You know, I, too, would argue that this is not a real pro camera.
But also SLRs are not automatically pro cameras. Neither are small-sensor-cameras (which others, for all the wrong reasons, tend to call point-and-shoot-cameras) automatically not pro cameras (Canon G9, Ricoh GR digital one and two, Lumix LX1 and LX2 and some others, I'm looking in your direction). Moreover, there are cameras that are not SLRs, but that are nevertheless considered (and always have been) pro tools. (Rangefinders anyone? Like the Leica M8?)
But you are right about one thing: the "prosumer" category is a very strange category. I wouldn’t want to call myself a prosumer, even if I may very well own what some might very well try to sell to me as a prosumer camera (GRD II). Even though I do not earn any money with my camera. It’s just a hobby. Maybe I would be ready to call myself an enthusiast. Clearly, some term is needed to describe the difference between point-and-shoots and so called prosumer cameras. Well, I know it when I see it, so I guess I might not need any fancy labels.
OK, maybe "not a DSLR" was a bad reason for saying it wasnt prosumer, but I still believe its not a prosumer camera.
To me, most of the cameras you listed *are* prosumer cameras, but I do not beleive this is. Things like the Leica's are prosumer because they house fantastic quality lenses, the ricoh for similar reasons, but this seems to be a total gimmick.
Personally its neither here nor there. If you want a decent camcorder, you buy a decent camcorder. If you want a decent camera, you buy a decent camera!
Yeah, it looks a lot like a goofy camera with not really much of a market to go for.
On the other hand, super-zooms also found their market. And to me at least, those cameras also seemed very goofy. I can see those people buying super-zooms also buying a camera like this. (Hm. If they have some spare money. Quite some.)
But the specs aren’t that bad. And Casio always produced cameras with a decent handling (that are also very well built). Not the best when it comes to things like manual control, but certainly also not the worst. To me, Casio cameras never really felt like the real deal when it comes to cameras. They always had this slightly odd and different approach to digital cameras (it may very well be that this is just something I’m making up, because until less than four or so years ago I only knew them for their watches and calculators).
Nevertheless, if those 6 MP are useable at high iso speeds (6 MP seem to be just perfect for that.) and with f2.7 at 7.3 mm (BTW. what’s the 35 mm equivalent to that?) and f4.6 at telephoto this could turn out to be a decent low light shooter. And if you then also like making movies or even high-speed movies, this is your camera.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Amazing FPS but you cant call it a "prosumer" camera if its not a digital SLR
Putting a high price tag on it doesn't make it prosumer
It's not DSLR? 'guess that explains the price.
Huh? Since when?
You know, I, too, would argue that this is not a real pro camera.
But also SLRs are not automatically pro cameras. Neither are small-sensor-cameras (which others, for all the wrong reasons, tend to call point-and-shoot-cameras) automatically not pro cameras (Canon G9, Ricoh GR digital one and two, Lumix LX1 and LX2 and some others, I'm looking in your direction). Moreover, there are cameras that are not SLRs, but that are nevertheless considered (and always have been) pro tools. (Rangefinders anyone? Like the Leica M8?)
But you are right about one thing: the "prosumer" category is a very strange category. I wouldn’t want to call myself a prosumer, even if I may very well own what some might very well try to sell to me as a prosumer camera (GRD II). Even though I do not earn any money with my camera. It’s just a hobby. Maybe I would be ready to call myself an enthusiast. Clearly, some term is needed to describe the difference between point-and-shoots and so called prosumer cameras. Well, I know it when I see it, so I guess I might not need any fancy labels.
Who said it wasn't a DSLR? Just because it's a fixed-lens means it can't be "prosumer"? That is simply false.
What ^^Michael^^ said, nice comment.
Prosumer term was around before DSLRs
OK, maybe "not a DSLR" was a bad reason for saying it wasnt prosumer, but I still believe its not a prosumer camera.
To me, most of the cameras you listed *are* prosumer cameras, but I do not beleive this is. Things like the Leica's are prosumer because they house fantastic quality lenses, the ricoh for similar reasons, but this seems to be a total gimmick.
Personally its neither here nor there. If you want a decent camcorder, you buy a decent camcorder. If you want a decent camera, you buy a decent camera!
Yeah, it looks a lot like a goofy camera with not really much of a market to go for.
On the other hand, super-zooms also found their market. And to me at least, those cameras also seemed very goofy. I can see those people buying super-zooms also buying a camera like this. (Hm. If they have some spare money. Quite some.)
But the specs aren’t that bad. And Casio always produced cameras with a decent handling (that are also very well built). Not the best when it comes to things like manual control, but certainly also not the worst. To me, Casio cameras never really felt like the real deal when it comes to cameras. They always had this slightly odd and different approach to digital cameras (it may very well be that this is just something I’m making up, because until less than four or so years ago I only knew them for their watches and calculators).
Nevertheless, if those 6 MP are useable at high iso speeds (6 MP seem to be just perfect for that.) and with f2.7 at 7.3 mm (BTW. what’s the 35 mm equivalent to that?) and f4.6 at telephoto this could turn out to be a decent low light shooter. And if you then also like making movies or even high-speed movies, this is your camera.