Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
and don't forget the 1999 2 MP Nikon Coolpix 950 :bugeyes:
Crikey - a thermometer and a barometer ? At that size they could have just as well put in a fridge ... :ROTFL:Well, cameras of today obviously have built in thermometer and barometer :toocool: but at least also GPS :thumbs:
https://www.43rumors.com/ft5-new-additional-e-m1x-info-has-built-in-gps-thermometer-barometer/
Not sure what this move from Olympus is all about - maybe pissing off existing customers :banghead: :angry:Crikey - a thermometer and a barometer ? At that size they could have just as well put in a fridge ... :ROTFL:
Or scaring off potential customers, anyway I'm sure everything will be revealed in due course ...Not sure what this move from Olympus is all about - maybe pissing off existing customers :banghead: :angry:
That's nothing. My telephone actually came with a built in camera. Coming to think of it... it didn't come with one camera. It came with three :shocked:Well, cameras of today obviously have built in thermometer and barometer :toocool: but at least also GPS :thumbs:
https://www.43rumors.com/ft5-new-additional-e-m1x-info-has-built-in-gps-thermometer-barometer/
I used the 4 megapixel Coolpix 4500 (a design which was very similar to the 950) for afocal astrophotography many years ago. Unfortunately, I didn't get very many images that met my hopes and expectations, so I switched to using a DSLR.and don't forget the 1999 2 MP Nikon Coolpix 950 :bugeyes:
This was the first camera that I used for infrared. Also had the prior 1 MP Coolpix 900.
Not a bad plan, unless you have 3000 $ burning in your pocket to spend on a new body (and I mean camera body )I should just keep my GX8 bodies, right? Spend more time taking photos and less time speculating over gear.
My Leica M8 and M9 let alone my M6 with kodachrome 200 all produced much more "noise" than my mft sensors EM1m2 and Pen F.16mp G5 Pebble sized to 31mp Sharp? Cobblestone sized noise?:thumbup:
My Leica M8 and M9 let alone my M6 with kodachrome 200 all produced much more "noise" than my mft sensors EM1m2 and Pen F.
The number of good images over the years has never been limited by noise or grain but by myself.
Here are a couple of shots from the old A95 that I unfortunately gave away:
.
Dang! I forgot I even owned that camera!
No no... it was in great shape, but I had bought the Fuji S3 and didn't see the value of a small camera. The girl who got the Canon was very happy, so I suppose it was all for the bestYou must have had reasons for that. May be it was nearly dead, for example.
In the early 1950's I only had very very slow kodachrome as well as having to push slow B&W Black and white to 400 or 800 ASAA pity that you never tried the Kodachrome 25!
Agreed. Sensor limitation is the negative side of the MFT compromise. I shoot Phase when I can transport it, tech cam with the Phase back on occasion, Nikon FF, DSLR & mirrorless, when nimbleness and camera speed become important, and MFT [G9] and the Sony RX10IV when size and weight are paramount. I would not be shooting MFT now if a colleague on a trip to Africa last year hadn't suggested it. I had read too many criticisms of IQ, and I felt the RX10IV was already enough of such a compromise [but with huge advantages in exchange]. But I decided to try out a G9, ended up with a few lenses, and can put it all in an inconspicuous Peak Designs 20L pack with a small tripod at about 20 pounds. No airline has given me difficulty with that. And I can see that, when shooting wildlife, it will be a real boon. But if IQ is paramount, then it's no contest. So, when Oly pushes the envelope on camera body and lens size, it's just of little interest. Why carry a body and lens that is bigger than my Z7 kit just for the privilege of 20 noisy megapixels? Granted, the other lenses in the kit will remain smaller, and a backup body can be smaller, but when the 150-400 lens gets as big as some FF lenses, what's the point? Even if that lens, with an effective 800mm, is excellent, why sacrifice quality pixels? My Z7 body weighs six grams more than the G9. Native base ISO is 64, not 200. Noise is much more manageable. it's just as nimble, though it's best lenses are not. If I have to go super-light, the G9 still wins, but with a much smaller zoom, either the 100-300 or 100-400. The former represents another IQ compromise, but it's not as severe, when one only has 20 mpx to process, and it's amazingly compact and lightweight. But it's still 20 fairly noisy mpx.I would be amazed, though if the new Olympus super camera can really extend the bounds of high iso limitation of 43rds sensors by anything other than a thin margin. Unless, of course, it is going to have a BSI sensor, which I am dearly hoping Panasonic or Olympus will get Sony to develop for them next.
Just my two cents
Louis