Panasonic Sucks! (per OP)

[Vivek]

Re: Panasonic Sucks!

Terry, Just checked. The price has taken a whopping 100 Euros dive (while the Nikon zoom has climbed up by >300 Euros, IIRC). FWIW, new G1 bodies were on sale until a month ago here. One can still buy a new G1 kit (black paint).

Jono, Thanks for your post.

I can readily accept the Nikon 12-24 f/4 price point.

 

[Bob]

Re: Panasonic Sucks!

Panasonic does not suck, yes they have their occasional misses, but they all do.

-bob

 

[ustein]

Re: Panasonic Sucks NOT!

Drag & drop one of the Pana files on top of the CS5 dock and see what happens. Use Bridge to browse the folder and see what happens.

 

[clay stewart]

Well, I guess I deserved Bob changing the title of this tread from "Panasonic Sucks" to "Panasonic Sucks per (OP)." I should have known better to say anything bad against Panasonic and I apologize to you Bob for saying anything rude to you, as well as to anyone else whose feathers I may have ruffled.

 

[Jonas]

Hmm, an apology? I don't think it was that bad Clay, don't worry.
Heh, thinking about it... if you are starting a trend here the forum post count will increase noticeably.

(And the rotational indicator should have been placed in the camera - otherwise a future horizontal level indicator will work with some Panny lenses only. More sucking.)

 

[Vivek]

I don't understand the title change.

How much Panasonic suck varies from person to person.

Whether they suck totally and is endorsed by the site was never the question.

 

[Bob]

Clay, no need for an apology really, just I think you meant something like
"Files without orientation encoding suck". I am also apparently getting grumpier as the years go by.

I agree with Clay that it is annoying to not have encoded orientation information in every image, but it is not unique to Panasonic. As far as I know there is no difference if files are stored on an internal drive, an external drive, or on a network. The protocols that connect file systems don't care about the file's purpose or content.

I also think it is annoying that cameras that DO encode orientation information sometimes get it wrong. I have files like this from Olympus, Nikon, Panasonic, Leica, actually probably every camera I have used. The frequency of occurrence varies depending on the sensor's sensitivity to camera orientations that are strongly biased up or down. Perhaps Panasonic's decision to put the orientation sensor in the lens might be questioned. I wonder if gravity is the appropriate reference, perhaps a chin or nose sensor might work better if hand holding, but the tripod use case presents other problems. I guess gravity is the best they have to go with absent something like a laser ring gyro.
-bob

 

[jonoslack]

Perhaps Panasonic's decision to put the orientation sensor in the lens might be questioned. I wonder if gravity is the appropriate reference, perhaps a chin or nose sensor might work better

You could then use the Nose Print as a security device as well, so that you couldn't take pictures without an approved Nose Print on the rear LCD.

 

[Bob]

You could then use the Nose Print as a security device as well, so that you couldn't take pictures without an approved Nose Print on the rear LCD.

What a great idea, also could record in the exif who actually took the image.
Quick, Jono, patent that!
-bob

 

[Godfrey]

orientation ...

I find a lot of errors whenever I'm shooting down ... copystand, my 'ground signs' series, my 'pavement' series, etc.

Of course, most camera orientation sensors don't know much about the z axis. They're stuck in x and y.

It's never bothered me to orient the photos on the computer, and when I'm reviewing on the camera I prefer that they NOT orient as I want as big an image as possible on the teensy LCD review screen. I just turn the camera if I want to see the image right side up.

 

[photoSmart42]

I don't understand the title change.

How much Panasonic suck varies from person to person.

Whether they suck totally and is endorsed by the site was never the question.

+1. I don't get it either. Why the need to qualify the OP's statements? Are we protecting Panasonic from something? If I want to say Panasonic sucks I would hope that's my right to do so, and it should be assumed by default that whatever I write on this, or any other forum, is, by definition, my opinion, and does not reflect in any way the opinions of the forum admins or site owners. Why the censorship? :thumbdown:

 

[Bob]

+1. I don't get it either. Why the need to qualify the OP's statements? Are we protecting Panasonic from something? If I want to say Panasonic sucks I would hope that's my right to do so, and it should be assumed by default that whatever I write on this, or any other forum, is, by definition, my opinion, and does not reflect in any way the opinions of the forum admins or site owners. Why the censorship? :thumbdown:

The moderators have discussed and the decision is final.
Some folks take this stuff very personally. You don't receive the complaints but we do.
-bob

 

[Diane B]

Not to add fuel to the fire, and I do sometimes feel the need to vent, BUT.... I understand the OPs first point though its not an issue for me (rotation). On the second point I would have been inclined to ask for some input on that rather than say or assume its not possible since its so unlikely Panasonic would be responsible for one's computer or software not to open RAW files from an external drive. As to expensive, its relative I guess. If you own a system and need a particular lens it doesn't really help to compare other system's prices. You may only annoy yourself LOL.

