Lee Jay: The assumption being, the purpose of photography is to create art.
I have only recently realized that many, even most photographers think this way.
I've been shooting for over 35 years and I never really thought of photography as a way to create art, at least for me.
I guess I'm now wondering if there aren't two totally different types of photography - artistic and documentary. I've always thought of photography as a way to document events, not as a way to create art. For that reason, very little of what he said made much sense to me.
It's a way for one person to communicate the beauty, or significance, or wonder, in what he or she sees, to others. If the communication is successful, I think that makes it art. That applies to documentary photography, landscape, travel, portrait, macro, street, architectural - any of it.
justmeMN: Staying inspired, when you live in a Midwestern suburb, and don't have a travel budget, is even harder. :-)
There are lots of opportunities to document the lost people in the dying suburbs. "It's been done" is no excuse - each place, each person, is unique, and makes the story different.
ejw07: Had the Fuji X100t ..God that battery was even eating my food to stay alive..3 hrs for me doing street...is useless, nice camera ugly power consumption and people like for its discreet shooting agreed on that point.
@PentaxNickMore like a half dozen, and how many chargers (or being there to swap batteries) do you need to charge them back at the hotel? 1000 shots on a battery is my minimum for a workhorse camera. That means most days I only need one spare, and two chargers is enough.
PowerG9atBlackForest: I've seen no explanation so far of how this filter can be adjusted directionally. It is for good reasons that polarisation filters in front of a lens e.g. can be rotated. Would someone like to clarify this question before proceeding? Or did I miss something? If so please tell me.
It looks like the sensor has pixels aligned to sense polarization in different orientations on each pixel. it would take quite a few to sense the polarization angle precisely, and for the pixels not aligned, it wouldn't know whether that light had a polarized (reflected) component or not. But if it even detects angle on every 20th or 40th pixel, that might be useful in some circumstances.
Donald M Mackinnon: For £1069 you can buy a kit that would defeat the GX8 on every conceivable front. The worrying aspect of this price is it puts the GX8 beyond the budget of possibly many current mft users. The price will inevitably drop but in two years time will it be down to £600? Any camera shop in the UK will tell you right now that the "camera to have" is the Nikon D5500 - currently £599
@Demoz Nikon may have a good selection of 18-xx zooms and lots of teles for DX, but its fast wide prime selection, other than a couple of bloated full-frame monsters and a fisheye, is miserable compared to MFT.
To show the earth's rotation, it would be better to shoot from the moon, or from another point in space. This video actually just shows an effect of the earh's rotation combined with the moon's rotation and its movement in its orbit around the earth.
JackM: I have to wonder if the lens was a bit slower like f/2.2 or f/2.5 or f/2.8, could the camera be more compact? Even in my fantasy world where price is no object, the size of this thing is a dealbreaker for me. I buy a "compact" in order to take it places where I don't want to carry a camera bag. My X100S just barely meets this requirement, as I can stuff it in a loose pants pocket or jacket pocket.
With a collapsing Elmar, a mechanical M fits in a coat pocket.
A little bit bigger and heavier than the CL with a 28mm, but beautiful in execution. Leica actually brings their concept cameras to market. I would love to see Leica follow this up with an interchangeable-lens version, or something like a 21-28-50 tri-Elmar. Not that I could actually buy one, but I'd just love to see it done.
The Full-Frame Coolpix B done right.
EskeRahn: This seems like a project done just because it is possible.I find it hard to find any other reason...
The selfie potential in such a shot is surely a more important motivation.
It would be great if Nikon would work with Fujifilm and Zeiss to design and build some fast wide primes for Nikon DX cameras. I'd love to have a lens like this, or the 14, or the 12 Zeiss, for my D400. Or the 24. This is a company that understands what lenses you need to make an APS-C camera system a complete solution.
mga010: We are not talking about astronomical photography where single photons are counted. I have my doubts that even the darkest areas in everyday images produce a measurable variance in the photon count on sensor elements. Is there any convincing proof for that?
We are counting actual photons, one by one, and the receptor sites in current camera sensors count most visual-light photons that hit them. Most sensors miss a substantial percentage overall because of the physical structure of the array, the RGB filters and the microlenses that direct light to the receptors.
The quantum efficiency of actual camera sensors is discussed extensively at sensorgen.info and Clarkvision.com.
You can test the variance in your own photos using Excel to look at TIFF files converted to CSV using a freeware TIFF to CSV converter. If you take a fairly uniform dark area that clips shadows, you can find pixels with low pixel counts and calculate the variance in dimly illuminated areas using Excel's statistical functions to satisfy your doubts. You can also calculate the variance of an unexposed frame with whatever exposure you like by making an exposure with the finder and the lens blocked.
LiSkynden: I may be stupid but why does the lens have to be that big even thoguh only a small amount of it is showing? This was already in the previous model, but i dont get it. Looks kind of weird and stupid to have that big "lens" but the actual lens seems to be really small, ... why is this?
AF and VR motors are in there.
Daniel Bliss: Will they enable off-center focusing with the FT-1 adapter? Will the improved high ISO performance translate into more dynamic range? Will Nikon resist inflicting the next generation V-body with yet another new battery? Might they even go back to the EN-EL15 for a V-body? Will the tiny proportions and jewelry-like manufacturing of the J5 hold up in use?
This is an intriguing camera. Let's hope they are getting it and the rest of Nikon 1 right, despite the stupidity with the battery.
I certainly hope they put the big battery back in the V4. All-day battery is a must, although I'd settle for a battery grip for 4 AAs.
GodSpeaks: Hey Nikon.... No EVF, NO SALE. Got it yet?
If the sensor proves worthy, there should be a V4 in our future with an EVF. It will be a while before there's a high quality EVF in an entry-level interchangeable-lens camera of this caliber with kit zoom lens at this price point.
Cameron R Hood: The camera looks great; the lens is extremely ugly and doesn't match the retro design one little bit.
Agreed on the ugly zoom, but their little primes, on the other hand, look absolutely right in place on the panda version.
Really enjoyed going through your entire gallery (sparked by the drop collision inside a bubble). Thanks for sharing.
Ying Chyi Gooi: "The XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR is a solid lens, and relatively compact for a 24-83mm (equivalent) F2.8 optic at its wide angle position."
24-83mm (equivalent) should have an equivalent aperture of F4.2 (1.5x crop factor).F-number will be readjusted when there is a conversion of focal length equivalents, so don't expect it to behave like a F2.8 on a full frame. Instead, it will look like a 24-83mm F4.2 on a full frame.
I'm sure you like your full frame system and your f/1.4 primes and 200mm f/2. I'm quite grateful to have exposure and angle of view equivalence to a very useful 24-70 f/2.8 in my APS-C system, and get really bored having this line of posts cluttering up the APS-C and MFT and 1-inch sensor threads, thank you very much.
bmwzimmer: It's massive!! Defeats the whole purpose of going mirrorless. I don't have an XT-1 but do admire it. However, I'd stick to a set of small fast primes than go for this monster
This is very similar in size to the 17-55mm f/2.8 Nikkor for APS-C and uses the same 77mm filter size, though it is a bit lighter. I like primes as well, but a fast midrange zoom is a great lens for events and photojournalism, and can get you the shot you wouldn't have time to switch lenses for. The overall system with camera body is more compact than Nikon's APS-C since the flange distance is shorter by quite a bit. This lens is a tad wider, and quite a bit less expensive than the Nikkor. Looks like a great offering and definitely brings the X system up a notch.
PatMann: Best of luck to Fujifilm on addressing these issues. The lens lineup is stellar - no other APS-C system comes close. But AF and resolution do need to be addressed. If Nikon produces a pro APS-C camera to replace the D300s, they need to bring lenses with it to sell it. If they do, I will probably stay with Nikon. If not, Fujifilm is the first place I will look for my future primary camera system. I can't afford the $ or the overall system weight and bulk to go whole-hog full-frame.
Fujifilm (with Zeiss) has a well-balanced range of focal lengths and apertures that make up a complete system, and in particular pick up some key requirements such as an 18-equivalent wide, a 24 or 28 equivalent, a 35-equivalent f/1.4. The Pentax range has a hodge-podge of full-frame leftovers and a lot of duplication in their APSC wides. I don't find it a very attractive mix for my needs.
DotCom Editor: Looks interesting. Too bad it's not Arca-Swiss compatible.
Of course it's compatible. You just buy a Manfrotto plate and screw an Arca QR to it. I guess that's what they expect most of us to do.