Joe Ogiba: The Red Epic Dragon is the enemy to the $20,000 Canon C500.
The red is much more expensive. so many add-ons required before you can capture a video.Put a lens on the C500 and you can start shooting.
mosswings: This is an interesting deal because the RED's sensor is APS-H, 1/2 stop smaller than the D800's and about 1/2 stop larger than APS-C. Pixel pitch and resolution are not a factor here.
The really interesting thing about this sensor is that is is using 1) a much different balance in the CFA, increasing the signal to red and blue sensors, and more importantly it is oversampling - combining multiple images taken per final frame so as to reduce noise by averaging. That's what "temporal" noise reduction is.
Overall, my guess is that it's exploiting the fixed frame rates and lighting conditions of video and oversampling perhaps 6-8 captures per frame, which means that it can read out full-frame data from its sensor at over 400 frames/sec - 4 times that of the fastest still cameras.
This does NOT mean that the sensor used in the RED has employed some secret new bulk technology that improves on standard CMOS sensors; rather, it's probably ordinary CMOS with a very fast readout scheme.
"oversampling perhaps 6-8 captures per frame"
This seems unlikely since the 180 degree shutter is necessary so that there is motion blur within the frame, otherwise the video looks harsh and disturbing.
Artistico: Yes, this is the must-have thing for a camera since there is no way I'll be able to cope if I can't share all my unadjusted images almost instantly on Twitter, Facebook and Flickr - my friends would love their timelines filling up with that. Preferably they should be up there just as I trigger the shutter - no, even before I take the picture would be ideal so I could look it up there myself before bringing out my camera to see if a picture was worth taking. Someone should invent a time machine Eye-Fi card so I could do that.
Not to mention it is too much hard work actually taking the SD card out of my camera and inserting it in the card slot on my computer to import my photos that way. I mean: who does that anymore? I read a review of an Eye-Fi card and it says you can "get rid of a ton of messy cables". Who doesn't want to get rid of literally a ton of messy cables, right?
It is useful for fast response in the field. Especially ENG. The small JPGs can be posted for reporting almost instantly through your cellphone, giving the shooter the scoop. I'd say WiFi transfer will become essential for NEWS gatherers, if it isn't already. RAW files are saved for later
pwmoree: How to shoot RAW and at the same time send small jpegs to your tablet or PC I have never been able to find out. If you shoot large jpegs the transmission is rather slow. I liked the X2-pro but because of the above almost never use it.
I think it can only be done on certain cameras, like the 5DIII, which has two cards.I have my 5DIII set to save Large RAW to the CF card, and small JPEG to the Mobi X2 PRO SD card. The Mobi card therefor only uploads the small JPG, and i have the large RAW on the CF for later
They really need to compare this with the other new products, like the Sony that has image stabilization and an lcd
Vinand: The FOV is really nice, but i am waiting until they improve the image stability.For that reason: I am more interested in the Sony AS100. The Live view remote is just a genius innovation. I also expect the image and stabilization to be miles ahead of GoPro. :)
Nobody posts the unusable unstable video.Sony now has active IS, which is really important for the longer focal length setting
raztec: A well researched comparison of all the different action cameras would be far more useful than a simple hands on review of one camera which can be found by the dozens on the internet.
There are lots of new action cams.Sony's new additions even have active IS
This will make a great run and gun lens on a Canon C100
wilsonbello: Good point: "Auto ISO is available in manual exposure mode, but as with previous Fujifilm cameras, you still can't use the exposure compensation dial to set the desired image brightness. This makes it less useful than it should be." Auto ISO with exposure compensation control in manual mode would be perfect.
Really? and how do you judge your exposure? a wild guess, or do you fuss around and make mental conversions?
Striple: ..Cause Bresson never cropped an image to exclude an object or visual element. Its not like he added bullets or flames or even altered the meaning... Sure - he went against the rules, but the idea that a photographic image is anything other than an interpretation of a scene is nuts - the choices one makes at all parts of the process determine a range of 'things' that makes the 'new moment'. Photography is not real.
That's overly simplistic. Cropping can change the context and meaning of an image dramatically
Henderson May: reminds me of contax..
How much are you prepared to pay?
Patrick Kristiansen: If one needs 40+mp's to crop a pic into something worth watching, one is not taking one's pics right. And 16mp is enough for just about anyone without a very special need. Not many lenses justify a higher resolution either. And not to mention the need for exceedingly high shutterspeed and/or tripods. Nah, super-high resoultion is bonk imo. Can't wait to receive my em1 and 12-40 lens. And can wait even less to try out my OM-lenses on it.
Archiver ... I've sensed that too. I would love to save some money and weight by getting a smaller system, and I watch the APS-C and m4/3 systems hoping to see something worthwhile, but nothing yet comes close to full frame. Especially when you stick an appropriate lens on it. m4/3 lenses have to be 2 full stops faster to match performance of a lens on a FF camera. That makes the lenses bigger, and the overall system size and weights become similar.
I'll stick with my 5DIII. Better performance, better ergonomics, better results.
It's not small enough to be more convenient than my 5DIII, and if you want any shallow DOF you need at least an f/1.4 lens. Aperture f/2.8 is often sufficient on the FF, which can be beautifully thin at f/1.4.
So what use does this m4/3 serve? I would still have to bring the FF to get shallow DOF and low light performance, and I still don't get compact size. I could see m4/3 IF the package was pocketable, but I'd probably still head to the Sony A7, or one of the Fuji APS-C cameras for that.
Can't see the purpose in this one.
StevenE: Sony A7, A7R, .... or this ...
Canikon is so passe ... the future is SonyCan
Y ... they definitely need to get some good lenses out. I'm sticking with Canon until they do. But in the meantime maybe Canon will come out with an answer to the A7 and A7R ... but with better video and zero moire.
Amazing times for both photography and video. Reminds me of the speedy PC advances in the 1990's ... a PC was out of date in 4 to 6 months.
Sony A7, A7R, .... or this ...
StevenE: Wow, a lot of haters here.
These are great images, HDR or no HDR, set-up or no setup. Most of these HDR's are not overdone. I suspect some of the haters are just jealous, and have nothing in their portfolio that could stand next to these.
A photograph can never 100% accurately represent the scene. It is created only after a series of acts all of which change and interpret the scene through the technology, equipment, or judgement of the photographer. That's true whether digital or analog. A purist approach to photography is dead and worthless.
Wow, a lot of haters here.
StevenE: It's micro 4/3, so you can forget about shallow DOF.If that doesn't bother you, then this format could work.Non starter for me, unless it can fit in my pocket.
BTW "white shadow" shallow DOF is absolutely NOT something you look for in macro photography. Shallow DOF is a problem in macro, something photographers have to grapple with, even using focus stacking to increase the DOF.
Anyway, if you are happy with DOF capabilities of m4/3 then go for it. As my trumpet teacher used to say "The quickest way to be happier with your performance is to lower your standards." His point applies here.
Of course you can get shallow dof, but you need wider apertures and you need to get much closer to the subject, which is not always possible.BTW ... I don't expect as much from a camera that I can put in my pocket, but I can put my EOS-M with 22mm f/2 in my pocket, and get pretty shallow DOF.
These m4/3 cameras appeal to some people, fine. Not as a main camera for me. However I would consider one that could fit in my pocket, otherwise no thanks
It's micro 4/3, so you can forget about shallow DOF.If that doesn't bother you, then this format could work.Non starter for me, unless it can fit in my pocket.