There's no LCD on the back of the M246? Odd, the M240 has one, as does image 7 above.
AF is over-rated, except for sports.
Several things:-There's a lot more "perfection" today, partly because SLR (and now LV/EVF cams) allow more accurate composition, and fast PDAF means people concentrate on getting the right moment.-The skill requirement is still there. With tech like SLRs and fast PDAF, images are more impressive, but expectations rise too.-Not retro does not mean "vulgar". -"everybody seems to be an expert" - perhaps, if your expectations haven't gone up with technology. It's easy now to make adequate images. "Experts" are those whose images are a cut above the rest.-No sane person despises fellow amateurs because of what brand they use. Using Leica is great, as long as you have fun. Same applies to Canon, Nikon, etc.
iirc that was with a D600 and an AF-I 300/2.8. I don't know if Leica makes M lenses that long (couldn't find one with brief searching), but if they did, I'd like to see someone try to MF that. :)D3s - the question is how the Leica's sensor compares to the D3s's sensor, if you just did a straight B/W conversion on the Nikon without downsizing. Or, at that price, the D4s's sensor.
This is where AF comes in handy:https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/1229986_10151857334962082_605821548_n.jpg?oh=d7280fb8ff3850c7f893e77f735d0e06&oe=55F572C5
With regards to B/W: a plain B/W sensor makes sense if you need more sensitivity. No color filters = more light, and noise is less intrusive with B/W. But for low light, I'd pick up a D3s first (or for money-is-no-issue people, a D4s). At least when they turn the lights back on, color's an option.
Sports, or whenever anything's moving. That ends up being a lot of situations. Sony's FF mirrorless cams wouldn't be my first choice for those situations, though.
The Leica does look really nice though.
Timbukto: IMO very luke warm. SLT grabs 1/2 stop of light, IBIS is not very good, and tracking is not the greatest. So why even bother with the DSLT form factor...
That only makes sense if you already have a collection of those lenses.If you're just getting into a system, everyone else has good lenses (including good old lenses) too. Actually, Nikon and Pentax would be better because their really old MF lenses can still be used.
LastChance4U: For the premium that Nikon charges for their products, they sure do have a lot of recalls/issues.
I'm having trouble parsing that - do you mean that they somehow damaged their manufacturing capabilities by not catching design issues before shipping? or that camera companies don't believe in fixing things at all (replace send with and)?
Still better than not fixing it at all
D1N0: With aps-c moving to 24mp and even 28, 16 is just not going to cut it anymore. Eventually m43 will be a niche for street photographers who don't crop.
If someone's shooting a D4s or 1D X, there's a fair chance they're willing to put down the money (aka not their money) for a very long telephoto.
Also, the need for higher resolution might go down as fewer people print and more view pictures onscreen. But then screen resolutions are increasing. Right now a 4K screen is somewhat affordable, and has about 8 MP. It'd be interesting to see what the future holds.
Depends on what you're doing. If you're not cropping or printing large, 16 MP can be enough.
chlamchowder: Looks like they're on Windows 7, with quad core CPUs (or 2-core CPUs with hyper-threading). And it looks like their CAD software is only loading two threads.
Also, standing desks...
Well, I said "that doesn't make porting code between Mac and Linux any easier". Looks like we agree.
It could be argued either way. I'm sure there's some engineering software that runs on OS X, and some that don't (i.e. Autodesk Inventor). But the ability to dual boot a modern Mac makes that debate moot anyways.
Macs are Linux-y - probably refers to Linux/Mac OS sharing a common ancestor (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Unix_history-simple.png). Windows IIRC is on a separate line. That doesn't make porting code between Mac and Linux easier though.
How did an observation about their computer setups turn into a Linux vs Mac vs Windows debate? Also, if we're going to have that debate, don't call anyone a fanboy or troll.
They probably have that setup because:-their software is written for windows-it's cheaper to get to a certain performance point when you can choose from more hardware manufacturers (with Mac your choices are limited)
I doubt there's more to it.
Looks like they're on Windows 7, with quad core CPUs (or 2-core CPUs with hyper-threading). And it looks like their CAD software is only loading two threads.
Tom Nokin: The importance of this release will be decided by the correctness of Tamrons first point in their press release. If it is on par or close to the quality of Nikon 14-24 it will be a bestseller.
I suppose an important question would be how much of a difference 14mm makes (vs 15mm).
chlamchowder: At least batteries with poor contact are more manageable than ones that like to explode.
All I have to say is wow. It's incredible you didn't realize:1. That comment was sarcastic2. 'Better than a miniature bomb' is a low standard3. Manageable =/= something you want to deal with4. I'm not condoning defective gear (see #2, 3)5. I'm not defending Canon (see #2, 3, 4)
Here's a revised comment for those without a sense of humor:"This situation is better than one in which a battery explodes and damages the camera and/or user. That said, it's a problem and I'm glad Canon's fixing it."
btw I shoot Nikon, so no pro-Canon bias here.
At least batteries with poor contact are more manageable than ones that like to explode.
photofan1986: Don't see the point: that's p&s quality. You'd be better off with a good bridge camera.
Though I still wouldn't buy this personally (just because I'm picky about image quality), I agree that there's a justification for it. The convenience of having everything from wideangle to long telephoto in one zoom lens can help "get the shot".
For example, if a bird is coming at you from long range, and then lands a meter away, you can smoothly zoom out and keep shooting. With a 300/2.8, or even a 70-200/2.8, you would have to run back to keep within minimum focus distance. You could run a dual camera setup, but even then there's more transition delay in switching cameras than zooming out more.
As for pros, if a 24-450mm f/2.8 existed that was sharp wide open, they'd be all over it. Sadly that lens doesn't exist.
I wouldn't call it P&S quality, but it definitely isn't what I'd want from a $600 lens.
I suppose my expectations are just too high, and it's probably acceptable to a lot of people who want the massive zoom range in a compact setup.
vladimir vanek: Someone should stop google from their spy activities. It's/will be really dangerous that a private company has so much data in possession... And excavates more everaday from your emails, searches, tracking, calling etc.
Ok, point taken (about Prism and other NSA projects). But at least consumer feedback and market forces have some effect on big companies. Google and Apple are moving to default encryption on phones. Microsoft fought back in a case where the government tried to get access to emails. All that happened because of customer privacy concerns.
I'm still concerned about companies like Google, but I'm more concerned about the NSA, which pretty much can't be held accountable for anything.
That's how they make money - by using that data for targeted advertising. You give up some privacy, and in return get nice things like free storage space (drive) and so on.
It's scary, but I'm more concerned about governments than Google or other tech companies. If your views are too far away from the ruling party's ideology, Google/MS/Apple/Amazon won't care and probably never will. Governments on the other hand.....(at least the US isn't there, yet.)