    >
    > Get your acts together people. Find words and acronyms that accurately describe
    > these different cameras or don't talk about them at all until you figure it out.
    >
    >
    > I propose, for accuracy, that:
    >
    > * P&S should be done away with completely, since ALL cameras today are P&S
    > cameras, especially DSLRs. Instead use "SLDC" for "Single Lens Digital Camera".
    >
    > * An "SLDC" with ultra-zoom (10x optical-zoom or more) as "UZDC", "Ultra-Zoom
    > Digital Camera", since they are generally in a class of their own the last few
    > years and everyone knows what design you are referring to. The UZDC being just a
    > subset of all SLDCs
    >
    > * DSLR can remain DSLR. Or if being praised for how fast they perform
    > automatically then a "DSLR-P&S" if you want to be accurate.
    >
    > Of course this is never going to happen because the DSLR crowd loves throwing
    > around the P&S acronym as a handy (but totally inaccurate) and childish insult
    > to anyone that doesn't buy a DSLR. Even though their DSLR is a high-priced P&S
    > but they won't admit it. (This is no different than christians that run around
    > calling people Pagans and Heathens never knowing what Pagan really means, or
    > that Heathen just means one who lives on the Heath. Or the wealthy who run
    > around calling everyone who has less as "hicks" just so they can feel better
    > about being greedy.) Calling an SLDC as a P&S is one of the few ways they can
    > pretend to be superior, they'll never give up that. Sometimes it's all they have
    > left in light of the new advances in SLDC and UZDC designs.
    >
    > So there you have it, "SLDC" and "UZDC" to describe these cameras. Start using
    > them or something just as accurate. Or appear to look the fool forever more --
    > just as you have been appearing since the use of "P&S" became commonplace.
    >


    Phew Henry. I can't disagree with anything you say. Unfortunately the world
    isn't ruled by accuracy and information, but marketing and numbers - usually
    masquerading as accuracy and information.

    I just wish that people would stop thinking that all photography should be
    referred to in 35mm terms. And that they'd stop inexplicably typing a trailing
    'e' on the word lens. Just because it isn't common to end a word -ns, people,
    doesn't mean it is wrong.
    Richard Polhill, Jul 31, 2007
    #6
  7. Trev wrote:
    > "Duncan" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    > But what is in a name. Leica was the name of a camera body that used
    > Lietz lens just like Ziess on Sony and Shnieder There only names.
    >

    The Leica lens on my Panasonic FZ30 is far better than the 3 Nikon lenses on
    my D70s, so if it is only a name, it must be a very good name!

    Dennis
    Dennis Pogson, Jul 31, 2007
    #7
  8. Tony Polson Guest

    Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    Henry Hank <> wrote:

    >On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:37:20 -0700, SMS <> wrote:
    >
    >>If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
    >>there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
    >>end with the use of a conversion lens.

    >
    >Who started this bizarre and totally wrong "ZLR" acronym? It makes absolutely no
    >sense whatsoever. People who keep using it are just parroting others that
    >invented this misnomer without realizing the error.



    ZLR is a perfectly valid term. It was applied to Olympus 35mm film
    SLRs with a reflex mirror and a non-interchangeable zoom lens, such as
    the IS1, IS2 and IS3 (IS 1000, IS 2000 and IS 3000 outside the USA).

    When Olympus started producing DSLRs with a non-interchangeable zoom
    lens, the term was also used. The E-10 and E-20 were both ZLRs.

    "Zoom lens reflex" perfectly describes these cameras. The problem is
    when ignorant and ill-informed people apply a perfectly valid term to
    cameras that don't fit the description.
    Tony Polson, Jul 31, 2007
    #8
  9. Henry Hank Guest

    Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:26:20 +0100, Tony Polson <> wrote:

    >Henry Hank <> wrote:
    >
    >>On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:37:20 -0700, SMS <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
    >>>there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
    >>>end with the use of a conversion lens.

    >>
    >>Who started this bizarre and totally wrong "ZLR" acronym? It makes absolutely no
    >>sense whatsoever. People who keep using it are just parroting others that
    >>invented this misnomer without realizing the error.

