Joe Ogiba: Wow, I purchased $20,000 in studio and darkroom gear from them back in the late 80's .
Sounds like they could have used another 20K from you last year.
Rage Joe: This seems like an untrue story. Maybe he earned $15,000 one day.... and the next days and weeks and month just about nothing?
That what the heading says. In ONE day. Not PER day.
Honestly, the world baffles me these days. More specific, it baffles me what people spend their money on.
Bill Bentley: DPReview should contract user EOSHD to provide the video summary for all their still camera reviews.
Very good Richard. Carry on then, and nevermind little old me. :-)
DPReview should contract user EOSHD to provide the video summary for all their still camera reviews.
So for non-commercial images is it best for us "enthusiasts" to watermark our photos then? I know that if someone wants a photo "bad" enough they will still steal it and try and remove the watermark. But maybe it's a small deterrent, just like having security company stickers on the doors and windows of your home or business. You hope you thief will just move on to a simpler target.
Edit: I'm talking about uploading of images to other sites, not Getty.
yabokkie: the lens looks good. would like to see it on X-A1 and be compared against other super wide APS-C zooms.
also I would appreciate if focal length, shutter, aperture, and ISO be displayed under album thumbnails. like "10mm/6.4, 1/300s, ISO800" for 1024mm_DSCF2293.
If you are using Chrome as your browser you can install an extension that will give you this functionality for any picture on the web that has the data still encoded. If you hover your mouse above the top left of the image it displays the exact info you mentioned in a small blue bar. It's very handy.
Wow, the high ISO shots (4000+) look very, very good to my eye. I can even see the fine honeycomb texture in the ceiling in image 1024mm_DSCF2285. There may be a fine amount of NR smearing going on in the ISO 6400 shots, but it's certainly something I could handle.
medon78: Look at 1024mm_DSCF1820
... strange colors on the left side of the building. Doesn't look like a regular lens flare?
I suspected as much Barney, and it makes total sense what you did. That building shot wouldn't be a keeper though. If the lens had of produced a ring effect then maybe.
It's not a pleasant "ring type" lens flare, but it's definitely lens flare. I get this with my Canon 10-22 sometimes too.
I wonder if a hood was used at all? Probably not since this is essentially a pre-production model.
Laptop > desktopTablet > laptopSmartphone > cheapish compact cameraQuality compact camera > DSLR??
Looks like Kai Wong from Digital Rev wearing the white gloves in pic #5?
Maybe David Hobby did convince him that X100s is a great cam after all. ;-)
gskolenda: Please, Please update these reviews, it's 2014!!We need more info on Video Specs!!!!!!!
Bit Rates!! File type!!! Uncompressed Video? video focus modes?
LOL, +1 for Marty.
That pop-up flash makes this look like WALL-E.
Kwick1: Where, exactly, are the "first impressions"?
First impressions don't always have to involve hands on shooting.
photobeans: 4K is coming fast and furious. 4K TV for $1,000 is coming out this year. But i've got to wonder if 8K is gonna hit just as hard in 2 years and obsolete 4k quickly.
Good shows still appear but because the market is flooded with channels now it seems like so little. It's just like NHL hockey. With so many teams there are really only 4-5 top end players per team.
@ calking - It's already here.
"People are recognizing that disc formats are yesterday's solution," Hunt said.
Because of the cost challenges of making a new disc format or upgrading TV production facilities for small audiences, most content early on "is bound to be Internet-delivered," he said.
Musicjohn: So when are manufacturers going to design a photo-camera which excells in taking photographs (just as the word PHOTO-camera implements) instead of concentrating on video features? If I want to make superior video images, I'll buy a video camera instead.
Copied from igorek7's post lower down this thread.
Besides significant improvements in the GH4 video capabilities --even in comparison with already impressive GH3, G6 and GX7-- GH4 offers drastic improvements for still-image photography as well, considering its new hardware and software resulting in:* decent improvements in AF speed be means of new Depth from Defocus method;* less rolling shutter effect in silent shooting mode due to 50% faster sensor read-out speed;* 1/8000 sec minimum shutter speed;* much faster continuous shooting speeds -- up to 12fps at full 16Mpix;* significantly improved LCD and EVF, + focus peaking, zebra pattern, and luminance level adjustment benefit still imaging, too.
If you have no interest to shoot video then for sure this is not a camera of interest to you. Panasonic happens to make other very good cameras for still image photography too.
D1N0: Even on a 1080p screen 4k looks better because there is less compression artifacts, but hardware is not up to task of streaming it yet. You need h.265 and VP9 hardware video accelleration to play it back smoothly. So this is really a film makers toy and not really usefull for most people. It will take 3 to 5 years for hardware to catch on and 4k screens to become cheaper. By then there will be much more 4k capable camera's.
"It will take 3 to 5 years for hardware to catch on and 4k screens to become cheaper. By then there will be much more 4k capable camera's."
Right. But you can't go back in time and re-shoot the stuff from today with those cameras can you? Better to have the footage now.
Arpad Lukacs: Time to get ready for a replacement for Bluray discs as well probably if 4K is the new thing now.
I highly doubt there will be another "hard copy" format after Bluray. At least not one that is widely adopted. Everything is moving towards streaming now. And yes, I know that 4K requires tremendous bandwidth, but they are solving that challenge as we type. All those new PS4's and XBox Ones have Bluray players in them.