sybersitizen: This new version appears to do its intended work very well, but...
Why does the program, like so many new Windows programs, have to LOOK like a Tinkertoy app running on a Windows phone? There's not a hint of the visual richness and dimensionality that Windows 7 on a REAL COMPUTER so easily provides. All we get is a dreary, gray, flat rectangle. Who declared total lack of esthetics (AKA the Win 8 experience) to be a good thing? Even the Start Menu icon is dull.
Why am I not presented with a drag-and-drop interface until AFTER I load up at least one file from the Windows Explorer interface? What's the point of that?
Why do we have to look at advertisements and panos made by other people every time the program is started?
These things might seem trivial on one level, but they truly diminish the value of what ought to be a visual showcase and something that's fun to use. Despite the functional enhancements, I'm actually considering going back to version 1.4.4.
You can still drag-and-drop all at once. Just do it without clicking on the "New Panorama" button which brings up the file opener dialog.
Tom Z: I remember now it was called Photosynth.
Like Fri13 above, you are confusing Photosynth with ICE. They are two different programs.
Wow, a huge update to already outstanding software.
Too pricey IMO.What's the weight?
Elaka Farmor: "...with the power of the BIONZ X processor, the camera is able to read, process and output data from all of the sensor’s pixels during video recording, ensuring that it produces the highest quality video possible by eliminating aliasing, moiré and false color artifacts."
which means full sensor read out??
Ouch! So no full sensor readout, I guess. Well, it should still be pretty good quality if they don't skip as many lines as before. Some clarification on this aspect and a sample video would be much appreciated!
flangad: full sensor readout sounds very good!
They have since revised the press release to remove the mention of full sensor readout!
Where did you find that quote about full sensor readout? I can't find it in this review.
In your RX100III video function review, you guys specifically mentioned full sensor readout and XAVC. Here I see only XAVC. Does this mean A5100 does NOT do full sensor readout?
Niklas Ramstedt: Please write out in metric too, so the rest of the world also understands.
Heck, I'm in the US and still prefer metric numbers. They should have gotten rid of imperial units long ago. I hate them, especially the ounce.
"And yes, the D810 is waterproof."
I seriously doubt it. Is this Nikon's claim or just the author's opinion?
Please fix your new thumbnail displays. It's horrendously slow to scroll and down right buggy at times. If you are not going to fix it, please give us an option to go back to the old ways of viewing.
Jogger: I switched to LR when I started shooting multiple camera systems. The manufacturer-specific RAW converter doesnt make much sense, imo. I guess OEMs have to make it in case third parties decide not the support their format.
Agree on why Nikon had to make it.
Good thing they made it free. I switched to LR couple years ago but now that this is free, I might actually use it for some files that I want the very best RAW conversion.
No weight given? Not even in the product home page. Weird.
LOL at Mactards showing up here to dish this unique product. Threads like this show why they are called bad names. (No offense to other Mac users who don't suffer from the same fanboyism)
I can't wait to buy one!
Off topic but...is it just me or have they started applying more compression to their images just recently? 500px pictures used to look real sharp but a lot of them look pretty crappy all of sudden. Compression artifacts in facial details are the easiest to spot. It's as if they've suddenly switched their jpegs from 90% to 60% quality. Now all I see are compression artifacts and I can't enjoy the photos anymore!
Surprised it performs noticeably better than other phones including iPhone 5S which has a similarly sized sensor. My wife wants this phone and I now have no reservation recommending this.
Looking forward to your review on 1020's RAW capability...
BTW, your link to "Page 8: Image Quality Comparison (Bright Light" (and subsequent ones) takes me to a wrong page.
michael2011: For low light shots, were cameras handheld or on tripod?
Thanks for that very critical information. Although still informative, that makes the above test results much less useful to typical users who don't carry around tripods. That's because it's basically impossible to ignore the effect of camera shake at such low shutter speeds like 1/15 sec used for the test.
I'm very curious to know how they would compare if they are handheld. From what I've seen elsewhere, Lumia 1020 with OIS may beat many of those DSLRs (even with VR/IS) in very low lights when you are forced to 1/10 to 1/20 sec of shutter speed.
For low light shots, were cameras handheld or on tripod?
People criticize 32GB as "limited storage" for shooting RAW these days? How much memory do you put in *your* DSLRs?
An interesting comparison between Lumia 1020 and Nikon D800E:
No doubt D800E is a better camera but Lumia 1020 holds up surprisingly well. In some cases Lumia is actually better!
In handheld low light shots, it's probably safe to say the 1020 with its OIS can actually get you usable photos more consistently than DSLRs with slow zoom lenses. Something to think about.