    >
    >
    >ZLR is a perfectly valid term. It was applied to Olympus 35mm film
    >SLRs with a reflex mirror and a non-interchangeable zoom lens, such as
    >the IS1, IS2 and IS3 (IS 1000, IS 2000 and IS 3000 outside the USA).
    >
    >When Olympus started producing DSLRs with a non-interchangeable zoom
    >lens, the term was also used. The E-10 and E-20 were both ZLRs.
    >
    >"Zoom lens reflex" perfectly describes these cameras. The problem is
    >when ignorant and ill-informed people apply a perfectly valid term to
    >cameras that don't fit the description.


    Just because a manufacturer uses some board-meeting-agreed-on marketing term
    doesn't mean they are totally accurate either. Just like Canon starting that
    silly Tv and Av mode on their cameras. Time-value? Aperture-value? Wha? OH, you
    *meant* to say shutter-speed priority and aperture priority. Now I get it,
    you're just a dumbshit CEO-pawn marketing idiot out to make everyone appear to
    be as much of an idiot as you are. Okay, I get it now.

    If Olympus really wanted to be accurate it should have been SZLR, for Single
    Zoom-Lens Reflex. It's a shame that this acronym has crept into common use for
    digital cameras. It's hard to take anyone seriously in this area of interest if
    they keep throwing around terms with such arcane origins and now wrongly
    applying them to unrelated devices.

    Just how hard would it be to turn the tide of ignorance and bad habit online? If
    everyone started using SLDC and UZDC today it could also spread by wildfire just
    as fast as the wrong terms had spread. When asked what you meant, tell them. Or
    just include it in parens until they get the drift of it. I.e. "The latest SLDC
    (single lens digital camera) from So-And-So company is ..." Try to turn it now,
    or people will be looking like fools for the whole next century. You have as
    much power to use and promote more correct terms as did the idiots who started
    using and promoting the wrong ones.

    I for one never give into the stupidity and ignorance of others just to make it
    easy for them. That would make me just as idiotic and stupid as they are.



    QWERTY made a lot of sense in the beginning, it stopped the typewriter hammers
    from locking up on fast typers. Today, putting a QWERTY keyboard on a small
    handheld device is just absurd. Yet they do it, and the manufacturers end up
    looking like fools to me, while making the average non-typer hunt all over
    trying to find the letters.

    I don't know how much of this stupidity of humanity I can take anymore. It seems
    to be growing exponentially.
    Henry Hank, Jul 31, 2007
    #9
  10. ASAAR Guest

    Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:20:41 GMT, Henry Hank wrote:

    > Wha? OH, you *meant* to say shutter-speed priority and aperture priority.
    > Now I get it, you're just a dumbshit CEO-pawn marketing idiot out to make
    > everyone appear to be as much of an idiot as you are. Okay, I get it now.
    > . . .
    >
    > I for one never give into the stupidity and ignorance of others just to make it
    > easy for them. That would make me just as idiotic and stupid as they are.


    Greetings, sock puppet. The name has once again changed, but the
    message sure hasn't. Why don't you sit yourself down and think calm
    thoughts over a nice, warm glass of milk.


    > I don't know how much of this stupidity of humanity I can take anymore.
    > It seems to be growing exponentially.


    Oh, I see. Then perhaps some Kool-Aid would be more appropriate.

    :) Time to roll out the all new . . .

    > **** CHDK / Photoline 32 / anti-DSLR Sock Puppet Troll List ****
    >
    > Baumbadier, Brad M, Bucky, CharleiD, CoolGuy, DOCJohnson,
    > D-Rexter, EdBancroft, , Fed-Up-With-Corel,
    > FrankLM, GilfordBrimly, GoKiting, Henry Hank, HokusPokus,
    > JoeBS, Lurk, NameHere, NameThere, New2_S3,
    > , RockyZ, SayWhat, SelfImporantName,
    > SelfImportantName, Soujourner, spamless, TryinToHelp,
    > WillyWonka and X-Man.
    ASAAR, Jul 31, 2007
    #10
  11. Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:36:18 -0400, ASAAR <> wrote:

    >On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:20:41 GMT, Henry Hank wrote:
    >
    >> Wha? OH, you *meant* to say shutter-speed priority and aperture priority.
    >> Now I get it, you're just a dumbshit CEO-pawn marketing idiot out to make
    >> everyone appear to be as much of an idiot as you are. Okay, I get it now.
    >> . . .
    >>
    >> I for one never give into the stupidity and ignorance of others just to make it
    >> easy for them. That would make me just as idiotic and stupid as they are.