As to the title change, I concur. Doesn't seem like censorship to me. He was able to say exactly what he wanted and it wasn't deleted. Thread titles are often changed in various forums for more clarity in searching.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

+1. I don't get it either. Why the need to qualify the OP's statements? Are we protecting Panasonic from something? If I want to say Panasonic sucks I would hope that's my right to do so, and it should be assumed by default that whatever I write on this, or any other forum, is, by definition, my opinion, and does not reflect in any way the opinions of the forum admins or site owners. Why the censorship? :thumbdown:

Crap I hate dealing with this stuff but here are the rules it applies to everything and there is a reason we made them. Now if we started making exceptions for this and that than it is REAL simple.
GetDPI would NOT be the friendly place that it is. Bottom line end of day and as part owner of this forum I NEVER WANT this forum to be anything but FRIENDLY and that is why it is HERE. If it was anything else but that Guy and Jack would simply turn the lights out and go home.

3) Arguing, rudeness, generally poor or negative behavior will be dealt with at moderator discretion as they see fit. This may result in the offending post(s) or entire thread(s) being deleted with or without explanation, and/or the offending poster(s) being banned or having their accounts suspended or erased. Note that broader topical and emotional latitude is tolerated in the "Sunset Bar" forum, but decisions on thread or post appropriateness remain at moderator discretion there as well.

 

[photoSmart42]

Crap I hate dealing with this stuff but here are the rules it applies to everything and there is a reason we made them.

That's cool - I don't think there's a need to get offended by the question. It wasn't meant in a combative way, and it's a valid concern some of us have in understanding where we stand in terms of being allowed to express our thoughts. A decision that seemed odd was made by the moderators (I'm not questioning that right) without explanation, so it raises concerns naturally. Just a part of having an community.

Most of us tend to forget that we're simply guests on these forums BECAUSE we feel like a family, and in front of family we say whatever comes to mind, unfiltered and understanding that it won't be taken wrongly. On the other hand, it helps to understand why moderators make certain decisions so others can avoid getting into the same predicament in the future. I, for one, don't have the forum rules memorized, so a simple reference to the rules when they're broken does wonders IMO.

Moving on. :deadhorse:

 

[ustein]

Here is a difference between a family and this forum.

If you say in your family "XYZ sucks" all know this is an unqualified rant and only a few ears listen to it. On the net threads with subjects like "XYZ sucks" get more attention than all the other threads and Google indexes it too.

>Bottom line end of day and as part owner of this forum I NEVER WANT this forum to be anything but FRIENDLY and that is why it is HERE.

The only rule actually to remember. Guy and Jack actually made this a unique and friendly place.

 

[Vivek]

If you say in your family "XYZ sucks" all know this is an unqualified rant and only a few ears listen to it. On the net threads with subjects like "XYZ sucks" get more attention than all the other threads and Google indexes it too.

I take exception to this claim.

What are the things in this thread you find as "unqualified rant" and why?

Google also indexes all the other things that get posted, for example every single image that gets posted with a Panasonic camera.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

That's cool - I don't think there's a need to get offended by the question. It wasn't meant in a combative way, and it's a valid concern some of us have in understanding where we stand in terms of being allowed to express our thoughts. A decision that seemed odd was made by the moderators (I'm not questioning that right) without explanation, so it raises concerns naturally. Just a part of having an community.

Most of us tend to forget that we're simply guests on these forums BECAUSE we feel like a family, and in front of family we say whatever comes to mind, unfiltered and understanding that it won't be taken wrongly. On the other hand, it helps to understand why moderators make certain decisions so others can avoid getting into the same predicament in the future. I, for one, don't have the forum rules memorized, so a simple reference to the rules when they're broken does wonders IMO.

Moving on. :deadhorse:

Well we are family and always want that feeling around here. Why it is a great place to hang out. But as family members sometimes we just redirect and guide things in a different or better way to get things said. Trust me it's a fine line and we don't want to be like others and take the low road. I have a 13 and 20 year old and I guess as a parent you learn to let lose of the reins but always try and guide them into the light with a very light touch.:thumbs:
Not easy being us. LOL

 

[ustein]

>What are the things in this thread you find as "unqualified rant" and why?

It was nothing wrong with the thread but the subject line does say nothing about the issue at hand. Why not break it down into the different issues or call it "Issues with XYZ files and cameras".

Case closed for me.

 

[photoSmart42]

I have a 13 and 20 year old and I guess as a parent you learn to let lose of the reins but always try and guide them into the light with a very light touch.:thumbs:
Not easy being us. LOL

Certainly, but I'm sure you make it a point to tell your kids why what they did was wrong so they don't repeat it in the future. I didn't see that happen in this case, so it raised some concerns because the decision to change the thread title seemed from the outside sudden and arbitrary regardless of whatever decisions the moderators were making in the background. That's all, and really nothing else to read into my original question. :salute: