Jonathan F/2: Only amateurs shoot RAW!
So there is only one type of professional photographer?
I don't know a single pro fashion, advertising, portrait or landscape photographer who doesn't shoot raw.
Of course, if you just shoot news events, who cares?
instamatic: You really don't need RAW most of the time - if speed of delivery is important - like stated here. Proper photography discipline and understanding of lighting will produce excellent JPGs out of camera probably like 95% of the time.
What struck me here, is that the size needs to be limited at 3500 px longest edge, which is about 8 megapixels. This goes contrary to some of the stuff one could read in the past, which stated, that stuff under 11 megapixels is not accepted, etc., etc. But then that probably applied to stock images.
All-in-all I think it's a wise decision, and allows the use of a smartphone alone to download and transfer images to the news agency.
8 megapixels = 4K roughly (diff aspect ratio though).
Way more than enough for newsprint, but they are clearly future proofing their image database for online viewing.
True or not, Samsungs are the worst marketed cameras in the UK. Even in the few stores that sell them (Samsung seems to sell them all through electrical retailers with whom it has existing links) don't have many display models or lenses to test.
As a premium product they would do better to push it through professional retailers and offer the right incentives and support in terms of backup and service.
Even Fuji have managed this. All Fuji models and lenses are available in most dedicated camera stores, and they service their own products rather than farming it out to some hapless third party.
The enthusiast camera market at whom the NX1 is aimed are not going to buy their cameras from a white-goods store or TV shop.
Which is a shame, because I tested an NX1 and was highly impressed with the camera.
57even: It is not perhaps surprising that mirrorless does not replace DSLR...yet.
To gain market share, mirrorless majored on the big flaw of DSLRs - size and weight. A lot of the compromises more or less derive from that. Less room for buttons, less room for large batteries, and less reserve power for really fast processors.
So, they appeal to people who want the same IQ in a smaller size, but can live without the continuous shooting, all-day battery performance, such as photojournalists, travel and street photographers. Sony's venture into FF has also offered solutions for landscape and studio photographers.
But the bulk of the pro market is involved with events, sport or advertising, and these issues are a big deal, as well as lens range, flash etc. But breaking into this market would require breaking the dominance of Nikon and Canon, which is a whole different challenge.
We are in a state of transition, waiting to see what the big two may do. Who will blink first?
The comments on this site get weirder by the day...
Carefully designed not to compete with their DSLR line or appeal to pro photographers.
It is not perhaps surprising that mirrorless does not replace DSLR...yet.
arhmatic: The entire idea of "camera bags" is dead to me. this is really a thief magnet and nothing else. Just get any bag you want ant fit it with padding per your needs.
That's exactly what I do. There are loads of foam inserts and dividers.
My tatty old canvas satchel is as dog earned and weather-beaten as I am. Nothing too tempting in either case ;-)
But hey, some folk like to look the part...
Pricey but not bad. IQ is a big step up from an iPhone.
Can we have an Android version soon please?
Why does everyone tout every new cool thing as being 'the future'. It's just one more option. Sometimes it's transformational, sometimes it's not.
This is not the future of photography. The 2D image is alive and well if all the exhibitions and awards I have been to this year are any indication. It may be an interesting niche specialisation, but its not transformational. It's not 'the future' its 'a future addition'. Journalistic hyperbole by prepositional abuse.
When GB broadband is more commonplace, 3D VR is likely to be transformational for other applications such as conferencing, skypeing, collaborative/remote working, education, dramas and movies, gaming etc. I can also see a future for "virtual tourism" but that would be more interesting as an enhancement to Google Earth, rather than Flickr.
On the other hand, can you image what a virtual reality full of Amazon pop-up ads will be like? Virtual hell. I can see a big market for ad-blockers.
phazelag: The FZ1000 jpegs and raws all look better at 3200 and up. I wonder if Sony is not capable of getting the most out of their sensors. I expected cleaner with the talk of the stacked sensor.
I think the main driver for BSI on large sensors (given that you still can't place photodiodes too close together or you get diffusion and light scatter) is countering light fall-off due to angle of incidence. This seems to be true of the A7Rii.
May also lead in near future to a true global shutter sensor as well. ADU per pixel. Now that would be something.
papa natas: It's about a year now that I no longer use ANY of my cameras for informal shooting. Other than studio work, the Ipod5 & Ipad3 cover the rest, and they add fun to my shooting. I'm NO pro. I'm what I call An ARTISAN.
57even: Don't get all the complaints. Its a nice competent camera and an obvious travel choice for Canon users.
The sensor used should give it great AF, and there is an EVF option. Sure, some of the dedicated competition has more functionality, but anything better is either old (A600) or quite a lot more expensive.
Personally, I am glad to see Canon making large sensor mirrorless cameras. I still think Nikon read this market wrong, having tried and failed to get on with the 1 series, which are no cheaper despite the smaller sensor.
Well, Sony aren't making any more APSC cameras for a while, so an old one is all you got. Seems like no new lenses for it either, which was already something of an issue. I prefer the lenses for the Canon.
Sony will change their minds again in a few years. At least Canon are predictable.
Don't get all the complaints. Its a nice competent camera and an obvious travel choice for Canon users.
57even: Actually looks like a nice bit of industrial design, particularly the switches and buttons.
I didn't realise the camera wasn't weather sealed. A little surprised at that for a landscape/outdoor camera.
Your loyalty to Sony is unquestionable, but there is no moisture or dust sealing, per se.
The tight tolerances may lend it some 'resistance', but that's not the same thing as having seals around the lens mount and controls, which would add an additional level of confidence.
And confidence means a lot to someone forking out several thousand dollars for a landscape camera.
Actually looks like a nice bit of industrial design, particularly the switches and buttons.
Personally, I would settle for a 4TB SSD which cost under $100...
ecka84: So, why would I choose this over FF 135L or my 150/2.8 APO Macro?
You use a full frame camera to look at images on a screen?
Better is meaningless without context. Why don't you own a medium format camera if you are so obsessed with sensor size?
The best camera is the one that gets the job done with the minimum fuss and inconvenience. Quality differences you can't see in a print are meaningless, and most people have no idea how big they have to print before the difference is even visible.
Gear forums are for people who insist they need the camera equivalent of a Range Rover for the photography equivalent of the school run.
True, they don't generally mention it but T1.7/F1.4 is not unusual.
Exposure is related to t-stop not f-stop.
DOF is related to f-stop.
So yes, 1/3 stop difference is not unusual.