Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss

In article
<47b349ca$0$20218$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>, Pete D
<no.DeleteThis@email.com> wrote:

> John it may work fine for you but as many of us have noticed your standards
> are extemely low and therefore of no value what so ever.

His breadth of knowledge doesn't go very high on the tree either.
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

"John Navas" <spamfilter1 DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:jns6r3hup7li1cahffucaq1k27t35vg1fb@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:22:51 GMT, "Jufi" <bowser DeleteThis @heart.com> wrote in
> <LcJsj.2597$YL3.2134@trndny05>:
>
>>"John Navas" <spamfilter1 DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>>news:a0f6r3p18rqqcn7v42to3vk9i47itq88d5@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:16:19 GMT, "Jufi" <bowser DeleteThis @heart.com> wrote in
>>> <TtGsj.2495$YJ4.1052@trndny01>:
>
>>>>And if the EVF ever gets out of the stone age, we might hae something...
>>>
>>> Works fine here.
>>
>>They work OK, but the best EVF is crude compared to the display in an SLR.
>>Grainy, ghosting, dull, hard to see in daylight, etc. I've used one
>>extensively in an FZ50, and compared to the viewfinder in any SLR, it's a
>>distant second place.
>
> My own take is that the FZ50 viewfinder is quite good. I haven't seen
> such problems as you list. Are you thinking of the rear display instead
> of the EVF (which isn't a problem in daylight)? Perhaps the one you
> tried was defective.

No, it was normal, but compared to the "live" display in an SLR, it's just
not that good. I'm an eyeglass wearer, and can't fully shield the EVF from
daylight, which doesn't help at all. And I'm definitely not confusing the
EVF with the LCD. Most users I talk to about EVF cameras have the same
opinion; they work, but have a very long way to go.
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

"John Navas" <spamfilter1.DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:gks6r31iqi0205atfrn2j8uhr4fc3a45v4@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:49:27 +1100, "Pete D" <no.DeleteThis@email.com> wrote in
> <47b349ca$0$20218$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>:
>
>>"John Navas" <spamfilter1.DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>>news:a0f6r3p18rqqcn7v42to3vk9i47itq88d5@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:16:19 GMT, "Jufi" <bowser.DeleteThis@heart.com> wrote in
>>> <TtGsj.2495$YJ4.1052@trndny01>:
>
>>>>And if the EVF ever gets out of the stone age, we might hae something...
>>>
>>> Works fine here.
>>
>>John it may work fine for you but as many of us have noticed your
>>standards
>>are extemely low and therefore of no value what so ever.
>
> Insecure and jealous as always, I see.
>


???Damn you caught me out John but I see that you are stupid and totally
clueless as always..........................
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

In article
<47b3d541$0$20224$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>, Pete D
<no.TakeThisOut@email.com> wrote:

> ???Damn you caught me out John but I see that you are stupid and totally
> clueless as always..........................

It's his way...
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:56:16 -0500, "Jufi" <bowser DeleteThis @work.com> wrote in
<4h%sj.601$C8.98@bos-service2b.ext.ray.com>:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter1 DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:jns6r3hup7li1cahffucaq1k27t35vg1fb@4ax.com...

>> My own take is that the FZ50 viewfinder is quite good. I haven't seen
>> such problems as you list. Are you thinking of the rear display instead
>> of the EVF (which isn't a problem in daylight)? Perhaps the one you
>> tried was defective.
>
>No, it was normal, but compared to the "live" display in an SLR, it's just
>not that good. I'm an eyeglass wearer, and can't fully shield the EVF from
>daylight, which doesn't help at all.

Likewise an optical viewfinder.

>And I'm definitely not confusing the
>EVF with the LCD. Most users I talk to about EVF cameras have the same
>opinion; they work, but have a very long way to go.

Most users I talk to find them more than satisfactory.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

"John Navas" <spamfilter1 RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:cb09r3t65ugm8c5evfm8jjfpfsfrrh2gpn@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:56:16 -0500, "Jufi" <bowser RemoveThis @work.com> wrote in
> <4h%sj.601$C8.98@bos-service2b.ext.ray.com>:
>
>>"John Navas" <spamfilter1 RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>>news:jns6r3hup7li1cahffucaq1k27t35vg1fb@4ax.com...
>
>>> My own take is that the FZ50 viewfinder is quite good. I haven't seen
>>> such problems as you list. Are you thinking of the rear display instead
>>> of the EVF (which isn't a problem in daylight)? Perhaps the one you
>>> tried was defective.
>>
>>No, it was normal, but compared to the "live" display in an SLR, it's just
>>not that good. I'm an eyeglass wearer, and can't fully shield the EVF from
>>daylight, which doesn't help at all.
>
> Likewise an optical viewfinder.

