Archiver: Interesting how this is available only for the C100 at this time. If this can be implemented with the C300, it will show that dual pixel AF is a function of the CMOS sensor shared by the C100, C300 and C500, rather than the C100's hardware.
The C100 has four photodiodes for each output pixel: a 3840x2160 photosite array but maximum output resolution of 1920x1080 pixels, so it could easily have a single microlens over each 2x2 cluster of photodiodes, allowing it to use a pair of them for AF. MaybeGGRBunder each lens and feeding wach output pixel,and using the GG pair for AF.
The C100 uses four photo-sites to produce each output pixel (3840x2160 active pixels, but maximum output resolution of 1920x1080 HD). That is probably critical to its ability to do dual pixel AF, which uses multiple photo-diodes per output pixel. The other dual pixel PDAF seniors also have those pairs of photo-sites behind a single micro lens, so it is also likely that each four photo-site cluster feeding a single output pixel in the C100 is behind a single micro lens.
So do not expect any such upgrades to other cameras whose sensors do not have these special hardware features.
hidden1: Its a shame the included kit lens doesn't have an aperture ring.
It kind of ruins the retro camera experience when you have to use an e dial to set the aperture.
Apparently you have to use the dial anyway with any CPU lens: the aperture ring only works with (very old) non-CPU lenses.
3dreal: It will have a fixed prism and no AF, maybe removable screens. Dont dream too much. we dont need AF but the best focussing-system on all DSLRs.
It has both ann AF-on button and an AF kit lens.
What is entertaining about the Df teaser campaign is how it has lured some people to reveal their wishes and fantasies while ignoring any facts that contradict them. The Df is functionally a modern highly automated digital SLR, with the addition of half a dozen added dials and the pointless removal of video functionality.
Or is someone going to argue that adding one more video button along with the roughly 20 buttons it already has, or adding a fifth position on the MASP dial, would "ruin its photographic simplicity and purity"?
Roland Karlsson: But is it SLR? Or is it mirrorless? And if it is SLR, do it have a split image screen?
And is the rumor that it has no LCD true? That could be compatible with "Good things take time. They are worth the wait". I mean, you have to wait until you get home to look at the result.
"And is the rumor that it has no LCD true?"No: the edge of the screen is visible in the rear view shot above. That "rumor" is just one of the delusional retro minimalist fantasies that people are projecting onto this camera with no supporting evidence at all. Another example is dreams of a split-image manual focusing VF on this AF camera.
Kriekira: That any of these might be assumed to be paintings says more about the viewer's inexperience with paintings than it does about the images.
And there is the additional, never-addressed issue of reproduction: is a photograph an image or a print? It is worth always keeping in mind that you cannot ever "see" a painting on a computer (or in a book) -- all you can see is a (photo-mechanical) reproduction.
I saw a large print of "Thorn Trees" close up in a nature photography exhibition, and my first reaction was "why is that drawing here"? The illusion is partly due to the amazing contrast in lighting and color, which the eye/brain at first takes as an artist's unrealistic fantasy.
That one is in a different league from painting-like effects produced in post-processing.
Renzokuken: I wonder how much of this technological improvement will translate to better stills??
Canon seems to have their hands full on video and their cine-line recently...
Typo: with a _sensor_ that big (36x24mm)
None: the only technological change here is having fewer, bigger photo sites; about 2MP, which is good enough for HD video, but too few for almost any still photography with a se SLR that big.
dw2001: love these focus tracking test where you shoot at like F22 and absolutely everything in the frame is in focus...that really gives you an idea of how the focus tracking performs....
Look at the full resolution images by clicking on the small downsized ones displayed in the web page: the OOF effect is clear, and looking at the ground, the plane of focus is clearly at the front of the horse, very near the plane of its eyes whee it should be.
Of course tiny downsized "web thumbnail" images show lots of DOF.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: Well, well... not bad for a dead medium!
Seriously, I chanced to try an FP4 125 Plus roll during the past two weeks. After seeing the results I must say I'm impressed with the sharpness and contrast this film is capable of. Grain is not as smooth as Kodak's T-Max, but somehow it adds expression to the pictures.
foto guy, the demand is there partly because people like me have lost access to local labs that used to provide this service, and local darkroom rental options (and do not want to mess with photographic chemicals in our bathrooms). So good news, but not due to any increase in overall B&W film usage, I suspect.I like the idea of getting scans too, since I suspect my bigger prints from B&W film will be inkjet or an online digital file printing service.
