Tim O'Connor: I love what Samsung have done but I would still take a 7dmk2 or D7200 over this camera, just because of the lack of lenses and also finder blackout. That is a huge deal breaker for me personally.
Yes, I own a Sony A7mk2 and A6000. I am probably overstating it a bit, after reading some more reviews.
I guess the problem is really only when shooting large bursts, which I dont tend to do. MikeTheMentor mentions that the finder turns off when shooting high frame rates:https://youtu.be/GmlzqAy5Q68?t=707
I love what Samsung have done but I would still take a 7dmk2 or D7200 over this camera, just because of the lack of lenses and also finder blackout. That is a huge deal breaker for me personally.
oscarvdvelde: Should be interesting to see how it compares against Sigma's old 24mm f/1.8 EX and the Samyang 24mm f/1.4 also.
Modern DSLR's are not designed for manual focusing - old camera were.
The LR update is still not showing up in Creative cloud for some reason...
This is such a brilliant little device - None of my lenses need AF calibration, but its great to have a tool to update lenses for compatibility and things like AF.
Lee Jay: I don't consider the RX100 to be compact enough to be a compact. It's too thick and the lens sticks out too much. I consider it in the same category as the Canon G-series - too big to be a true compact. A Canon S-series is the upper end of the size I'd consider to be "compact".
If it were 8mm thinner and started at 24mm instead of 28mm, then it might be interesting.
I should add - it fits into the front and rear pockets of the jeans that I own. I guess stove pipe hipster pants would be out :)
I dont agree - it fits into a jeans pocket, and the lens retracts all the way into the body. Its MUCH smaller than the Canon G-series. To me its perfectly compact.
Karl Gnter Wnsch: Why not make it f/5.6 at the long end, then at least all focusing systems would be within their working range! At f/6.3 nobody should buy this lens as it will not focus reliably on all but the top of the line DSLR...
Sigma's affordable long tele zooms are all 6.3 on the long end, and they have no problems on any DSLR's going back to the digital rebel and even the old film SLRs had no issues. They simply report that the stop is 5.6.
Unless its wet plate, or daguerreotype, Im not interested.
Andrew Butterfield: He seems puzzled that users haven't taken the EOS-M to their hearts. And he's a big cheese at Canon. They're doomed.
I was really disappointed with the AF performance of the EOS-M. The camera is cute, but based on its sluggish AF, I wouldn't be tempted by it.
davidstock: I'm not convinced. If we are relying on metadata tags anyway, isn't it possible to search just as well in Bridge as in Lightroom? Personally, I like having a logical file folder system. But if for whatever reason I don't know where one of my files is, I simply do a metadata search in Bridge--just like in Lightroom.
The only downside of Bridge seems to be slightly longer backups, which I find to be a non-issue. I've never had it slow me down. (I use continuous automated backups, as well as late-night automated backups.)
The minor backup issue seems like a small trade-off for the security of having all the image data saved in the file itself. The internet is full of confused or desperate people who lost or damaged their Lightroom catalog because of a computer problem or even an upgrade to their hardware or software. I'd rather have files, complete with their metadata and processing, that can be opened in a variety of programs.
My main issue with LR catalog is that when I do an import, I find it very tedious to tag each image with metadata, so I tend to just not bother because most of the time I have a bunch of different images of different subjects - to be honest I just rely on the import process to create date subdirectories, and thats it.
guess I am lazy :)
Blackburn11: Hmmmm.... Wonder if the full review of this will be up before their review on the Pentax k-30. :)
Um, am I missing something? I dont see the D600 listed, only D800.
Photoworks: ADOBE RIPOFF ALERT
Can somebody from Adobe please explain why US customers pay $79 for the upgrade, while Australian customers are charged $122. Both are delivered electronically via download. Even taking into account the difference in exchange rates and taxes, the difference is a major ripoff.
Shame it doesnt have the new sharpen routines :)