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.
I'm just STILL wondering about decent mid-grade lens options for emount. I'd say especially for ASP-C, but I think that horse has left the barn. The upcoming 24mm is a start. Good dual use (FF and ASPC), good size (IQ is TBD). Need others.
If you are going to use a lens that size, why go with a body that small?
Danlo: Cant believe all the anti-gay comments here. When are people going to spend their energy on something more important than hating two adults loving eachother?When are people going to wake up and realise that religion just leads to hate? I hope and wish in the deepest depths of my heart that humanity will one day see a world full love, instead of religion and hate.
"When are people going to wake up and realise that religion just leads to hate? I hope and wish in the deepest depths of my heart that humanity will one day see a world full love, instead of religion and hate."
You will be waiting a long time, because it's the nature of people. Religion is just a tool for those who wish to use it to negative ends. Stalin was not religious. Hitler not traditionally so. Alexander the Great wasn't, and Napolean didn't ride over Europe on the back of religion. etc. etc.
This is a naive sentiment, but I realize it's a common social media one, so you are certainly not alone in the error.
ipecaca: If you think of it, gay couples are more environment-friendly, they don't produce more people.
Perhaps you are joking, in which case, ignore the below. If you are serious, though:
Here's a harsh reality for a socialist west -- if you don't have kids, then there's no one to earn a living for when you want social support.
But not everyone will stop having kids. Certainly militant populations now sweeping through Iraq and Syria, or northern Africa, are more than happy to add to the population of the world, but their kids aren't going to support you in your dotage.
Having children is not a moral evil.
LukeDuciel: the more I look at the ZE 35 and the 90 macro, the more I doubt the point of moving to sony a ff system.
as a Nikon D800 user, my whole system bulk is actually comparable to the a7 + good glasses.
Smaller if you don't make 2.8 only means ... you didn't make a 2.8 zoom.
keeponkeepingon: Dang I had hoped pricing/availability would be announced at CP+ instead of just another "teaser".
(I'm considering the 28mm for my A6000 as an alternative to the SEL35F18)
That's what interests me -- how is the 28/2, and how are the adapters. If the adapters retain reasonable center sharpness, then it might be a nice little mini-kit
kodos: The more I see how the lens situation is panning out the more glad I am that I went Micro 43rds (for my shooting style/subjects). The lenses are huge on FF Mirrorless. Though I am sometimes wondering if the Fuji mirrorless system might have been a good compromise instead. But I love my little Olympus bodies and lenses.
I think I'd rather get a FF DSLR system as a complement to my M43 setup, and have the best of both worlds when I need it.
But for those who love FF Mirrorless, I am glad that Sony is about to unleash some more lenses! It was the primary thing holding me back from pulling the trigger.
I still find the Fuji lenses + bodies pretty large, compared to m43.
I still have a NEX6 for adapted lenses, but I am really just not excited about most Sony lenses -- either too low quality (or aperture not fast enough), or too high price. Slim pickings in the middle. I am interested in the 28/2, and the quality of the adapters. That one might extend my dalliance with Sony, while I wait for more mid-range lenses.
Canon is not selling this in my market, so they can go pound sand.
qwertyasdf: I have said this many times, all mirrorless companies are doing something wrong...why are there no affordable ultra wide angles?!?!!?!
This is except Canon's 11-22mm, and it's also the reason the EOS M is my most used camera.Fuji & Sony's options are too expensive & bulky. Olympus's 9-18 is expensive given it's quality.
Do they even know their target market? Travelers would adore a lightweight ultra wide setup.
I don't understand this post. Oly's 9-18mm (18-36 equivalent) vs. Canons EF-M 11-22 (18-35mm), and they are nearly the same price, with the Oly cheaper used than the Canon is new (it is easy to find the Oly used -- much harder on the Canon)
Yes, disappointment here. I'd like a better body for the awesome 22mm lens to attach to.
Damien Demolder: Do readers in the USA feel deprived that the EOS M3 isn't coming to America? Maybe you don't care either way, or aren't interested in CSC? Is this the camera you've been waiting for?