monkeybrain: Does anyone else suspect that this model is really to introduce the new slightly larger design that can later accommodate a larger sensor more easily?
It's bigger because it's got a higher capacity battery the np-95 which is also in the x100 series.
D1N0: This looks pretty good, though I rue the loss of the ovf. The camera looks better with one on it because of the retro styling. The evf will probably be better, but it's not retro. They probably should have gotten rid of some real estate on the front though, because of the missing OVF. Understandably they did not use a 1" sensor. It would have required a new lens design. Much larger. The RX100 III has a 24-70 equivalent lens, this is 28-112. The camera would cost at least $200 more lifting it out of it's price class.
Yeah and you'll have a 35-105 equivalent. 28 wide is already on the high side by today's standards.
The Name is Bond: As a red-green colour blind individual, I appreciate the colours chosen for that graph. Presumably deliberately, so unusual that I can easily for once distinguish between the lines.
How did you ever get through international super spy school being colour blind?
This looks pretty good, though I rue the loss of the ovf. The camera looks better with one on it because of the retro styling. The evf will probably be better, but it's not retro. They probably should have gotten rid of some real estate on the front though, because of the missing OVF. Understandably they did not use a 1" sensor. It would have required a new lens design. Much larger. The RX100 III has a 24-70 equivalent lens, this is 28-112. The camera would cost at least $200 more lifting it out of it's price class.
Hopefully no critters or vermin were harmed during the shooting of these great pics.
JDThomas: Ohhh! Let me be the first to complain about how expensive this camera is! Only dumb rich people can buy this camera!
Yeah but that's part of the charm ;) You can tell it's been used. Anyway there would be an exclusive re lacquering service for only $1999,95 (tax excluded).
And it doesn't even come with a lacquered wooden handle. Which would quadruple the price....
Any IBIS camera should have this ;)
Josh SZ: Sony 7s is a small part of this impressive system. But it is impressive indeed.
Cine lenses also have stopless apertures so you don't get brightness jumps when changing aperture.
Robert Eckerlin: Yes, I too will not buy a camera without View Finder.
And as long, as the quality (among other the brightness and colors) of the image shown in the EVF does not get comparable to the quality of the images shown in reasonable Optical viewfinders: I will also not buy a camera without OVF. The pleasure of looking via VF at the photo that i will soot is an extremely important part of my overall pleasure of taking photographies.
Can I please ask experts: why is the quality of the image shown in EVF not comparable to the quality of the image shown in "reasonble" optical viewfinders (e,g. the OVF of the NIKON D5000)? Is it really impossible to build at a reasonable price cameras having EVFs with pleasant image quality?
And why does Dpreview not rate or comment the quality of the Images shown in EVFs? I would appreciate very much to read such comments, in order to motivate me from time to time to take a look at new camera having (according dpreview) EVFs with an excellent image quality.
That's why Sony is offering the A6000 and NEX-7. This camera is for people who do not want a VF. Now they don't have to pay for it. :p
The lack of dedicated controls bothers me. It's a camera for P-mode only.
W5JCK: I'm thinking at that price it also comes with a second mortgage! :) Looks like something the military or NASA would have bought, as they overpay for everything. But seriously, who was it actually designed for? I cannot think of any commercial application where it would have been cost effective. You can get a damn good 1200mm telescope, even at f/5.6, for a fraction of the money. I cannot believe AF would justify the extra 95% of the cost! :0
Paparazzi. For de right shot, you can get a lot of money.
throw in a rebel and I'm game...
Poweruser: I guess this camera is fine and all. But it´s still a brick and a technological dead-end. I know my little mirrorless is "worse" on paper. But so much more fun to have it with me all day.
Couple the D810 with a decent Nikon zoom and what you get is almost grotesque in size and weight.
Poweruser is doing just that Barn Ed. I just reworded it a bit. @Fogsprig your cat pic would have looked a lot better when you would have used a decent FF :p.
If only the m43 crew would stop their "sieg heil m43" campaign and calling larger formats and dslrs obsolete dinosaurs. As if the mere existence of them is threatening their holy format.
I am wrong because someone shot a roller derby on m43? Fascinating.
Smaller sensor is different DOF because of different focal length's and also the sharpness transition is different. It gives FF an airier more roomy feel. M43 can't do that. It is always more compressed.
No m43 camera can make pictures like this.
Jan Luursema: Why doesn't this article mention these are just rebranded Kata bags? (Which Manfrotto has taken over, or "merged with")Or is this an advertorial? If so the article should say so.
because it is more of a advertorial than serious news
RichRMA: Even with a red band, half plastic...
metal bad plastic good! NO! Plastic bad metal good! urgh!