DBE: This may be a 'niche' response, but I will stick with a DSLR / OVF for the foreseeable future since an EVF cannot be used when photographing night landscapes. With an OVF your eyes eventually adjust to the darkness and you can properly frame your shot by starlight. An EVF? Pure black - at least with my previous Sony SLT. The same goes for bright sunlight. The current crop of EVFs cannot and perhaps never will match the dynamic range of what your eye sees through an OVF, and the 'look' of a final print is what you remember from the viewfinder composition. But then again, I still create framed prints, which may also be going the way of the Dodo ...
I've shot with both OVF and EVF in low light and far prefer the OVF. I have no desire to make dark shots look like full daylight and want to see the scene for what it is. When shooting in mixed conditions, for example a concert, the EVF would often blank out when overcome with bright lights. The OVF just works.
mosc: I really don't get this type of product at all. It's nothing against Think Tank Photo's particular offerings here and I'm sure they make other products that I would prefer but I really just don't get this offering.
These are not sturdy enough to protect a 70-200 in the overhead bin of an airplane let alone checked baggage. These are not sturdy enough to put in the luggage area of a greyhound bus (with somebody famous's name on the side). These are bizzare to think about as camera-only backpacks on a hiking trip compared to a more general purpose bag. They certainly don't offer any type of holster-like ease of access middle ground either.
Anybody want to explain why I'm crazy?
This is for situations where you will be doing a lot of walking. Examples would be day hikes in natural or urban environments or people who do their travelling on foot.
Like any properly designed backpack this will distribute the weight and will not destroy your shoulders. When you are at your destination, you remove the camera from the backpack and will be feeling a lot less pain/fatigue and can focus on taking pictures.
Its not great as luggage, not great as a holster, nor great for backpacking to the top of Mount Everest. In contrast, each of those things is poor as a day pack.
So you need to figure out your needs and use something appropriate. This may not be for you.
Combatmedic870: Where does one find a 50tb hard? Is it a single picture on multiple hard drives??? If so....can this still be considered a single photograph? I looked for 50+ Tb hard drives I couldn't find any. Also what kind of processing beast would you need to make this?!?!? I'd love to hear about all of that!
It's most likely stored on some kind of cloud storage.
EskeRahn: This seems like a project done just because it is possible.I find it hard to find any other reason...
Personal satisfaction, the admiration of your peers, and most important: publicity.
A better commercial would be to show a muscular guy shooting his DSLR, with camera in one hand while the other does curls with a telephoto lens. He hands his camera to a curious onlooker who immediately collapses because his atrophied arms can't support the weight. An Olympus salesman appears and hands the feeble guy a camera, who is overjoyed to discover there are cameras made for people like him. The athletic and lame guy then become photography friends.
So the buckles on the front are non-functional and just for looks??? I was going to comment on how buckles are completely impractical for a bag you want frequent and easy access to. But from the video, it seems they don't actually fasten anything. If so, why are they even there? Just for that retro look?
I'm OK with items with a strong emphasis on style, but it needs to be functional style. IMHO, false buckles just cheapen the bag. It basically says: I am pretending to have a retro bag.
Dimit: German made I presume..great choise..I love the brand,I love the A7 series combination with.
Fotomagazin says they're made in Japan.
Peter Galbavy: Canon, you've got it wrong again.
I have had a CP510 for years and it's a great little printer. When the media cost was low and online 6x4 prints costs about the same it was a nice idea. Since then the price of online prints (or booths in some shops) had dramatically dropped and the media for Selphys have skyrocketed it's become less of a value proposition *unless* you are isolated in a field somewhere. Then add the extremely poor Canon support for updating drivers and you have an even poorer proposition.
Now the CP1000 without WiFi for more than the CP910 which does it with only CF card support as an addition? I'm confused by who they are taregtting...
I'd guess they're targeting people with cameras that have CF cards and lack wifi, which makes up a lot of Canon users.
So if I wanted to make quick prints from my 5D3 (cf card and no wifi), this would be the one for me. Not sure I'd even use wifi. I'd prefer to just pull the card and save the battery power.
So I wouldn't say they're wrong, just that the CP1000 isn't the model for you.
What if I'm standing 15 ft away from the incident, but have a 15 ft long selfie stick?
wetsleet: Great news. Glassholes will need to forever skirt 15 feet around any wandering police officers.
15 feet from an incident, not from police officers. So if a police officer is arresting someone, you have to stand 15 feet away in order to film them.
AlexisH: I wonder what they'll try after video? Sounds like no one wants the current tech for stills. And then I expect that video will not provide the resolution for professional use and that the amateurs won't have the time and interest to select focus themselves.
I've only rendered HD video, which is very taxing on my i7-4770k processor. So I can only imagine that Lytro video will be very demanding since it will have about 10x the data of conventional video.