    >
    > Greetings, sock puppet. The name has once again changed, but the
    >message sure hasn't. Why don't you sit yourself down and think calm
    >thoughts over a nice, warm glass of milk.
    >
    >
    >> I don't know how much of this stupidity of humanity I can take anymore.
    >> It seems to be growing exponentially.

    >
    > Oh, I see. Then perhaps some Kool-Aid would be more appropriate.
    >
    > :) Time to roll out the all new . . .
    >
    >> **** CHDK / Photoline 32 / anti-DSLR Sock Puppet Troll List ****
    >>
    >> Baumbadier, Brad M, Bucky, CharleiD, CoolGuy, DOCJohnson,
    >> D-Rexter, EdBancroft, , Fed-Up-With-Corel,
    >> FrankLM, GilfordBrimly, GoKiting, Henry Hank, HokusPokus,
    >> JoeBS, Lurk, NameHere, NameThere, New2_S3,
    >> , RockyZ, SayWhat, SelfImporantName,
    >> SelfImportantName, Soujourner, spamless, TryinToHelp,
    >> WillyWonka and X-Man.


    Poor poor Ass-are, nothing better to do with its time, the most uninventive and
    unoriginal thing on the internet. All it can do is copy posts from others and
    ape whatever it's been told to say. How very very sad.

    I hope that your clone is busy posting more kiddie-porn on the net from your
    account. Or was that really you? It's so hard to tell. You'll have a lot of
    explaining to do. Your life is so uninteresting they're actually doing you a
    favor.
    Craig Stevens, Jul 31, 2007
    #11
  12. Pooh-Man Guest

    Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    "Henry Hank" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > So there you have it, "SLDC" and "UZDC" to describe these cameras. Start
    > using
    > them or something just as accurate. Or appear to look the fool forever
    > more --
    > just as you have been appearing since the use of "P&S" became commonplace.
    >



    What's the acronym for a DC with swiveling lens? They are in their own
    league so need an acronym too. I trust you will come up with a good one that
    we can all use.
    Pooh-Man, Jul 31, 2007
    #12
  13. Pooh-Man Guest

    Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    "Henry Hank" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I don't know how much of this stupidity of humanity I can take anymore. It
    > seems
    > to be growing exponentially.
    >


    Don't do it Hank! We all love you.
    Pooh-Man, Jul 31, 2007
    #13
  14. Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digitalcameras

    Henry Hank wrote:

    >
    > Just because a manufacturer uses some board-meeting-agreed-on marketing term
    > doesn't mean they are totally accurate either. Just like Canon starting that
    > silly Tv and Av mode on their cameras. Time-value? Aperture-value? Wha? OH, you
    > *meant* to say shutter-speed priority and aperture priority. Now I get it,
    > you're just a dumbshit CEO-pawn marketing idiot out to make everyone appear to
    > be as much of an idiot as you are. Okay, I get it now.


    I don't think it was Canon's invention. It was once quite common.

    >
    > If Olympus really wanted to be accurate it should have been SZLR, for Single
    > Zoom-Lens Reflex. It's a shame that this acronym has crept into common use for
    > digital cameras. It's hard to take anyone seriously in this area of interest if
    > they keep throwing around terms with such arcane origins and now wrongly
    > applying them to unrelated devices.


    I believe Olympus can call it what they like as long as the claim isn't
    inaccurate.

    If other people start to misapply the term then that's something else.

    >
    > Just how hard would it be to turn the tide of ignorance and bad habit online? If
    > everyone started using SLDC and UZDC today it could also spread by wildfire just
    > as fast as the wrong terms had spread. When asked what you meant, tell them. Or
    > just include it in parens until they get the drift of it. I.e. "The latest SLDC
    > (single lens digital camera) from So-And-So company is ..." Try to turn it now,
    > or people will be looking like fools for the whole next century. You have as
    > much power to use and promote more correct terms as did the idiots who started
    > using and promoting the wrong ones.


    Heh, well on Usenet you'd have to just use it as if everyone knows what it
    means. It's like the emperor's new clothes: if you make it sound like only the
    ignorant don't know, everyone will pretend they do.