I see the optical viewfinder just fine, corner to corner in all lighting
conditions. Not the same for EVF from any manufacturer I've tried. Use what
you like, but for me they just aren't that good. Useable, yes, but nowhere
near as clear as an optical viewfinder.

>
>>And I'm definitely not confusing the
>>EVF with the LCD. Most users I talk to about EVF cameras have the same
>>opinion; they work, but have a very long way to go.
>
> Most users I talk to find them more than satisfactory.

I guess when I see the shooters along the sidelines of a football game using
an EVF camera, I'll change my mind. Nearly worthless for action shooting.
But for many out there, agree that they are satisfactory. Just not for me.
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:24:05 GMT, "Jufi" <bowser DeleteThis @heart.com> wrote in
<p44tj.4350$%x3.1322@trndny06>:

>>>Most users I talk to about EVF cameras have the same
>>>opinion; they work, but have a very long way to go.
>>
>> Most users I talk to find them more than satisfactory.
>
>I guess when I see the shooters along the sidelines of a football game using
>an EVF camera, I'll change my mind.

If that was my profession (and my gear was all paid for), I might well
too, but that's not the kind of photography I do.

>Nearly worthless for action shooting.

My FZ8 is terrific for action shooting.

>But for many out there, agree that they are satisfactory. Just not for me.

Fair enough. "Different strokes for different folks."

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

irwell wrote:

>> Are there any P&S models still available with a high resolution EVF like
>> the A2?
>
> The new Nikon P60 has this spec for the EVF.
>
> Viewfinder
> 0.2-in., approx. 201k-dot, equivalent
>
> What resolution was the A2?

922,000 pixels (or dots).
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

In article <ghibr31d98n6stacbe5pr85iqps2rg834v.RemoveThis@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1.RemoveThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >it had 922k *dots*, not pixels.
>
> The correct term is "subpixel", and the subpixel resolution can matter
> if the display is capable of subpixel rendering, which can produce a
> better image than pixel rendering.

that may be, but it's called 'dots' by the manufacturers. of course,
people end up calling it pixels anyway, adding to the confusion.

> Pentax has a tiny fraction of the market, only 5.8% even in Japan
> according to <http://en.j-cast.com/2008/01/25015807.html>.

so what? the pentax k10d was a strong seller as was the k100d. pentax
isnt' about to overtake nikon or canon, but they have some very
competitive cameras.
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

In article <47b62113$0$36387$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven.RemoveThis@geemail.com> wrote:

> > What resolution was the A2?
>
> 922,000 pixels (or dots).

pixels and dots are not the same. the a2 had 922k dots or 300k pixels
or a 640x480 screen.
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

SMS wrote:
[]
> Are there any P&S models still available with a high resolution EVF
> like the A2?

Sadly, not as far as I know.

David
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

David J Taylor wrote:
> SMS wrote:
> []
>> Are there any P&S models still available with a high resolution EVF
>> like the A2?
>
> Sadly, not as far as I know.
>
> David

With D-SLRs taking over the high to mid-range, I'm not surprised. Few
users of point and shoot cameras ever manual focus, and even a low-res
EVF is sufficient for framing the shot. No point in putting in an
expensive EVF for the few buyers that understand the benefit.
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss 

John Navas wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 04:45:44 GMT, "flambe" <fac187.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in
> <YBusj.7146$R84.3134@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>:
>
> >What is Pentax anyway?
> >They are basically a name sold to Samsung and who knows what Hoya is getting
> >out of the deal?
> >The very small Pentax lens lineup is actually made by what Japanese
> >manufacturer: hint--starts with a "T" and not a "P".
> >The current issue of Shutterbug is pimping a non/pre-preproduction Pentax
> >dSLR with a sensor made by who?
> >For the near term the only old line Japanese SLR makers still in the race
> >are Nikon and Canon.
> >For the rest of the market the real question is how long will Olympus, Sony,
> >Panasonic, Pentax, et al hang in there?
> >...
>
> Olympus, Sony and Panasonic are all doing pretty well.
> BTW, you left out Kodak.


Hello, John:

And a very serious omission it was, with Kodak ranking among the U.S.
and worldwide leaders, in digicam sales, today.


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur.RemoveThis@concentric.net>
 >> Stay informed about: Good for Pentax! Eliminate the horrible little P&Ss