Mikael Risedal: why not give some alternative ?
www.qpcard.com is easier, faster and better and was also cheaper when I tested different ways to generate a own profile for my Canon and Nikon cameras
Te various methods/systems give comparable results that are slightly different at defaults. The real key is the tweaking afterwards that makes the image pleasing, not perfect.
AlanG: Where do they find people to hand polish these things all day and how much do they pay them? Even if the hand polishing costs $50 per camera that would not justify the body price. Consider that other than the aluminum chassis, the innards are not much different than in a Nex. Maybe it cost them a lot to design the interface.
The real cost is in their very low production numbers. The cost of R&D plus manufacturing cost puts the total up there
itchhh: ... and the best they could come up with was a variable aperture lens? For this kind of kit and $$$, I would expect better... IMHO.
The lens design is a result of the desire to keep the lens compact and high quality. Going to and f2.8 zoom would have been nice but the lens would have dwarfed the camera. The Vario has a slowish zoom also but not one reviewer has anything but praise for its IQ. The speed is also a byproduct of care in designing a lens that uses no software correction to achieve its performance thus adhering to the purist esthetic.
Sadly DPR seems to be a magnet for people who can make foolish pronouncements on people that are doing great work in photography.
So you don't like the work.... snarky comments don't make anything better other than to inform the world that you are insensitive, unhelpful and most likely ignorant of the history and the business of photography.
Maybe if you studied the field a bit you might understand what it is you are seeing and why it exists and what came before and what are the trends and issues in that genre.
JohnEwing: Engagement shoots are stupid, lame, false and slightly nauseating.
Wow, we are so impressed with your insight. I will never look at wedding photography again without thinking about your brilliance and ability to pass judgement.
123Mike: Hilarious how they make those medium format cameras look medium big, as if it actually needs all that space. What a rip off !
@RDMPhotos:Of course the body is based on the original film body. That is because unless they kept development costs down this camera would never exist. That was also true for the first APS-C cameras. All these cameras were the first of their kind and costs were already high ($30K for the first DSLRs....remember?) so every means necessary were used to keep costs down. As the technology evolved, investments in new bodies allowed the introduction of more and improved features. Note that Hasselblad and Mamiya STILL do not have many of the features that the Pentax has and even this camera falls short of the most pedestrian DSLR.
What you see in the 645z is the first of (hopefully) a line of increasingly affordable large sensor cameras that will bring better and better options to all of us.
dosdan: In the sample images at http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.uk/en/medium-format-digital/images/samples/PENTAX-645-Z.html
Photo #12 of 12. The detail in the ceiling is impressive when viewed full size.
While I am sure the quality is superb a real noticeable jump in IQ would have needed a jump to 80 MP+ because the increase from 36 to 52 MP while numerically significant is not a very large jump in area. The IQ will be barely noticeable in large prints and invisible in small prints.
BozillaNZ: So int he end Pentax still can't produce any full-sized sensor cameras! It's either Cropped 35mm or cropped 645, Pentax is for Croppers! It's sensor is far smaller than theactual '645' model number suggests, no matter how you fans spin it.
Wow, you win the debate! You are so smart and clever I wish I had thought of such a sharp idea.Now what happens? I guess Pentax will just have to close shop.
The complaints about it not being mirrorless are a little short sighted. While it would have created a real stir among enthusiasts a mirror less camera still would have required expensive R&D that is amortized over a small production run. This camera allows Ricoh to hopefully create an upswell of interest that can result in sales volume that will justify a ML 645 in the future.
I am sure that this will greatly improve the quality of photos uploaded to FB
Kodachrome200: Im actually surprised that its more expensive than the 35mm 1.4. Traditionally that would be a more expensive lens
Sigma IS moving away from its usual customers if that means those people who want cheap lenses and are willing to put up with spotty QC. I would also note that the design of this lens is far more ambitious than the 35 and the price reflects the development costs, material costs and competitive considerations.Their target market is pixel peepers with fat wallets of which there seem to be a lot.
While all these cool video cameras are interesting, the NAB show has turned all my camera sites into video sites.At least for this week.The total market for these magical new machines is vanishingly small compared to even the sad DSLR market.
MrTaikitso: This is one of those machines that I would like to own purely because it is so cool and would be so much fun to use. A bit like a Harley, a Hummer or a Lambo, you can get by with less, but the URSA mixes superb industrial design with great performance. I just want to grab it, touch the screens and fiddle with the physical controls. Make a movie? Get from A to B? Phuh! Who cares! The journey is the reward!
Is the Blackmagic Design URSA true gadget porn?
You would be the baddest Dad at the zoo.
The new A7s will be the darling/demon of the moment....until the next shiny thing comes along.
Mssimo: Best low light camera of all times?
Maybe ... for today.
If it doesn't have an EVF I'm not buying it.
Did I miss the complaints about the lack of a FF sensor?
Sergey Borachev: So, Olympus, this is admission that there is a shutter shock problem with the E-M1?
Good to know that there is a solution for the E-M1. Could it not be used to fix the E-P5, which is by all account ruined by a more severe shutter shock problem. And, shouldn't it be used for the E-M5 and also all future OM-D cameras, if not all Olympus cameras?
Let us have the firmware updates for the other cameras, Olympus.
I think Olympus is changing. Lens hoods for the 12-40mm and then the 25mm f/1.8 lenses. Firmware updates that actually provide additional features in the E-M5 and E-M1. Bravo, Olympus. Keep it up.
I scarcely feel that the EP-5 "is by all account ruined by a more severe shutter shock problem". While it and other mirrorless cameras will exhibit shutter shock. (and BTW DSLRS exhibit mirror shock) it has hardly "ruined" them or all the other cameras that have vibration issues.In the end, a craftsperson learns their tools and works around their foibles and gets the job done.
Olympus does a Fuji. Yay.
Don't like the price? I suppose you aren't too familiar with the cine world then.