Scubadu: The E-mount 23mm looks super nice. I'm also very curious about the 35mm 1.4 on E-mount.
SLR Magic, if you are listening- please change the name of your compnay, or at least the lineup. It's very confusing. I also hope that you can set up distributors in the US or Europe. As an individual user I don't want to deal with customs or put a big purchase on PayPal.
Don't worry. They won't last two more years. There is no way that the other big firms will allow this unbridled innovation to continue. Someone will buy them out, whatever the price, change the name and then cut quality. It's inevitable.
This look awsome! The main reason I am hesitating investing in M4/3 camera system is because here are so few bright AND wide lenses. Thank you SLR Magic for this development.
Where are the prices and availability listed? I can't find the 'press release' and the SLR Magic web site is very incomplete.
Any chance that there is a bright 8.5mm lens in the works for m4/3 by anybody?
These non-electronic 'dumb' lenses make total sense with the new cameras with focus peaking. It is very intuitive and you can see the focal plane in the live view as a virtual live section through the scene. That makes these type of bright MFT lenses combined with the cameras that lack an OVF very logical and affordable workflow to get high quality work on a non-pro budget. And just to have FUN again!
Spectacle99: Prices I'm seeing for this look like they're going to be in the seriously expensive range. $1299 for the body alone, according to Amazon. Other stories indicating that the standard bundle will be with the very nice 35-100mm lens, and that the package will be around $2000. Wow.
Edit: Although, now I look at it, if the body goes for $1299, I'd be surprised if the bundle is as low as $2000, since the two weathersealed, high quality Lumix lenses are about $1400-$1500 each. So maybe more like $2200? This is, of course, just a guess.
The GH3 with the 12-35mm f2.8 as a kit for $2,000 would sell like hot cakes. I know I would run to the bank for that combo.
mosc: I'm still system free and looking for a video-focused, tele focused, ILC camera but I'm not sure this sits well with me. If anything, it's making me look for a GH2. I'm not going to be doing a whole lot of post work on anything I pick and that seems to be the main additional feature (bitrate stuff) compared to the GH2.
I like the A65 a lot, the viewfinder is amazing. I also like the E-M5. The IBIS in both really appeal to me compared to the panasonics. Then again, the panny 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS looks like a winner so I wouldn't need it. APS-C gets me the Sigma 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM though, and 750mm equiv seems awesome.
Also, the ETC feature is awesome. Unique to the GH2/GH3 right?
Advice? Main use case: boredom at little league games from the stands.
I was also looking to go for the Sony a77 with the 16-55 f2.8 but then I found some reviews online and I don't think I will be going there. Do you know the Sony has an additional crop factor for video?!? and the AF tracking durring video on the a77 is pretty sad. Glad they are innovating though and hope they work it out.
What would I need to use the Olympus ED 12-60mm f.2.8-4 lens with this camera and retain all functionality and weather protection of the camera and lens?
Is it the Olympus MMF-3 adpater?
It will not be permitted to to have FLASH, pop-up or otherwise.
Canon already made an i-pod that you attach to a lens - the EOS M. Just make it thinner, add the half eaten apple, and charge some insane price.
Oh but the User Interface!!! Power zoom would be controled only by two-finger touch screen of course. Apeture and shutter control would be apps that you need to download for $5 each.
They try too hard.... no seriously, they TRY too hard. To call it ape butt ugly would be a compliment. They have gone Lunar-toons.
I love everything about the GH3 except the price and the compact sensor in a mid size camera. Compared to the Sony A77 with 16-55 f2.8 - The GH3 has a smaller sensor (size and pixels) and the same size body. And it costs a lot more with the G X 12-35 f2.8 lens. Thanks for pushing the price of the Sony A77 down so I can afford it now. I don't do profesional film shooting.
d2f: I wonder how the old school Samyang lens will compare to the Sigma 8-16 lens. Since the Sigma has AF, supports a electronic interface and has a zoom range that provides another level of control. I know it produces great images since I own one. Given that current DSLR cameras have high sensitivity and the depth of field of a wide angle lens is significant is there is any real need for a 2.8 lens? It is my opinion that current DSLR cameras are fairly difficult to focus manually, since their focusing screens are not optimized for manual focusing, unless there is a focus confirmation, which appears to be missing on this lens, with maybe the exception of the Nikon mount. Also this lens does not appear to have a old school depth of field scale on the lens barrel, which may limit its usefulness when it is needed.
