I was actually thinking today I'd love a tablet or phone without a camera. Not just for myself but specially for my kids. I'd even pay more for that.
abortabort: I wonder if I will be allowed to use this phone's cameras to shoot something again a white background?
Don't worry, it will come with a permissive EULA.
Awesome, specially after the dishwasher thing ;)
A filter thread would have been the icying on the cake...
ipecaca: Why would one be interested in samsung cameras, what's the catch? Truly interested, can owners tell me?
@thephilipsActually it's one of the longer flange distances, and Leica M lenses cannot be adapted, which is a major bummer...
Scottelly: Wow! If you told me a few years ago that by 2015 there would be hand-held, interchangeable lens video cameras that could shoot at 60 frames per second progressive in a format that held 4 times the pixels of a 1080 video, AND these cameras were going to be able to take lenses from a bunch of different manufacturers, I would have said, "You're smoking crack! No way manufacturers are going to get together to make cameras that can take each others' lenses!"
This is just AWESOME! I really like where micro4/3 is going.
losers club uh?
mpgxsvcd: The GH4 and the A7s are two totally different cameras. The GH4 is meant to be a universal solution. Average users could us it as an everyday hybrid camera. Pros could use it as a really nice 4K video camera.
The A7s is meant solely for pro videographers or more specifically pro wedding videographers. It will be incredible for low light with nice big full frame lenses. However, it will need to be tethered for 4K footage.
Both are great but neither is a true competitor for the other.
Pro? There is nothing pro about the A7s video specs.FF for video is actually a disadvantage for any serious work. Sure it's cool, i get that, but Super 35 (APS-C) is the standard for a reason. What is the point of filming with FF if you need f/4 to actually get something in focus? Sony's own 4K demo at f/4 proves this. Plus this XAVCs is nothing special. No intra compression, low bitrate... Not very different to the consumerish VG900 we already had and was already nothing special.
whtchocla7e: Kodak killer.
Beating a dead horse?
yabokkie: actually this is a good buying guide for new amateur users (with some modifications). just plan a system like Jarvis and that's the cheapest (best cost performance) plan than keeping buying low quality gears = waste of money.
some alternative gears may be - instead of two D4's, one D800/D610 or D700, plus one D7100, - instead of two 5D3's, one 5D3/6D, plus one 70D, - Canon 24-70/2.8L2 and 70-200/2.8LIS2 instead of cheaper lenses, - 50/1.4 (Sigma 35/1.4) instead of 35/1.4L, - get the most robust tripod/head that you can carry first,
It's just "gear", and not "gears".For example: "I have lots of gear" or "Need to sell some of my gear"Not being pedantic, but I've seen you make that mistake many times...
I think Aptina managed to sell / force feed the 1 inch sensor idea to Nikon before Nikon even had the faintest idea where it wanted to go with mirrorless. Nikon being Nikon, is probably always shopping around for sensors and took the bait. Aptina managed to score a once in a lifetime sales goal they probably even themselves never expected to happen. Then Nikon's upper management tells its engineers and marketeers... Hey guys this is the sensor we are going for on mirrorless... Now get together and figure something out...
Beginner friendly / Entry level...Always wondered what that really means.Perhaps:"You are a beginner so you must be poor also", or"Expert photographers need to pay more of course", or"Since you know no better, we've got the perfect thing for you", or"All our products have annoyances, this one is targeted at you"
Eugene232: ugliest camera ever..
mra1948812: This thing is even more ugly than some of the earliest digital cameras! Looks like a great rig for street photography, eh!
Are you Canadian, eh?
Sure they don't mind the blue Zeiss logo in the promo materials?
I'll have a rebadged Toyota please... with a Honda engine... and the cool Jaguar cat in the bonnet... ah... in British racing green... Thanks!
JaimeA: There is something called actuality and momentum in the news. The story and reviews for the full-frame Sony A7r and A7 have by now appeared practically everywhere, including DxO, an affiliate. Apart from inconclusive “first impressions” we get no review in DPR. Nevertheless we see this inane news that no professional or amateur cares to know (except perhaps children). Michael Reichmann reported his impressions in October of last year; DxO Mark published a detailed review and ratings (2nd in 249 cameras) also in October. I got my camera in November. I suggest you do not publish anything more about the A7r and avoid the ridicule; by now it is old, stale news.
Amazon management probably doesn't care much about DPR so they likely have the freedom to do things at their own pace... Probably a very different mindset from a smaller review website that has to constantly fight for readership, relevance, and revenue... Just a thought...
tkbslc: "While the GC2 retains the slim form factor...."
What?!? Have you seen the Galaxy Camera? It's HUGE, not slim. It's closer in size to a Canon G16 than anything. It outright lies with the 19mm thickness spec because that's the thickness of the camera body, not the grip or the lens protrusion.
Funny. I had the opposite reaction when I saw it at a local store. Thought it looked way smaller than what I expected from looking at photos. I was pleased with the overall design and would have bought one for my wife if it could do 25fps PAL video. Was hoping this new one would as the Galaxy NX does, but it seems like it doesn't.Interestingly, also saw it again at our local pub few days ago, as an older lady in her 60-70s who sat on the table next to us had one. Probably not the target demographics but I can see how it could be useful for a grandparent trying to keep in touch etc...
Actually have YOU ever seen one in person?It looks a lot smaller in person than in photos.And it is a lot slimmer than the fat G series.
cinemascope: The small throat of the FE mount also forces the lenses to be big, so it's not like it would make any difference if these were "native" designs.Sony itself also stated they are not "interested" in doing fast FE lenses, maybe because they would be silly monstrosities? Of course they won't admit FE is a technical nightmare, so let's just say they are "not interested"...This FE mount is a bad joke really and I hope this silly FF fad dies with it too...
And just finishing it off. Sony is not a very timid company... They sure like a splash. But I think their initial FE line-up did not match the hype surrounding the cameras, and perhaps for good reason.What do those zooms bring to the table? Why are they any better than what we had with the Alpha mount? Isn't this a duplication of a production line, with not much good reason? A couple of very expensive primes? A 35mm 2.8 for $800, and a 55mm 1.8 for $1000 bucks? Hmm. How much does a Canon 50 1.8 costs? Just checked. $110 on BH, free shipping. Plus wide angles are cleverly nowhere to be seen, I wonder why.Couple that with Sony's announcement that they do not intend to do fast lenses, then I am not really sure what is so interesting about it as a system, either today or in the future, besides being a platform to adapt foreign lenses...
Hence why I called it a fad. It's cool, but what problems does it solve? It actually brings new issues to the table. Sure it enables one to adapt lenses from other systems, but such ability should be a bi-product of a good design, and not it's main appeal as a system.The problem Leica had on the transition to digital was a very well known one and Sony just basically half-addressed it with the micro lenses. Leica did the same too, but it's not like they had a choice...If you were to imagine a MF mirrorless system with the same short flange distance perhaps it would make it easier to picture the problems at hand.