Just a Photographer: Why should we still use Eye-Fi cards now in most places we can use a 4G network?
Next to that in todays world not only your phone has wifi already, but most (consumer) camera's have wifi too.
Few years ago these cards came in handy, but nowadays aren't these eye-fi card mostly redundant? Its only a matter of time before Eye-fi will be out of business.
There is a huge legacy of DLSRs and other expensive cameras without Wi-Fi. WiFI alone hardly can justify buying a new $1000+ camera body if there is no other major reason to upgrade. Even some actual models don't offer built-in Wi-Fi. So it will take quite a few years until these cards will become redundant.
Mattersburger: That's a lot of metal & glass to get to an f2 normal.
No trolling. A teleconverter always decreases the resulting lens speed. The f-value is calculated from the diameter of the focal length divided by the diameter of the aperture. The teleconverter increases the focal length, but cannot increase the aperture (it is part of the original lens). So a 2x TC doubles the f-value.
Greg VdB: Outwardly, they look a lot like a schoolbag I had in the early nineties ;-)
I'm sure these are well made and perfectly good if you're after such a bag. Personally though, when I go into rugged terrain, I take my Lowepro Rover Pro 45L AW, which is half photo backpack - half trecking backpack, together with a holster type bag. This setup is much more practical I find than carrying a bag like the ones above (too annoying for serious hiking) + a normal backpack, or just a dedicated photography backpack (no room for trecking material).
Even if they resemble an old schoolbag, they still look like camera bags. Not discreet enough for areas where carrying expensive camera equipment shouldn' t be too obvious. So I still have to use more or less suitable bags not primarily designed for photography.
Lux Painter: The 25mmf1.8 sounds like an awesome lens and was long overdue. And based on Olympus reputation of building great lenses it should have a stellar performance.
But the price tag of $400 (twice the price of a full frame 50mmf1.8 lens) must be a sick joke!
Maybe Olympus is trying to ruin their m43 biz completely.
@Dolan: I agree, most 50mm are variations of the old double-gauss (Zeiss Planar) design. But there are other examples, the low priced Nikon 1.8 50mmG is a new lens design using aspherical elements and a modern ultrasonic AF drive. OTOH Zeiss OTUS shows where the upper spectrum of a "normal prime" ends. Lets wait for some permomance tets of the 25mm Oly. If it is a very good performer, its price is ok.
Tom_A: Considering the size of the images it produces, can we consider the Fuji Instax 90 as a medium format film camera?
All in all a rather attractive device if instant print results are important.
Call it a LO res Medium format Optical device (LOMO)
Long awaited ! 20, 35 and 85mm is my favorite combo for cityscapes (including some street and portraits) since many years (way back in the film era). The 1.8 85mm is very good, the 20mm just ok. The AF-D 35mm doesn't deliver optically, while the 1.4 Nikon and Sigma lenses are too big and heavy for me. So I appreciate the new 1.8 Version and surely will buy one, at least when a resaonable street price will have settled.
So, an updated 20mm still remains on my wish list...
Merry Christmas to the DPreview team and to all readers !
Even if > 400 comments are much for a camera not available in North America and Europe I feel that I read too much bashing here. With the EOS-M Canon did half of the things wrong, but half right. Indeed I considered to buy into the EOS-M system before I went with m4/3. The EOS-M uses a proven sensor that satisfies most EOS DSLR users. Sony has slightly better sensors and higher end camera bodies, but most of its lenses are either mediocre or expensive. Canon managed to produce very good AND affordable lenses for the EOS-M. But only three. And here is where the good side of the story ends. I expected that Canon would quickly develop a more comprehensive lens lineup and a higher end body (with EVF and more controls). But time has shown they didn't. So they make a niche product from a potentially good concept.
Cailean Gallimore: It's amusing that everyone who has an X100, or X100S, are saying how much they like the camera, and all the people who are saying they dislike the camera don't have one. Jealousy, maybe... Lol.