    >
    > I for one never give into the stupidity and ignorance of others just to make it
    > easy for them. That would make me just as idiotic and stupid as they are.
    >

    Hear hear!
    >
    >
    > QWERTY made a lot of sense in the beginning, it stopped the typewriter hammers
    > from locking up on fast typers. Today, putting a QWERTY keyboard on a small
    > handheld device is just absurd. Yet they do it, and the manufacturers end up
    > looking like fools to me, while making the average non-typer hunt all over
    > trying to find the letters.


    Yes it's origins were to avoid mechanical problems on typewriters, however you
    are overlooking another fundamental aspect: familiarity. The qwerty keyboard
    is well recognized as a standard, and understood by an enormous number of
    people. Anyone who regularly uses a computer can use one pretty quickly and
    can locate the letter they want with little thought. Those who don't normally
    use a qwerty keyboard may have to hunt and peck, at least until they gain
    familiarity. And that familiarity, once gained, carries over to any other
    qwerty keyboard one is exposed to.

    Any other layout results in hunt-and-peck typing for everyone event though
    there are a lot of people that are already familiar with qwerty. If you use an
    alphabetical layout, you have to break the alphabet over several rows. For
    this there is no conventional mapping, the breaks are arbitrary. You may get
    used to a 5-row layout and then have to use a 4-row keyboard. For example,
    when typing "where" do I have to go left or right from "h" to "e"?

    Anyone can come up with more rational designs for everyday items but can
    rarely overcome the human interface benefits of familiarity and convention.

    >
    > I don't know how much of this stupidity of humanity I can take anymore. It seems
    > to be growing exponentially.
    >


    Well the choice is yours I guess. Hamlet had it:

    To be, or not to be: that is the question:
    Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
    The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
    Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
    And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
    No more; and by a sleep to say we end
    The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
    That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
    Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
    To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
    For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
    When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
    Must give us pause: there's the respect
    That makes calamity of so long life;
    For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
    The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
    The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
    The insolence of office and the spurns
    That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
    When he himself might his quietus make
    With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
    To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
    But that the dread of something after death,
    The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
    No traveller returns, puzzles the will
    And makes us rather bear those ills we have
    Than fly to others that we know not of?
    Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
    And thus the native hue of resolution
    Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
    And enterprises of great pith and moment
    With this regard their currents turn awry,
    And lose the name of action. - Soft you now!
    The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
    Be all my sins remember'd.

    I'm sure bungee jumping without the bungee would do the trick.
    Richard Polhill, Jul 31, 2007
    #14
  15. Tony Polson Guest

    Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    Henry Hank <> wrote:
    >On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:26:20 +0100, Tony Polson <> wrote:
    >>
    >>ZLR is a perfectly valid term. It was applied to Olympus 35mm film
    >>SLRs with a reflex mirror and a non-interchangeable zoom lens, such as
    >>the IS1, IS2 and IS3 (IS 1000, IS 2000 and IS 3000 outside the USA).
    >>
    >>When Olympus started producing DSLRs with a non-interchangeable zoom
    >>lens, the term was also used. The E-10 and E-20 were both ZLRs.
    >>
    >>"Zoom lens reflex" perfectly describes these cameras. The problem is
    >>when ignorant and ill-informed people apply a perfectly valid term to
    >>cameras that don't fit the description.

    >
    >Just because a manufacturer uses some board-meeting-agreed-on marketing term
    >doesn't mean they are totally accurate either. Just like Canon starting that
    >silly Tv and Av mode on their cameras. Time-value? Aperture-value? Wha? OH, you
    >*meant* to say shutter-speed priority and aperture priority. Now I get it,
    >you're just a dumbshit CEO-pawn marketing idiot out to make everyone appear to
    >be as much of an idiot as you are. Okay, I get it now.
    >
    >If Olympus really wanted to be accurate it should have been SZLR, for Single
    >Zoom-Lens Reflex. It's a shame that this acronym has crept into common use for
    >digital cameras. It's hard to take anyone seriously in this area of interest if
    >they keep throwing around terms with such arcane origins and now wrongly
    >applying them to unrelated devices.