Petka: Two polarizers: how much light loss there is?
Sounds like a good idea which is really not needed. And even less in the future with ever sharper sensors.
No polarizers: one layer that rotates polarization, different from a polarizing filter that blocks light of a certain polarization.
G G: I'm not sure this is a truly useful exercise. One of its drawback is to reduce light transmission, as any polarizing filter does.The future is probably something like this: - increase the pixel density above the lens resolution (a low pass filter) - filter digitally for lower resolution.
Low pass filters already have two filters: the innovation seems to be allowing rotation of light in between them, to turn the low-pass fitering effect on and off, rather than having the second physically rotated relative to the first by an appropriate angle. Like what happens if you swap between a D800 and D800E: they differ by having the two filters in different relative orientation.
Frank_BR: In the beginning there was the D800 for $3000. So Nikon stripped the AA filter and tge D800E was born. Because less is more, Nikon charges $3300 for the D800E. The next logical step would be a D800F with a configurable AA filter for $5000. E la nave va.
Frank: you trust KR for technical information rather than the details provided by Nikon or at this site?! KR is simply wrong on this: surprised?
P. S. Lower volume specialty versions products can cost more due to economies of scale even when they cost no more to make.
abolit: who is this camera for? nothing comes to mind so far....
@Entropus: "There are no standout features other than a viewfinder and sensor at the back and a lens mount at the front" How can you ignore that it also looks a lot more like an SLR than previous Sony E-mount cameras, including ones like the NEX 6 which has all the features you list? Even after I mentioned that SLR resemblance in the post you are replying to?
I would say that compared to previous Sony E-mount cameras, looking like a SLR is THE standout feature!
Maverick_: Sony just put the nails in the APS-C and Mirrorless cameras coffin. The future is only FF DSLRs and Phone cameras. Wanna know why Pana struggles with the GH3, it was priced 600 over where it should have been. Nice job Sony. Now the APS-C is going to go down in price and eventually move out completely and make way for low priced FF.
A new, well-priced entry-level APSC mirrorless camera does not put a nail in the coffin of either APSC or mirrorless cameras! It might be part of the downfall of entry-level DSLRs, with their unsatisfactory small VF images caused by the combination of a small format and a penta-mirror (instead of penta-prism) OVF. Sony is right in touting the advantages of the a3000‘s EVF over the OVFs of similarly priced DSLRs.
Phone and compact camera users wanting their first "serious camera", and who still believe that such cameras must at least look like the SLRs that pros use. At the cost of a completely imobile rear-screen, greater bulk. It is the "suburbanite's SUV" of mirrorless cameras. It will probably sell frustratingly well, at least in the USA.
P.S. never mind: the second paragraph of the preview says it already!
mpgxsvcd: This looks like a camera phone without the phone part. Is this any more useful than an iTouch?
My iPod Touch does not have an 8x zoom lens.
completelyrandomstuff: It costs too much, but the idea is not that dumb. Sure, phone can take pictures and post them easily on facebook. But it does not have zoom and takes poor pictures in low-light (clubs, parties, movie theathers, etc etc). It is made to be very pocketable, looks like a piece of make-up and serves the purpose of being partly a fashion accessory, partly a communication tool. I would put an option to send text in there, but still I expect it to see it in purses of 16 year old girls across the country, as long as the price drops a little.
Adapop: even people who post photos on Facebook might want far more zoom ability than any phone gives. Even the Nokia 1020 with its crop-to-zoom has no match for this 8x lens.
Zoom range is probably the single most common reason for camera-photographers to also want a camera-only device. i expect fixed-lens small sensor cameras with less than 4x zoom to die out fairly soon.
Joe Ogiba: I still have Kodachrome 135 and 120 film in my freezer.http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5196/5842743706_b1ecffa5a1_b.jpg
Developing the first and most famous color film, which even has "chrome" in its name, as black and white only is ... bizarre. I am guessing that was never Joe's plan.
Did some freaky darkroom photo nuts actually do that, and perhaps try to rationalize it as a superior artistic choice over any of the films actually designed for black and white?
Did you miss the news that the last Kodochrome development facility in the world shut down a year or two ago? All youncan do with that stuff now is keep it in the freezer forever as a souvenir.