Michael49: People keep complaining about the sizes of these lenses, but the way I see it for most outings all I need is the 28mm f/2, 35mm f/2.8 and the 55mm f/1.8 on the A7. Small enough for me, even when compared to my Fuji XE-1 kit.
I already own the 35 and the 55 - they are small enough and simply fantastic lenses. I only hope the 28mm f/2 is as good.
Eventually, I'll either add the 21mm adapter (if its decent) or keep using my Oly 21mm f/3.5 - which is tiny and very good.
Screw the E mount zooms, I agree that they are too large, but who needs them with such sweet and small primes!!
Mirrorrless please - Leica is a high quality manufacturing company. They do most work in house. Their lenses are The best and for the majority of products they dont have motors in the lenses. They are manual focus!!! Forget this typ T camera, it is no measure of what Leica really is.
dougster1979: If you have a tiny body, you will still have to use large lenses(full frame). Smaller lenses = 4/3rds, APSC.
Nerd2 what on eath ate you gibbering about? M4/3 have some of the fastest lenses available. There are plenty of APSC lebses with nice apertures, Pentax especially good at this.
iAPX: I am sad for the Kodak brand, as here in North America we often refer to a Camera as a "Kodak".
Yes. Brand identity is sadly more important than the universally recognised noun for a thing. Can I please have a Kleenex? Lets xerox it! Etc. Etc.
DPR, in the opening paragraph, you make mention of the 18-55, not the 55-200. Nitpicks I know ;-)
ryan2007: Nikon is reusing the defective D600 tech in a rebranded D750 body??
Ryan is just monkey see monkey dp-ing
nawknai: For me, the standouts are:
4: Glacier5: Arty b&w staircase6: Deer7: Backlit monk (borderline...)11: Orangutan (or "monkey")
10: Planes. I love it, but I'm simple-minded.
#9 is mirrored in photoshop, and so I feel should be considered "digital art" rather than photography.
I do not believe #9 is mirrored. The sky is not mirrored.
bebgsurg: I'm sorry, but no flash = no buy. How Olympus could have designed a camera for the point and shoot crowd just moving up from cellphone cameras, and left off an embedded flash is beyond me. Inside or outside, sometimes you need a flash !!
Clip on flash with my epl-3 was fine! Also its free with the camera.
exdeejjjaaaa: ahaha... that's not glass corroding... that's their reputation.
Ah dont be a nob. You think the designed it to corrode?
chris_j_l: #4 looks very overcooked for me - others will disagree, but the rest I'd be very happy to stare at 'for more than 20 minutes' (if they were printed/displayed at studio size). For me the judges did a good job with an excellent submission field.
Totally agree... Pictures like that do not inform the reality of the scene too accurately. Love the winners in general well done'
Mirrorless Crusader: These photos look like they were taken by a 7-year-old.
emadrisss: Another example of why our western societies are so decadent and why the 3rd world nations hate us so much - is a camera like this truly needed in this recession riddled world?
The fat cat leaders of the 3rd world countries probably are the customers.
Rawmeister: OMG. There really are too many mental defectives in the world.So, so Sad.
Please, why don't all you "more money than brains" types stay away from the photography world.
I'm rooting for a massive worldwide ebola pandemic as a much needed attitude adjuster.
Wow, you are a horrible person, what if you were the first fatal case of this pandemic you are wishing for?
bigdaddave: The camera is genuine but I doubt the lens is, the black Planars didn't arrive until much later, they were all silver back then
Knowing the story around photo #4 may give clues too.
I tip the hat again :) great community of gear junkies!
I am no expert at all, but I may note that as this was likely a special order camera, the lens may be custom too. (if it is indeed genuine, then this may be the explanation). Nice sleuthing.
Peter Bendheim: The barrel machining and finish looks horrid. The screw area is unpainted or worn. There have always been plenty cheap and nasty optics around, ultimately you get what you pay for.
Maybe the optics are better. But lenses are an investment, bodies are not. I'd rather spend extra for lenses.
Maybe the prototype is pictured
Roland Karlsson: Hmmmmm ... a color film with faulty colors.
Damn better forget about converting those old digi bodies to IR, cant have something different.