    You can rant on about Olympus as much as you like. But I don't think
    Olympus coined the term, nor did Olympus ever use it in their own
    publicity material. It was merely a term that other people applied to
    Olympus cameras.
    Tony Polson, Jul 31, 2007
    #15
  16. SMS <> wrote:

    > It's not so difficult, especially if you want that 28mm. Applying just
    > some very basic requirements you can eliminate most cameras from
    > consideration:
    >
    > 1. Low-noise
    > 2. Optical Viewfinder (or at least an EVF)
    > 3. Zoom of at least 28mm at the wide end
    >
    > Here's what you end up with (let me know if I've missed any):
    >
    > Pocket
    > ------
    > Canon SD800 IS
    >
    >
    > Compact
    > -------
    > None
    >
    > ZLR
    > ---
    > Fuji FinePix S8000fd (probably...too new to know about the noise)



    In the compact category, the Ricoh GX100 has an optional EVF viewfinder and
    24-72mm lens (19mm with converter). It's very expensive for a compact
    though (£350-£400 with viewfinder), and I haven't seen a single online shop
    which lists the DW6 converter for getting the 19mm. Nevertheless it's very
    tempting since it's only 220g and very compact, half the bulk of even the
    smallest DSLR+lens.
    Gordon Freeman, Jul 31, 2007
    #16
  17. SMS Guest

    Gordon Freeman wrote:

    > In the compact category, the Ricoh GX100 has an optional EVF viewfinder and
    > 24-72mm lens (19mm with converter). It's very expensive for a compact
    > though (£350-£400 with viewfinder), and I haven't seen a single online shop
    > which lists the DW6 converter for getting the 19mm. Nevertheless it's very
    > tempting since it's only 220g and very compact, half the bulk of even the
    > smallest DSLR+lens.


    Yeah, I keep forgetting about Ricoh since they left the U.S. camera
    market many years ago. Adorama in Brooklyn NY gray markets many of the
    Ricoh cameras. The GX100 sells for $700 with the removable viewfinder, ouch.

    Adorama does sell the DW6 converter,
    "http://www.adorama.com/IRCDW6.html". It's $140.

    You also need the HA-2, which is another $45,
    "http://www.adorama.com/IRCHA2.html?searchinfo=ha-2&item_no=2?searchinfo=ha-2&item_no=2"

    Clearly the Ricoh GX100 with the DW6 converter is the widest angle
    non-DSLR available. At $885, I'm not sure how big the market is, but I
    guess there is always some market for high-end stuff like that. 24mm is
    still better than about any P&S on the market, even without the
    conversion lens.
    SMS, Aug 1, 2007
    #17
  18. ASAAR Guest

    On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:16:25 -0700, SMS wrote:

    > Yeah, I keep forgetting about Ricoh since they left the U.S.
    > camera market many years ago. Adorama in Brooklyn NY
    > gray markets many of the Ricoh cameras. The GX100 sells
    > for $700 with the removable viewfinder, ouch.


    I've only been to the Adorama in Manhattan, NY and didn't realize
    that they had a storefront in Brooklyn. As with Abe's of Maine,
    with a name like Broadway Photo, they probably are located in
    Brooklyn instead of the assumed Manhattan. I also thought that the
    Ricoh described was the GR Digital. Is the GX100 the same or a
    different camera? Anybody? (if SMS replies at all it will likely
    be through his alter ego).
    ASAAR, Aug 1, 2007
    #18
  19. Ron Hunter Guest

    Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digitalcameras

    Henry Hank wrote:
    > On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:37:20 -0700, SMS <> wrote:
    >
    >> If you're willing to use conversion lenses, then the list grows, as
    >> there are several compacts and ZLRs that can achieve 28mm at the wide
    >> end with the use of a conversion lens.