Too much simplification. There is at least a third group who like the X100S but I do not own it. At least I belong to this group. The camera is nicely built and styled, has good optics and a good sensor. OTOH I simply have no (read: too limited) use for it. Although 35mm was and is a focal length I like, about 40% of my photos are taken around 35mm. But then, there are 60% of my shots better made with significantly longer or shorter lenses. So for me, interchangeable lenses are a must.
Silver award...so what. For me the GX-7 is the small and capable camera I was waiting for (years). It is right in the sweet spot between bulk, image quality and usability as a photographic tool. I have this camrea since it was available in Germany and have to say, that I'm not disappointed. Only few reasons left to take out my FF DSLR equipment anymore. I must admit that I do stills only, so the missing microphone jack doesn't hurt.
Not for everyone...but for whom ? While such an experimental kit would make sense for film photography I don't see the point for digital. Color filters and double exposures can be applied by post processing with much more control. 12mm (24mm equiv.) is nothing special today. It all comes down to buy a bad fisheye at 1/3 of the price of the cheapest good one (e.g. Samyang).
I'm sure its a fake, created by a guy who has no idea of true luxury products. A Hasselblad camera will never follow the release of a Sony product that early. It can't. Like a Bordeaux Premier Cru it has to mature in a kind of Barrique (here the wooden outer shell) for a certain time. A new Sony will never have this special flavor.
First the sensor oil issue (D600), now the sensor water issue (caused by underwater lens changes).
Joke aside, this camera is a really refreshing concept, even if it won't become the scuba divers favorite.
alatchin: While expensive, this is an exciting camera. With programs like snapseed you dont have to bring a large portion of your photography into a computer and can directly attach to emails and upload to clients.... Maintain up to the minute imagery for your blog, or website, share high quality images on the fly just like you would form your phone but with immeasurably more flexibility and quality.
Next stop Samsung? Design an app for this phone to process your raw files. KABOOM! How cool wold that be. Just a note, they could be reduced size raws for this specific purpose.
In principle, you are right. But I doubt that there is much need for a device like this.Bloggers and social network afficionados do not need 20 MP images for web use.Professionals who want to upload quickly high quality press, sports or paparazzi images would prefer a much higher specced camera system.The remaining part of photographers, where this concept fits best, seems to be a very small percentage...
Karroly: Is the quality of the ZEISS Makro-Planar T* 2/50 ZF.2 really mandatory to record 1024x512 pixel pictures or is the University of Jena just rich ?
The cost of such a lens is negligible compared to the whole lab equipment. No indication for a special sponsorship.
Nice concept, similar to Ricoh's GXR without the need of a camera body. Assuming you carry a smartphone anyway, it is only very little additional bulk for having a quality photo device in your pocket. Usefulness will depend greatly upon a well thought implementation of camera control and display/shutter lags.
Wow - I'm surprised. I always thougt Google glass shooters take only photos when Google tells them to do so.
mrmut: Acceptable price for a great lens.
When they published specifications of this lens, that was the reason for me to start thinking about system change. Somewhere in that time Canon also announced their small and light camera, so there two would be paired beautifully.
Don't know if this would become a true dream pair. The lens is big and heavy (810 grams), better balanced with the bigger and heavier APS-C bodies.
Why complain over its price - it's a f/1.2 lens. I've never seen a cheap lens being that fast, regardless of brand, focal length or sensor/film format.
The development of such a lens is a strong commitment of Nikon to its "1" system. This makes me hope that we will see higher specced, more enthusiast-oriented camera bodies in future. With a few tweaks in the user interface and sensor quality this system might sit right in the sweet spot between mobility and overall photographic usefulness - at least for a wide range of applications.
Nice collection of sample photos. The camera, nevertheless is a niche product in my eyes. Surely a useful tool for unobstrusive foto reportage. Its price point is clearly aimed to the professional market. You will get most of what you can get out of a Sony RX-1 for less than half of its price (assuming the advantage of a 24 MP sensor is not too often visible in handheld reportage photos and most real world pictures are not taken at the high ISO limit). Don't know if this enough for economical success.