brycesteiner: If this model is still in stores, why would Samsung confirm this discontinuation? No one would buy it because it won't be supported. Dealers couldn't in good conscience recommend it and Samsung doesn't want to take them all back to the warehouses especially if there is a stockpile.
If this being the case, they certainly wouldn't confirm it with a press release, which is what seems to be happening.
@Mark, then why repeat it here?
James Booba: OFC it could be they made a deal with a major cam company for providing them their amazing backlit image sensors, and part of the agreement would be they dont make cams themselves. e.g Canon, Leica, etc.
Besides. If the current camera makers want to survive they better bring all their cams down to 1 mount and 1 graphical UI.
Yep, that's my guess too, they are shifting to supplying tech to established market players, whilst leaving the door very slightly ajar. Not sure having just one of everything would help, lack of competition, but you could see it thinning down from what it is currently.
meland: I would suggest that DPR would never have helped fuel speculation by printing this rumour unless they actually do know something.
Normally I would agree with you about DPReview and rumours, but this has been building for months, and the uncertainty it has created is newsworthy in itself and even interesting in a this is how a company may do business way. Also, it will take the prodding of a site the size of DPReview to extract a definitive answer from Samsung. On the rumour itself it does sound fishy, the wording, and timing suggests a concerted effort to troll, which would be at new heights, and if it is a troll, then its something we all should be aware and so newsworthy. But the silence from Samsung? Inept awareness of the camera market, or quietly shifting focus, or just oblivious. Whichever way its poor handling by Samsung.
NoRules: Lee Friedlander was once asked why he always only have name of the place and date as titles. He answerd "That is the only objective aspect of my pictures". There is nothing more to say. Let the image speak for it self. When I read what he said I felt very releaved. Photography means writing with light. It's a passive (in most times) activity. We have a device that register light. Behind it we can manipulate it, and we can manipulate what's in front of it (staged photography). The only objective values are time and place. If we go beyond that we enter the realm of metaphysics and mysticism, and that is not needed. The pictures are beautiful, no need to hang a veil over them like titles that obscure and reduce them. Pure photography tells a story that do not need words. If we cross that line we end up with a mess. IMHO.
I'd actually agree with you both here. In theory you'd want to let the image speak of itself, but in practice having a title does make an image more accessible and even more successful. I think the trick is to have titles that in themselves are open to interpretation, that suggest rather than confine. Literal descriptions could be too confining but cryptic or titles that suggest links, e.g. the harp one above, work better. Course this is purely a subjective point if view. The best way is whatever works best for you!
Indeed, wow! Thanks for posting this.
Its finally dawning on me on how to select a camera from the myriad of options. Lenses. Which lenses do I covet. The Loxias on Sony FE seem fantastic, and these Pro zooms do to. An A7s with the Loxias and an EM1 with a set of these would sort everything. Shame I have such expensive tastes and can afford none of them :-)
Hmmm looks like Zvonimir maybe correct about a series of release moves from Ricoh building up to Photokina. Using Zvonimir's chess analogy if the XG-1 was the first move with a pawn, then this is the knight in shiny armour :-)
These are great, thank you for posting. I wonder what those in 75 years time will make of the images we take now. I suspect that the impact shots we think great now will fade to obscurity and it will be the ones documenting everyday life that become treasured. And there's plenty of those now :-) Looking forward to the next set. Thanks
Earthrise: I like it. The concept, the camera, the possibilities and all. The composition of an interesting 3D space rather than a 2D plane will be an exciting challenge.
That said I would still need to be able to pull out prints from the images, but if it is 5mb then that's enough to allow the print sizes I need, up to 8" by 10". Any other confirmation of this apart from this DPReview article? 5mb prints would be important to me
I wonder if they could use the light field data to allow a smarter interpolation if you needed to rez up?
Think I saw somewhere that the slowest shutter speed is 250ms, is this right? That would be a shame as long exposures (2-4 secs) would be great with this. Wonder if it can/could do multi-exposures even if there was a sec or 2 gap between exposures?
And in the future, a video version? Allowing you to wander space and time lines :-)
According to Lytro's specs its 4mb:https://support.lytro.com/hc/en-us/articles/201825730-What-are-the-specs-on-the-Lytro-ILLUM-camera-
Now to track down the reason for the lower shutter speed limit. Risk of over exposure?
JohnEwing: Like the camera, not the name: too much like a missed stab at "ilium".
Qu.: were they thinking of Troy or pelvises?
Troy was my first take too, didn't know the latin for pelvis though! The things you learn on this site. Guess illuminating the right answer will shed some light.
I like it. The concept, the camera, the possibilities and all. The composition of an interesting 3D space rather than a 2D plane will be an exciting challenge.
A 70-30 split sounds fine, but I'd agree with other comments on here in that if I had an image someone actually wanted to spend $250 on then it's not an image I'd want to give a worldwide perpetual license on. Still, if someone would like to test my resolve on that... :-)
Earthrise: If anyone spots one I'd like to see a comparison of this lens and Olympus's new 12-40/2.8 M.Zuiko PRO (yes I know the range is different!)
If you have a review that shows the Pentax is soft wide open a link would be good. But if you are basing your statement on your misunderstanding of the Ricoh release note, that isn't what I had in mind. Yep, it not a straight comparison between the two, but its close enough and would be useful for my purposes which is why I asked.
peevee1: " It allows the photographer to optimise the subject’s visual description, by making its appearance softer at larger apertures and sharper at smaller apertures."
Translation: not sharp wide open.
You've misunderstood what this means.
ChristophBarthold: Pentax, admit it! It covers the 35mm image circle and the camera to go with this lens is in the works...
Wouldn't need to be full frame but would be good if there was a camera with looks and size to match the Limiteds in the works.
If anyone spots one I'd like to see a comparison of this lens and Olympus's new 12-40/2.8 M.Zuiko PRO (yes I know the range is different!)
Earthrise: This is the kind of lens I would by a camera for. If the camera were svelte enough :-)
Heh, no not a K-01. A good idea, a mirrorboxless K mount cam, poorly designed. You'll never get the mount into the slim design people associate mirrorless cameras. Had it been a mirrorboxless dslr with a slimmer body where possible I think it would have gone abit better.
KL Matt: Will its image circle cover a full frame sensor? I'm kind of excited to find out. Not only because of this lens, but because of what it may or may not reveal about Ricoh's next move.
Wondered the same myself :-)
True enough. I already use the GXR with M42 adapter. But, as you say, would lose AF.