    >
    > Who started this bizarre and totally wrong "ZLR" acronym? It makes absolutely no
    > sense whatsoever. People who keep using it are just parroting others that
    > invented this misnomer without realizing the error.
    >
    > ZLR, Zoom-Lens-Reflex for a long-zoom P&S camera? The R needs to be thrown out.
    > "Reflex" in SLR (single lens reflex) and d-SLR (digital single lens reflex)
    > stands for the ancient mirror and reflected light path required in that camera
    > design. If R is thrown out to be more accurate, then you have a ZL (zoom lens)
    > camera? Great, so every P&S camera with 1.1x to 18x qualifies as a ZL camera.
    > You can be more accurate with UZPS (ultra-zoom P&S), since everyone keeps
    > calling non-DSLR cameras as P&S cameras, even though DSLRs are revered for being
    > even more of a P&S camera than P&S cameras. Again, just more nonsense on the
    > net.
    >
    > Don't you just hate it when erroneous information and nonsense catch-phrases
    > start spreading like wildfire on the net, everyone repeating it without even
    > understanding why they are saying it, then everyone starts looking like idiots.
    > They think it means something because someone else said it, looking just as
    > foolish as the first person that used it.
    >
    > Get your acts together people. Find words and acronyms that accurately describe
    > these different cameras or don't talk about them at all until you figure it out.
    >
    >
    > I propose, for accuracy, that:
    >
    > * P&S should be done away with completely, since ALL cameras today are P&S
    > cameras, especially DSLRs. Instead use "SLDC" for "Single Lens Digital Camera".
    >
    > * An "SLDC" with ultra-zoom (10x optical-zoom or more) as "UZDC", "Ultra-Zoom
    > Digital Camera", since they are generally in a class of their own the last few
    > years and everyone knows what design you are referring to. The UZDC being just a
    > subset of all SLDCs
    >
    > * DSLR can remain DSLR. Or if being praised for how fast they perform
    > automatically then a "DSLR-P&S" if you want to be accurate.
    >
    > Of course this is never going to happen because the DSLR crowd loves throwing
    > around the P&S acronym as a handy (but totally inaccurate) and childish insult
    > to anyone that doesn't buy a DSLR. Even though their DSLR is a high-priced P&S
    > but they won't admit it. (This is no different than christians that run around
    > calling people Pagans and Heathens never knowing what Pagan really means, or
    > that Heathen just means one who lives on the Heath. Or the wealthy who run
    > around calling everyone who has less as "hicks" just so they can feel better
    > about being greedy.) Calling an SLDC as a P&S is one of the few ways they can
    > pretend to be superior, they'll never give up that. Sometimes it's all they have
    > left in light of the new advances in SLDC and UZDC designs.
    >
    > So there you have it, "SLDC" and "UZDC" to describe these cameras. Start using
    > them or something just as accurate. Or appear to look the fool forever more --
    > just as you have been appearing since the use of "P&S" became commonplace.
    >

    Why worry about such things while we still 'dial numbers' on our
    cell-phones? Ever see a cell phone with a rotary pulse dialer?
    Ron Hunter, Aug 1, 2007
    #19
  20. Henry Hank Guest

    Re: Camera Acronyms - Get it right people! was: Panasonic digital cameras

    On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 03:12:43 -0500, Ron Hunter <> wrote:

    >Why worry about such things while we still 'dial numbers' on our
    >cell-phones? Ever see a cell phone with a rotary pulse dialer?


    Why do I get the feeling that someone is going to write a skin for their
    I-Phones with an animated rotary dial so they _can_ actually "dial" a number?
    Who knows, maybe they already have, I wouldn't know. I live where cell towers
    will never reach. "No, he can't hear you now, get over it!" (commercial humor)

    I took apart all my phones. On the rotary-dial relics I reinserted the dials
    backward and reversed the ear and mouth-pieces in the handsets. In the
    touch-tone phones I moved all the numbered buttons to new positions to make
    "magic squares" because I was bored one day and like a little math-puzzle now
    and then. It's only a problem dialing if you pay attention to the numbers on the
    buttons instead of their familiar positions. I don't let drinking visitors have
    their car keys back until they can "dial" the time & temperature or call their
    other friends for help to get them out of the house of the crazy-man. I feel it
    reduces the number of DUIs and the "I knew him!" road-kills.

    Now, back to my campaign to stomp out the absurdity and stupidity of using "P&S"
    to describe an "SLCD" or "UZDC" .....
    Henry Hank, Aug 1, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mike Kohary
    Replies:
    35
    Views:
    819
    grolschie
    Aug 14, 2005
  2. www.itparadise.com.au

    [COMM] Panasonic Digital Cameras

    www.itparadise.com.au, Apr 22, 2004, in forum: Panasonic Lumix
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    277
    www.itparadise.com.au
    Apr 22, 2004
  3. Replies:
    73
    Views:
    1,176
  4. Replies:
    21
    Views:
    486
    Michael Weinstein, M.D.
    Jan 29, 2004
  5. jv

    Panasonic Digital Zoom Cameras

    jv, Oct 7, 2003, in forum: Panasonic Lumix
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    808
Loading...

Share This Page