F 2: Appmera or maybe Appamera
A portmanteau of application/app, and camera.
PCPics: V.nice - but why no shutter speeds on the top dial for those people who use manual? If the aperture is so carefully crafted with third stop detents, why a 'menu driven' shutter speed selection?
I see your points (@Calvin Chann and @garygraphy) - but if 'most' people are using 'A' why bother with 1/3 stop aperture increments?
The comment in the article "[Sony's] first compact camera for serious photographers" could definitely be regarded as correct when looking at the beautiful Ziess lens with it's 1/3 aperture indents - but then when looking at the body and seeing a 'point and shoot' type selector dial just doesn't do it for me.... I only ever shoot manual. The X100 sort of gets it right, but could do with the 1/3 aperture stops on the aperture ring.
We come back to the old question of 'what is the perfect camera?' and see that we all like different things!
daMatrix: I'm also sad about the focal length.35mm? I would prefer a 50mm on this dream camera. Otherwise a 85mm would make it a perfect companion for concert photos in clubs.
If the RX1 came with freedom of focal length choice I would now be hysteric of happiness (a feather light full frame...that fits in a lady purse).
Anyhow the RX1 is remarkable And a congratulation is in place; It is the 3 milestone in cameras deliverd by Sony (other hits: Mavica with floppy storage 1981, Sony Nex )
35mm is perfect for a full frame camera - a Leica with a 35mm Summicron is surely one of the greatest combos of all time - and clearly what is being emulated by Sony/Zeiss here....
V.nice - but why no shutter speeds on the top dial for those people who use manual? If the aperture is so carefully crafted with third stop detents, why a 'menu driven' shutter speed selection?
Where is the thumb activated focus? Without that one little item it becomes a toy from my perspective. Perhaps with a firmware tweak, the movie stop/start could be assigned that function whilst in 'stills' mode. Seems like an obvious omission on Canon's side?
Just hope the robots have got permission to take pictures - otherwise they will probably get arrested by the Olympic Stasi and thrown out!
Despite all the negative comments about Leica that seem to fill the columns on DP Review (often from people who don't own a single peice of Leica kit) - just take a really careful look at this picture. Even with the best Japanese cameras and lenses and running the finest software, your pictures are never this detailed straight off the camera. This is a great example of why Leica lenses have the reputation they do!
Martin is a (the?) well respected software master and shows this software off to it's best - but I still can't quite accept HDR (whether from multi images or from just one) as generating anything that looks real! The midtones are awful - just look at the grey building and the halo effect around the edges of the sky/building boundary and it looks like it's been badly feathered and over compensated... to create a look that is plain fake!
TheYetiCom: You see occasional complaints about depth of field, but you probably don't understand how bad a problem it is. I looked into getting one of these (reflector based telephoto lenses)years ago, and at the time the russian models were available. I don't imagine that this can be much different.
the 500mm lens had a depth of field of 1 inch at a distance of 1/4 mile at F11. focusing required a tripod. Maybe that is desirable, you would have crazy bokeh, but the bokeh is all donuts not circles.
So given the problems with the depth of field, you need lots of rotation on the focusing grip, or a usm motor, a stepper motor is not precise enough.
I like the 'out by a few football fields' comment!
As far as I'm aware a 500mm f/11 mirror (shouldn't that be f/8 anyway?) will have the same d.o.f. as any other 500mm lens at the same aperture. A mirror lens does not have less d.o.f.
This is a dilemma - the picture in the Washington Post is not actually 'a news event' and the manipulation is clearly mentioned - and let's be perfectly honest, the HDR aspect quite subtley applied, to the point that many people wouldn't have realised it was HDR unless it was mentioned. It could easily have been a single shot with tweaks to contrast and saturation - and is that wrong/disallowed?
I think that if it is a 'news event' then manipulation outside of contrast/exposure corrections should not be permitted.
As this particular shot is 'illustrative', then perhaps it is ok - just as long as it doesn't become a common ocurrance...
And how do you police this exactly - definitely a dilemma!
Adobe used to be amazing - they made truly groundbreaking things.
Now they just update stuff that plateaued years ago and pass it off as 'progress' - for which you must pay.... handsomely....
It is an amazing piece of software - but alienating previous owners is not a good business model.