Thanks for the very insightful answer.
You make some excellent points. Everyone brings up price......like it
costs 1850.....yet you can buy the LC1 For $1195 everywhere well at
least B&H J&R and other good mail order houses.
I just like the concept of this camera. Would like a bigger CCD and a
couple of other things, but it is appealing to me.
I am going to find a way to try one out.
I like your analogy about the beautiful girl in college. I remember a
few of those. That was always fun.....but a lot of them you can't
afford to own and you are better to rent!
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Moose
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 2:35 PM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Everyday camera
DICK LAGUE wrote:
>Have you tried an LC1? I understand the theory, but how does it really
>work in reality?
>
Nope. The only camera in this general class that I've played with is the
Nik*n 5700 belonging to a friend. Nice package, takes nice pics in many
ways. Too much noise even at the lowest iso and I could never use it
because of the slow EVF frame rate. But that has little to do with what
I'm talking about.
I'm talking about two things, personal preferences and technical
performance.
As a matter of personal preference, I know from using many cameras over
many years that there are breaking points of size and weight that effect
how I relate to and use a camera. The Coolpix 5700 is quite a bit
smaller and lighter than the DMC-LC1, but I already know from using it
that it is big and bulky enough that I might as well be carrying a small
DSLR. Neither will fit in a pocket and thus must be carried around
hanging from my hand or around my neck. Thus, for me, and others will
have different preferences, there is no practical difference in
size/weight usability between a DMC-LC1 and a D300. At the next step up,
I know that if I had one of the bigger, heavier Pro DSLRs, it wouldn't
get all that much use. Anything over a certain size/weight just somehow
magically stays home a lot. Of course size will go down as the
technology matures.
The only way to really test electro/optical performance is from images.
Unless one is lucky enough to be able to use a camera for a few days, as
I was with the D60, just playing around tells a lot about feel/interface
and not much about performance. If I had played with one, I could give
my ergonomic/esthetic impressions, but they could be very different than
your's might be.
However, evaluating image making performance is quite possible without
ever seeeing or touching the camera. The various review sites, notably
dpreview and Steve's Digicams, post full size sample shots of lots of
different subjects at different isos, apertures, etc. It was obvious to
me when I downloaded some of these, viewed them in PS and played with
noise reduction software on them, that the 5 and 8mp prosumer cameras
just didn't come close to the DSLRs in overall image quality, and
especially in noise. The A2, for example, gains a couple of stops
through IS, then loses it to a DSLR which is able to use a 2 stop or
more faster shutter speed at a higher iso with no more noise. I did, in
fact, go and play at least briefly with all the candidates for look and
feel, viewfinder, etc., but only those that made images I found
acceptable ever got serious consideration.
When I bought my son a P&S for his birthday and trip to Oz, reviews were
read and sample images examined before I ventured out to view and feel
the actual cameras. That way, there were only a handful to look at.
It's sort of like the spectacularly good looking woman I dated briefly
in college. It felt odd at first walking around campus with her,
something was different feeling, but I couldn't put my finger on it.
Then I got it; every male eye in sight was looking toward me, an
experience I wasn't used to. Looked great, would certainly have felt
great if I'd gotten any further before her parents came to haul her away
from the evils of the big city, but there wasn't much going on in the
processer department.
Then, of course, there are all the other DSLR capabilities with
interchangeable lenses, etc.
So I wouldn't be interested in a camera like the DMC-LC1 anyway. And
then it is way over priced, unless I'm missing something big here. I can
even see paying top $ for a special camera in a mature technology, but
not in one that is changing as rapidly as DCs. I am only saved from
Leicas by the fact that I don't much like rangefinders, but I can resist
a Leica lens on this DC. At least with a DSLR, the lens investment
doesn't have to be made again when upgrading bodies.
Moose
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of Moose
>Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 1:23 AM
>To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [OM] Re: Everyday camera
>
>I have to vote with Winsor here. Don't get sucked in by the big, fast,
>wonderful lens. You don't get the benefit you think from the speed. I
>don't know directly about noise on the DMC-LC1, but suppose it it
>similar to the Min*lta A1, which has the same sensor size and mp count.
>Take a look at the tests of the A1
><http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/minoltadimagea1/page16.asp> and 300D
><http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page13.asp> side-by-side.
>The 300D has less noise at iso 800 than the A1 at 200 and is generally
2
>
>stops 'faster' in noise performance. So an f4-4.8 lens on the 300D has
>the same effective ability to deliver an image as the f2-2.4 lens on
the
>
>DMC-LC1. This can take a bit to get one's head around when steeped in
>film, but it is true. One really big difference between prosumer
cameras
>
>and DSLRs is a huge difference in noise. I was much enammored of the
>idea of the A2 until I looked closely at the sample images. compared to
>DSLRs.
>
>Again echoing Winsor, the small sensors have their place - in small
>cameras. In a camera that gets close to the size/weight of a DSLR, they
>don't make much sense. I thought they made sense in the super-zoom
>cameras, as they had something special in the lenses. Now that I have a
>Tamron 28-300 Di lens, I'm not even convinced about the super-zooms
>cameras.
>
>Winsor Crosby wrote:
>
>
>
>><snip> Considering that it weighs a bit over 1.5 pounds and that
>>
>>
>something
>
>
>>like a Canon 300D weighs 1.8 pounds with the kit lens I do not see the
>>advantage of the Panasonic/Leica. The new Oly and Pentax may be
lighter
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>yet. A small DSLR with an everyday LENS is a so much more capable
>>combination in every way while not giving away much in size or
>>convenience.
>>
>>
>>
>>><snip> Any opinions here on the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LC1 ???? looks
>>>
>>>
>very
>
>
>>>interesting to me.....
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|