jagge: It seems its not very sharp at 0,95 -> 2.8 which makes this sense completely irrelevant for anything, especially with the lack of AF and especially at this price.
Ohhh the amount of f 5.0 pictures from this baby in the review strongly puzzles me. A lens like this is bought for the 0.95 what it can do above f 3.5 is totally irrelevant.
well touche, you have a point there :0). It still leaves a gaping hole in the M43 lineup though and thats a darn shame. The platform needs faster than f 2.0 wideangle with working af bad in my view.
It seems its not very sharp at 0,95 -> 2.8 which makes this sense completely irrelevant for anything, especially with the lack of AF and especially at this price.
Scottelly: Fankly, I'm surprised it's less than $100,000 dollars. You'd think something made by NASA or for NASA would be really expensive, just because of what it represents. Imagine having one of Henry Ford's cars or a suit, horse, or hat belonging to George Washington? How about a pen used by Thomas Jefferson or better yet, how about a quill and ink well used by Shakespeare? One day this stuff will be legendary, and people in the future will pay big money to get anything from Earth, let alone something like a telescopic lens, which represents our curiosity about space and other planets and stars, solar systems, and galaxies, where most humans will live one day, in maybe as little as 100 years. Give something like this to a child, who is 5 or 6 now, but will be 20 or 30 when given something like this, and that child may get a large fortune for it in 100 years, when people are living an average of 150 years or more and space travel is as normal as air travel is today.
wow scottelly what level are you in Scientology ?
From a sociological point of view this is very interesting.
Hasseblad takes a cam, "styles it" in a embaressing tacky way that I guess only rich italians, oil sheihks or rich russians with no clue about photography will appreciate.
So by buing this thing that should make you special and cool, you very much display that you have not style, have no clue about photography and is easy to fool. Basically Hasselblad takes pride in making their customers appear like fools.
lol, who cares ?? this review is so desperately late that it is utterly meaningless. Every single cam site out there has made reviews I guess a year ago, its a cam widely used in productions.
Using energy on this is close to a joke. It just highlights the speed issue on this site. It seems to be very bad use of the time that so obviously is in short demand. Using the time on a current and newer release would make much more sense.
And dont get me wrong its a super relevant cam to review, but at this point in time its a waste of energy
justmeMN: Thom Hogan is not a happy Nikonian: "One self-imposed problem that Nikon just keeps facing is that it isn’t truly satisfying its most loyal customer base. The QA problems, the lack of good customer support and communication, coupled with the totally missing products, the lack of upgrades of significant products, and the strange emphasis on overlapping FX bodies at higher price points, are things are slowly eroding brand loyalty. At a time when you’d want brand loyalty to be highest so that you can better weather the camera sales downturn."
lol if there is one company less inovative who is stronger stuck in the "2008 dslr mud" then its Canon. Nikon and Canon face precisely the same problems lack of innovation. At least Nikon are using contemporary sensors.
No he should go Olympus, Fuji or Sony that is where true innovation is these days
joe6pack: I would like to see a comparison with the Panasonic GM1 or GM5. The GM1 seems to be smaller, even including the kit lens. Of course, the lens is not as fast but then the LX100 is simply not pocketable.
yep which makes the statement that "the rx100 and the canon" was the only option for small high IQ cams a joke.
So a pro cam review site to make such a claim is downright embarresing.
Canon just cant be innovative even when they try. Compare this to the LX100 and its wealth of innovation.
Its just a quite boring, very standard, digicam. Like any sony 4-5 years ago. Its incredible that canon can run a busyness just on the idea that they are market leaders, i guess its subsidised by a world of soccer moms and dads.
