None of these camera's are very compact, but the FZ1000 certainly not. It is bigger than most entry and mid range dslrs, and even than some enthusiast dslrs (like the K-3)
II stellar for me
BobORama: "Raping the Internet has never been so easy!"
How is this any different from downloading the CC images and printing them? Not very different at all.
As for these images competing with "fine art" photographers - how? Not everything that is CC is something you'd want a poster print of. e.g.
And to be honest, the difference between "artist" and the rest of us is time and money.
Apparently Flickr shows the option when you are logged in (even though it's labeled NC) They expect me to order my own pics from them it seems.
It's different because flickr is making money from it. $30 for a eight by ten inch. I think this is in violation of CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
russbarnes: Also, can't believe they've released this before further lenses...
who needs lenses. You can adapt so much to it.
Did they 3-dprint that body? Those lenses don't seem to have enough angle of view to create a 360 dome (like the Ricoh Theta).
That's what you get for not giving it a Gold award dpreview. Now the design team has gone bonkers. But hey at least it isn't a gangsta version like the Brikk's
When I buy a 360-degree 3d television I'll think aboot it.
Adrien S: This Pentax body seems to be such a bargain for the features it offers...Or at least, it's better than what Hasselblad offers for that price.Pentax really is making things better for photographers.
It's not a lot bigger than a Nikon D4 or Canon 1Dx It has less height. Just more depth because of the registry distance. It has a great grip. For landscape photographers this will be a great camera (it has weather sealing).
It doesn't matter. There are plenty of other camera's out there.
Andy Dan: Stupid launch imo. The Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 Contemporary Macro sells for 500$ and it's faster and has macro capabilities. It lacks weather sealing indeed but who needs weather sealing in a slow variable aperture zoom like this new Pentax? Pro's won't use it, enthusiasts won't use it...A new version of the DA 17-70mm F4 AL would have been much better...
Pentaxforums does not agree. It rates both older sigma's better. http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-sigma-17-70mm-comparison/conclusion-ratings.html
This fixation with corner sharpness at large wide angle apertures seems a bit omphaloskeptical.
Photozone didn't test de 17-70/2.8-4 on Pentax but the previous model 2.8-4.5. They did test it on the Nikon D7000 where it scores very well. http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/822-sigma1770284os?start=2
bold statement. Do you mean the overpriced http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Nikon/AF-S-DX-Zoom-Nikkor-17-55mm-f-2.8G-IF-ED
That's the end of the fun then....
miiicho: 3.15 x 1.65 x 1.06 inches ?I don't buy it unless it's metric!
"the organization will display 70 portraits from a submission of 1184 photographs,"
so plenty of pictures left for rejects from the rejects exhibition exhibition.
vladimir vanek: To all those DOF-obsessed: there is a thing called Speedbooster. I CAN have FF-like bokeh on M43 with big lenses plus a more portable system at the same time...
yeah I just threw out my d4 because of you and it killed the mailman. Can't post anymore the cops are klh/eg;r
You think Sigma uses window glass that filters out colours? Yeah you are going to get field curvature at 17mm and yeah the corners are going to be soft at 2.8. That's why you stop down. 2.8 is for low light or bokeh, where corners matter less. The Sigma is a fine and sharp lens. Best bang for buck for any dslr. Only brand snobs who won't touch third party gear would disagree.
that's standard Nikon. Set it to vibrant