Horshack: It's the 90's financial boom all over again, where companies make more money on their investments than they do in their actual business units. Money for nothing and chicks for free :)
Uh, what??? Doesn't the release say Sony is selling their investment, which got them access to tech, to invest more in their business? What in the world is your post about?
Tavarino: Looks like it might be useful for me, but after backing over 45 KS projects, I refuse to support any more, especially after the TriggerTrap Ada debacle. I like the idea of the photo community making possible the development of products that might not otherwise see the light of day, but the game is rigged against backers by KS, which refuses to do anything to protect backers against fraud.
I had a similar thought. It's a cool concept, but I'm not investing. I've gotten IMO far less than what was promised from KS tech. I heard from my brother that his investment in KS board games have been a much better return :)
Paul Boddie: I don't want to sound like everybody else commenting on DPReview, but would it be possible for Kickstarter product "announcements" to have a prominent tag on the front page (like the "REVIEW" tag) so that we can distinguish between genuinely-available products and potentially-available products (becoming available only if they get funded, manage to get manufactured without defects or false-starts, master the logistics without learning about customs and shipping the hard way, or any number of other things that appear to sink the average non-trivial Kickstarter)?
I think they don't even need to label it. Just put on the appropriate title.
"Adaptalux introduces portable lighting studio for macro photography" isn't honest or accurate.
"Adaptalux introduces portable lighting studio prototype for macro photography"
"Adaptalux seeks funding for a new portable lighting studio concept for macro photography"
btw -- i think it's a cool concept. Just title the article appropriately.
Awesome vision and pic
mini clip-on bounce/rotate flash. Yes! Not a reason to get this camera, but more makers need to provide this!
fab vision and execution. very nice.
WT21: I've been buying m43 because I don't care at all for Sony lens options. I hope the 28/2 is good. That would be great on my NEX6.
@aman74 Settle down, and read what I wrote. For the most part, the Sony lenses need to be stopped down to get to where most of the m43 lenses are wide open, which negates the larger sensor equivalence.
For example if you can shoot an m43 lens around 1.8 but have to stop the Sony to 2.8 to get similar sharpness out of the center and maybe corners, then you are dealing with full frame equivalent apertures of 3.6 (m43) and 4.2 (APS-C).
That's why I am very interested in the 28/2. I hope it's good out of the gate, and doesn't need to stop to 2.8, 3.5 or 4.0. If it is good at 2.0 (or even 2.2) and at it's moderate price, that gives me hope that I can make use of Sony's excellent sensor.
Thorgrem: Only the 28 f/2.0 has a normal size and price. To bad it's not wider than a normal kit-lens. The rest is to big and to expensive. If I wanted to go FF, Sony wouldn't be an option anymore. To big and to expensive, can get the same size at a cheaper price at CaNikon.
I like the idea of the 28 on a Sony crop. I agree -- I wouldn't use it on full frame.
I shoot m43 mainly, and the Sony lenses don't compare.
Sigmas feature: slow startup time, slow aperture, and OK AF.
The Sony 20 is OK, but the distortion is complex and hard to remove. The 50 is not a focal length on crop I care about. The Sony 35 is not strong wide open. You have to stop it down, but then I'm ahead with the PL25 on my GX7.
My GX7 has with it the PL25, P50-150 (and P100-300), and soon perhaps the 12-35/2.8. Sony equivalents are weak or super expensive.
All I have for my NEX right now is legacy lenses. I've tried all the Sony and Sigmas to date in the moderate price range. No thanks.
The Sony 28 is well priced (for a list price on a newly released lens). Hopefully Sony will make more like that.
I don't have anything more to say, I suppose. If you think the moderate sigmas or sonys are better than the above, then I guess we just disagree.
tom1234567: You pay for the name always the same Sony is one camera I would never buy
@enenzo you know exactly what I meant, so you are just being cute. AF lenses my friend, AF.
Yes, but what's a camera without a lens. This is a start, but they still seem more capable in bodies. Let's see how these work, then let's see some more.
I've been buying m43 because I don't care at all for Sony lens options. I hope the 28/2 is good. That would be great on my NEX6.
I've always had issues with startup time on my NEX6 with all sorts of random lenses. I also found that if I have the first curtain eshutter, and attach legacy lenses, the camera is prone to lock up about 1/3 the time after an initial shot. Any firmware fix from Sony is welcomed!
Retzius: Lytro is struggling because its a solution in search of a problem.
Your hypothetical doesn't exist, so it doesn't prove anything. You've lost the plot, but are free to be an apologist for Lytro if you choose. The base tech could be useful down the road, but the Lytro camera as currently conceived is a solution without a problem.
On a side note RAW -- your position is pretty much proven wrong by the fact that people buy skates. They do not buy Lytro. You can pontificate all you want, but facts is facts.
Not at all. Skating is absolutely an activity people want to do. Whether it was the need to cover long distances across a frozen lake, exercise outdoors, or relieve boredom in winter. Lytro solve the problem on how to pull focus in a still. But no one was really looking to solve that problem ESPECIALLY with such a large DOF that requires pretty extreme distances between foreground and background to make it interesting.
It could develop into a useful tech later, but right now the camera called Lytro (not the tech behind it) solves no ones issues. Skates do solve a number of challenges.
Ice skating is an activity, not a technology. Skates are the technology, and they solve a problem. Photography is the activity, not "Lytro"
Boy, no one saw that coming!
Marty4650: There seems to be a real disconnect between making an "affordable camera" for lenses that cost between $4,000 and $10,000.
I mean... why bother?
Can't the Leica lens owner afford a Leica camera?If someone can't afford those lenses, they why would they buy this camera?
Did I miss the part where Konost was planning to create a few affordable lenses for their affordable camera?
I'd say Konost is solving a problem that doesn't exist. Perhaps they might have been better off creating an affordable rangefinder camera that uses Nikon F lenses?
I have the Oly 45, but generally like the Panny rendering better. It will be interesting to compare.
I do wish someone would do a 50/2 macro. I used the Oly OM 50/2 on m43, and it's a fantastic setup.