What would makers do without the horrible 1/2.33 sensor?

Rich wrote:
Now mostly 12 megapixels. Out of 134 P&S cameras in French mag, I

The big cameras are too big for you, the small cameras are too small,
the expensive ones are too expensive and the cheap ones are too cheap
for you.

You're just an idiot troll.

--
Ray Fischer

"Ray Fischer" wrote in message
...
Rich wrote:

Now mostly 12 megapixels. Out of 134 P&S cameras in French mag, I
think 3/4 or more had that crappy sensor. It is the commodity sensor
of the decade. Pure junk. No matter how many bells and whistles you
put on the P&S, you still end up with the same results.


The big cameras are too big for you, the small cameras are too small,
the expensive ones are too expensive and the cheap ones are too cheap
for you.

You're just an idiot troll.


Maybe he's a troll, I don't know, but he makes a good point. Where are the
APS-C compact digitals? Off the top of my head, I can only recall Sigma
making one, and that has a fixed FL f/4 lens.

"Rich" wrote in message
...


Timmy Two Thumbs wrote:
"Ray Fischer" wrote in message
...
Rich wrote:

Now mostly 12 megapixels. Out of 134 P&S cameras in French mag, I
think 3/4 or more had that crappy sensor. It is the commodity sensor
of the decade. Pure junk. No matter how many bells and whistles you
put on the P&S, you still end up with the same results.


The big cameras are too big for you, the small cameras are too small,
the expensive ones are too expensive and the cheap ones are too cheap
for you.

You're just an idiot troll.


Maybe he's a troll, I don't know, but he makes a good point. Where are
the
APS-C compact digitals? Off the top of my head, I can only recall Sigma
making one, and that has a fixed FL f/4 lens.

The new Sigma is f2.8 but fixed lens, fixed focal length cameras are
dinosaurs to most buyers.



I don't mind primes TBH, as long as I can change the lenses.

Timmy Two Thumbs wrote:
"Ray Fischer" wrote in message
Rich wrote:

Now mostly 12 megapixels. Out of 134 P&S cameras in French mag, I
think 3/4 or more had that crappy sensor. It is the commodity sensor
of the decade. Pure junk. No matter how many bells and whistles you
put on the P&S, you still end up with the same results.


The big cameras are too big for you, the small cameras are too small,
the expensive ones are too expensive and the cheap ones are too cheap
for you.

You're just an idiot troll.

Maybe he's a troll, I don't know, but he makes a good point.

That cheap cameras don't perform as well as expensive cameras?

Where are the
APS-C compact digitals?

Where are the dSLRs that you can fit into your pocket? Where are the
medium-format 30 megapixel cameras that you can buy for $200?

--
Ray Fischer

(Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

Timmy Two Thumbs wrote:
"Ray Fischer" wrote in message
Rich wrote:

Now mostly 12 megapixels. Out of 134 P&S cameras in French mag, I
think 3/4 or more had that crappy sensor. It is the commodity
sensor of the decade. Pure junk. No matter how many bells and
whistles you put on the P&S, you still end up with the same
results.


The big cameras are too big for you, the small cameras are too
small, the expensive ones are too expensive and the cheap ones are
too cheap for you.

You're just an idiot troll.

Maybe he's a troll, I don't know, but he makes a good point.

That cheap cameras don't perform as well as expensive cameras?

Where are the
APS-C compact digitals?

Where are the dSLRs that you can fit into your pocket? Where are the
medium-format 30 megapixel cameras that you can buy for $200?


I'm wondering where the human eye equivalent camera is myself.

~ for under $200.


Ah, limitations on silicon! Perhaps a biologically based sensor then?

OH, but that'd be also more than $200- how about $200 million?
The poor troll wants a free lunch- or for the year 2102. Take your
pick.