Albert: As a Nikon shooter; I hope Canon brings better stuff to give Nikon pressure; but the pressure seems to come from Panasonic these days. This is a sad sad upgrade IMHO; the obvious being no 4K and same sensor. My D600 is 2 years old and still has better IQ than this. Nikon and even more so, Canon are playing a dangerous game if they think everybody is going to be loyal for another 10 years with the crap they are pushing out. NFC, Wifi, GPS, 4K, insane buffer, and uber sharp lenses. Nikon's bodies lack focus peaking, NFC, Wifi, GPS and 4K. Canon bodies lack a sensor from within the last 5 years. Sigma is SPANKING both in the new lens department.
yep gives "resting on the laurels" true meaning. All canon has going for them these days are the glass that is old as f as well.
technic: yet another machinegun style brick from Canon with no real improvement in sensor quality compared to 8 years ago or so ... really sad. Dual pixel is some progress, but not in image quality where it was really needed given the advantage that Nikon and Sony have had for several years now.
IMHO the most boring upgrade in a long time :-(
you are spot on. there is NO real development from Canon, and the fact that Dpreview states this as very interesting launch, just makes very clear where they have their loalties. Really its a lifetime since the 7D in the digital age, and you can very well take pictures that for the most are indistinguisable between the two.
still outdated tech. Canon and Nikon just cant shake the concept of the traditional SLR and it will be their downfall.
If one looks at the time, 5 years what did that bring. More fps, upgraded video ok, and a moderately better sensor.
With 5 years of developmental work ??? Must be a pretty stable job to be a designer at Canon, not much pressure there.
ehhh @mauijohn, pressure gauge ???
jagge: Sorry, you guys crack me up.
All those here who are so eager to state " that the photographer, has no rights, the monkey does" it really puzzles me.
Put yourself in his shoes. If it had been your camera off course you would accept the pictures from that situation as "yours" to decide upon. And yes there might be a loop hole in the copyright laws that did not take into account that a monkey could snatch your cam, and take a picture with it, surprise surprise...
What goes out ot the window here is just simpel common decency. Really you think that you all have equal right as the photographer who owned the kit, visited the monkey, had this incredible experience, and shared the pictures.... Its incredible to me what this internet era does to common decency and fairness, its really quite disapointing but not news for sure.
really ? please dont state the obvious.
It does not take decency out of the equation though
Sorry, you guys crack me up.
Buzz Lightyear: My first thought: this colored mess must be murder on the environment! I can find nothing on their webpage to explain how toxic (or not) the substance is that they use in the photos. I hope I am wrong about this . . . but it seems rather callous and careless of them if the environment is in any way being ruined by their efforts to promote their "art".
How come you equate color with toxin ? I know thats how bugs use it but really ?
I like the idea, BUT to be honest the potential is not harwested at all. Lighting seems harsh and most backgrounds are truly boring. I also think the lighting does really not harvest the potential in the reflective surfaces that are bound to be there in the splashes.
jagge: lol Nikon just dont get it, i have left the Mikon wagon a while ago and man such a attempt is a bit pathetic. It sure can inly be for hard core nikonians with a large glass collection...
Retro and high Iq at 3000 usd. lol to little MUCH to late, it has been done. Look at the two new sony ff, ehhh ff and retro looking AND with optional stellar video. Ohh then the retro omd, ohh the fujis..
Come on Nikon this one seems more than desperate
well i think you are mixing up "simple tool" and experience. While I do get your idea, and the tool should be intuitive for sure, it seems to me that you are talking about experience.
Now you are right that a wood chisel is a functional and simple tool. The point is that is absolutely useless in the hand of anybody but an experienced craftsman. Its precisely the same with the cam.
lol Nikon just dont get it, i have left the Mikon wagon a while ago and man such a attempt is a bit pathetic. It sure can inly be for hard core nikonians with a large glass collection...
jagge: It does NOT make sense. It would have made a LOT of sense to make a 15 mm 1.4 lense or even 1.2 then you could get some ff like wideangle feel.
Why go for a 15 mm. 1.7 when there is a 17 1.8 out there. Is it to difficult with a 1.4 version ? I would LOVE that lense
look a f 1.2 or even 1.4 would be great, a 1.2 of high quality would be a game changer
It does NOT make sense. It would have made a LOT of sense to make a 15 mm 1.4 lense or even 1.2 then you could get some ff like wideangle feel.