An f2.8 lens is not at all the same as an f.4.5 lens. There is a huge void in almost all lens lines for large apeture wide angle lenses. Good luck trying to find a 17-35mm (FF equiv) f2.8 lens for any camera system except full frame (135). Nice to see somone trying to fill that void.
Very nice but WAY expensive. I guess they are forced to keep it that high to avoid cutting their own throat on the other products. Too bad. Unlike Sony with the a99, Nikon can't have had that much development cost since they already have a full line stretching on either side of this camera.
Not that it really matters, but it looks exactly like every other Nikon for the last ten years.
They should call it 'Shrek"
Mr_Beast: Are the specs above incorrect? no gps etc? the official Sony page seems to suggest otherwise...
Specs here say GPS - BuiltIn Glasses not included
Nice to see a really wide angle zoom but I would have much rather had more aperture than the power zoom. Oh well. looks like lots of nice stuff coming out.
mpgxsvcd: That looks like a terrific camera for the very controlled environments it is meant to be used in.
You wouldn't take this as a walk around camera just as you wouldn't choose a point and shoot for studio shots. It is a purpose built camera and when used correctly for that purpose it would be exceptional.
I wonder how long it will be before we have 500 megapixel cameras with ultra wide lenses and we just crop the image down instead of zooming.
Is 1.6 Gigapixel enough?http://www.dgcam.org/dgCam/Home.htmlOnly $25,000 with lens
Vitruvius: What can you expect when Nokia had to fake the footage for the ad with a DSLR....
Makes you wonder how often they do this and don't get caught. Shouldn't this be false advertising, like Sketchers?
No, I don't believe advertisements.... I just thought that there was supposed to be some sort of accountability to the public through some system, like in Canada here we have the Competition Bureau and Competition Act which makes this illegal. Just don't understand how so many companies can get away with this so blatantly.http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/02776.html
AbrasiveReducer: Honestly, I hope it's great and sells for $49. But another thing to bear in mind is that because everything in a TS lens is adjustable, there won't be any profiles for correcting barrel, or other distortion. In other words, there won't be any auto corrections in Lightroom, Photoshop or even DxO (because everything is dependent on how the lens is adjusted). This is a problem even with Nikon and Canon PC/TS lenses, if you need everything to look straight and square.
The purpose of the lens is to avoid all the IQ loss that comes with post exposure warping. You can also shift the plane of focus out of parallel with the sensor plane which is almost impossible post exposure. If you don't care about that stuff then this lens will seem like a waste of money.
When the top of the highrise building across the street is a quarter the size of the bottom of the building and you don't have a TS lens, you have to shoot a whole bunch of images and stitch them together and then correct for optical distortion if you don't want to lose massive amounts of information when you STREEEETCH the building. Or the TS lens can do it for you optically in a single shot by essentially zooming in on the top of the building and zooming out at the bottom. TS lenses are awesome but far too expensive.
What can you expect when Nokia had to fake the footage for the ad with a DSLR....
wyoming: this is very interesting, i prefer the m4/3 compactess but this camera is very interesting. in my opinion mirrorless will eat the dslr market in the next years.
Next stop down memory lane for camera makers... Twin Lens Reflex! Would love to see a Rollieflex or Mamiya C220 style camera in digital format with traditional Optical Viewfinder on top, perhaps enhanced with digital information like the heads-up displays. Would be very retro and functional for waist level shooting, travel, portrait, etc.