"State of the Art"
Not too shabby for a Panasonic.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/30/technology/personaltech/30pogue.html?scp=1&sq=panasonic g1&st=cse
Too bad the writer did not fully get what lens adapters could do with it.
Stephen
Not too shabby for a Panasonic.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/30/technology/personaltech/30pogue.html?scp=1&sq=panasonic g1&st=cse
Too bad the writer did not fully get what lens adapters could do with it.
Stephen
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
He compares it's capabilities to a $10,000 HD video camera (they can't shoot stills). There is HD video and then there is HD video. There's a ton of $100 "HD Video" cameras on the market now. But numbers aren't everything.
That said, shooting for both the web and print at the same time, it's a pretty good deal.
That said, shooting for both the web and print at the same time, it's a pretty good deal.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
Extremely tempting. And I'm not even into video.
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
Anyone who has shot both stills and video for years knows that they are two completely different disciplines.
If you wish to later choose the best frame from a short video burst well then that is a different story (flash photographers beware!).
If you wish to later choose the best frame from a short video burst well then that is a different story (flash photographers beware!).