Jim Evidon: Until you technical experts have the opportunity to read the patent application to see what Olympus is doing exactly, your comments need to be restrained.You may very well be ultimately correct, but the article does not present enough information for you to say it won't work, will lose half the light, etc. Crystal balls are fine in their place, but are highly suspect.
Apparently the information is enough. If one does not use a polarizing beamsplitter, but rather uses a single pixel to record polarization, he loses 50% of photons per this pixel. Or one could sacrifice on contrast between polarised and unpolarized light. One can surely say that much, unless Olympus invented new physics. The question is how many such pixels they will be using, and how well does the reconstruction using a subset of such pixel work. At this point I am agree with you - we'd rather sit and wait for more information.
servic: Well, I still like my Canon G1x mark II more. With touch screen, longer zoom and no issues with the lens cap...
I am very much satisfied with the image quality of G1x mark II, otherwise I would not start with the handling issues. I don't care about brands like leica really and I am not planning to buy a dedicated device for playing 4K videos in the next few years.
Well, I still like my Canon G1x mark II more. With touch screen, longer zoom and no issues with the lens cap...
Catalin Stavaru: It seems that the Canon campaign had its desired effect. This article seems to have the largest number of comments in dpreview's history :)
Then Canon should probably do much more of it. Like "This young black man dying from Ebola was shot by a Canon camera".
There is a tiny error in the conclusion stating:
"The Coolpix P7700 offers a bigger zoom lens, with a focal range of 24-200mm, but it's slower, with a max aperture range..."
I'd wish Nikon camera were a 24-200 indeed.
I do not like this camera as it looks like putting an elephant on mouse legs. The camera is neither really a wide angle nor has a sensible tele (like most of others). You can't do any reasonable portraits with it and wide angle is too long for the skies. I wonder if there were a market for two cameras LX7 + a compact camera with say some 60-300 with f2.0. And say selling two such cameras in a combo at reduced price?
cplunk: So instead of reusing your stolen lens it get a quick bash with a hammer and tossed in the garbage.
It's not going to save anyone from having there gear stolen. If a thief has the opportunity to take it they will. If it has a password on it making it unusable, they aren't going to then return it.
There are rare occasions of the stuff being found. Thieves are also different. Some of them may not damage it. Anyway, if I don't get my lens back, I'd prefer it rather being damaged than to support a thief.
mfineman: Also, all antitheft stuff does on car radios is get additional damage doneto the vehicle or driver due to angry thiefs.
If you were thinking of terrorists would you oppose them? It just makes them angrier, right?
AbrasiveReducer: The problem with all these schemes is that the guy who steals your camera/computer/stereo doesn't know he needs a password.
Well, It is good enough for me that a thief can't live off my lens. Otherwise, this is an additional benefit to recognize your own lens wenn found.
Mike Strong: Breathtakingly ridiculous! I cannot imagine who came up with that one. Maybe Nikon lost all of its photographers (kind of like Microsoft seems to have lost its core programmers). You, know, people who actually use the product. I can just see trying to login as I pull my camera up for a "fast" shot.
We used to call the old "ever-ready" camera cases "never-ready" cases because it always took so long to drop the front and open the camera. Password input would be far worse or any kind of biometric ID device (gloves in winter, bloodshot eyes, different hold or tripod mounted, etc.).
If a password-protected device is stolen it is more likely to land in some dumpster out of frustration on the part of the thief instead of finding its way back to me.
More cynically, maybe this is just a way to control your hardware so that is it never really yours. Not so far from the recent trends to rent you a license for software (i.e. cs6) at roughly 5.5 times what it usually costs me to upgrade.
I don't know the details, but I would imagine you won't be required to enter a password every time. If the lens recognizes a camera, you won't be required to enter it.
I'd guess setting a password is also optional. So why complain?
TheWoodMaven: I truly believe that some bright young MBA at Nikon came up with this scheme and sold it to management by touting it's "virtue" of making reselling of lenses just a bit harder. I have bought lenses on eBay and can just imagine the seller giving you the wrong code so you have another thing to complain to eBay about. What happens to guys like me who own half a dozen lenses? This has got to be a boondoggle.
I am sure you are a smart kid, you'll find a way to manage your passwords by writing them down. If you see you're no good at managing passwors- just leave it empty.
Did I solve your problem?
I thought it should take at least 1000 years till camera designers would have eventually started supporting jpeg2000 but now I see that something a lot more useful is coming.
don_mateo23: f/3.5-6-8... LOL!!
Would be really handy if DPreview report focal length vs f-stop for those superzooms being compared to each other.
My bet: it won't beat older cameras like TZ7 (f/4.9@300mm).
Yomama: To be honest, The short flange focal distance of the nex is what makes it so difficult for them to produce decent fixed primes that are not bigger/longer then it needs . It's pure physics, small body (with short FD)=bigger lenses (NEX), normal body (with normal FD)=normal lenses (Fuji & Samsung), and big body (with long FD)=small lenses (Pentax).
The market is longing for faster pancake lenses with high IQ..... Sony will have a hard time doing so. M43 seems to be hitting the sweet spot with the size of the body and collection of lenses. I also think Pentax K-01 will do a lot better than we think.
Please do the math of adding up the lenses length of Sony's 16mm (23mm), 24mm (66mm) & 50mm (62mm) and compare to Pentax's 21mm (25mm), 40mm (15mm), 70mm Ltd (26mm)........ Ouch Sony. Ouch
Ok, CFynn, even if pancake design is not totally symmetric (see e.g. http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_25_2p8_o20/) you can still move the rear lens further away from the sensor if required, even if the flange focal distance is short. It doesn't matter if it is symmetric or not.
Short flange focal distance is not a problem at all, since FFD is the distance between the flange and the sensor (not the rear lens!). You just stick the lens deeper behind the flange. You can easily design symmetric lenses in 18-30 mm range in pancake format.
Every time a small-sensor mirrorless camera comes out I'm hoping that the optics prices will go down. I hoped some 28-200 mm 2.8-4.5 equivalent like the one seen on earlier cameras like Pro1 or A200 will emerge. It seems it will never be the case though.This is also ridiculous how companies develop huge grenade launchers to be put on tiny cameras like that.