M Jesper: I'm European, what's a 5lbs? ^.^
5 lbs is about 1/3 of a stone.
Maybe its more compelling for video shooters. But it seems a lot of video shooters want 4K. A 4K sensor is about 8 megapixels, so for Lytro to pull off 4K they need at least an 80 megapixel sensor.
Maybe they'll develop one? But then you're not just processing a 4K video stream ... but the equivalent of a 40k video stream (all that "light field" data). You're going to need some serious bandwidth, storage, and a computer upgrade...
HowaboutRAW: In 1974, maybe '75, IBM released it's first PC at a cost of something like $50,000, in mid70s dollars. (Irony the PC was at least assembled in Seattle.)
1981, different story.
Look what happened within 20 years to the PC market, and the usefulness of PCs. Every computer development for broad public use that has occured between 1995 and 2015 was well predicted in 1995 by anyone paying attention to computers.
Contrast 1975: Almost none of what came to pass in computers in the next 20 years upto 1995 was being predicted--even by people paying attention to computers. Maybe digital audio. Even into the early 1980s physicists who wanted to demonstrate a new program, software, they'd worked on at a conference would often travel to the conference with the program recorded on punch cards. That's cardboard.
No the Lytro is not likely to be as radical a change to photography as the broad use of a computer, but the nay-sayers here sure sound like many talking about computers in the 1970s.
You shouldn't have to tell stories or belittle doubters if Lytro was so compelling. I could tell another story about how most new businesses fail and most inventions never succeed as a viable product, but that’s irrelevant too. We can only judge the Lytro based on the Lytro technology.Lytro is not a broad category like PCs. It’s a specific camera technology that accomplishes a single specific task. It takes a 40 MP sensor (the current example) and adds patented microlenses to capture direction data. That's it. Lytro is just the microlenses and associated software. The huge downside is that for any given focal plane, you're only using 10% of the sensor data. So it outputs 4 MP photos.
For any given sensor, remove Lytro's microlenses and you get 10x the detail. It seems that most photographers prefer more detail over being able to adjust focus after the fact.
*That* is the reality of Lytro, not a story about people who doubted PCs.
filmrescue: What I've always thought about Lytro cameras for photography...."Well that's really cool but I kind of know what I want in focus when I take the picture - most people do". Hope they have better luck with video...it actually makes a lot more sense. Focus pulling in post would be really useful.
Even for the very first hockey game I shot, most of my images were in focus. I missed a lot of plays, but I certainly didn't miss the game.
My major problems were to do with exposure settings with the ice. By the end of the game I had learned a lot: from exposure settings, panning/tracking subjects, to not missing plays because I was lost in the viewfinder. Lytro doesn't solve those problems. If I wasn't able to problem solve, I would have missed the entire game, and every game that followed. Improving my focus techniques was just one small part of my overall improvement.
Switching to a system where 90% of the sensor data is in a "light field" and only 10% ends up on any given photograph is not a desirable solution to any problem I have.
It sounds like one of those late night infomercials: have trouble using a blanket, get a Snuggie! Can't take an in focus shot, get a Lytro! No thanks, I'll figure both out myself.
If I miss focus, then I review the problem and see where I need to improve for next time. This usually involves different exposure settings and technique.
What I don't do is give up trying to improve and switch to a system that uses a 40 MP sensor to produce a 4 MP image. I'd rather have a few great 40 MP shots than trade all that information for an adjustable "light field" image that only outputs 4 MP.
If I was OK with 4 MP, I'd just use a point and shoot, where most of everything will be in focus anyway.
Francis Sawyer: Canon is so far out in the weeds, it's pathetic.
Still no intervalometers in their cameras (a simple, essentially free feature that every modern camera should have). Their lenses still have shitty servo rings instead of real mechanical focusing action.
They don't even have a reasonable 35mm lens. They have two overpriced boondoggles with IS systems in them. At 35mm? Really?
It's as if no one over there knows anything about photography OR video.
The 5Ds and 5Dr have an intervalometer.
The 35/1.4L lens doesn't have IS.
IS is useful at all focal lengths when shooting video or handheld shots in low light.
Jogger: Sony A6000 looks best to me, esp. RAW and fine detail.
Keep in mind that the A6000 shots were taken with the rather excellent FE 55/1.8, which is significantly sharper than the EF 50/1.4 used for the 7Dii shots.
mpgxsvcd: Why would the camera choose 1/400 shutter duration in aperture priority mode in low light? That just doesn’t make any sense. 1/120 or perhaps even 1/60 would work just fine for this scene with no movement. Was this with Auto ISO or a manually set ISO?
My guess is a manually set ISO. The purposes of these photos is not to win a contest, but to show images at various settings and conditions.
jorg14: Did I miss something but with touting all the manual controls, where is the PASM.. knob?
There's on "A" (auto) setting on the shutter and aperture dials. Put one or both on "A" to select your desired auto mode.