photo_rb: It kills me that companies bring out small light camera bodies that would be ideal for UAV (drone) or any remote use if only they could add a couple small features such as AV output and remote triggering.I know this can be done with WiFi but probably distance limited.
Weighs a porky 11oz (I assume w/o lens), costs $1200, and The sensor size seems small (13.056mm x 7.344mm).The 4/3 sensor has a 22.5mm diagonal.
At 11+ ounces, you can instead use a normal m43 camera or LX100, Rx100, Ricoh GR (only 8 ounces). Versus the Oly Air weighs only FIVE ounces and costs only $300!
It has 4k video, but that will soon be commonplace.
GM1 has the slow 1/50s mechanical shutter, but on the other hand, it seems the Oly only has electronic shutter? I wonder how fast it truly is to capture a whole frame - the "flash sync" speed in other words.
mpgxsvcd: Useless for astronomy with its 4 second shutter speed limitation. That is the area where it had the most potential.
Shoot, I assumed it also had a mechanical shutter.Oly PM2's have the shutter shock issue, but overall it's the camera I've been leaning towards due to low cost used and low weight. GM1 has a slow 1/50s shutter (flash sync speed, which is the actual speed the shutter moves at).
Does it have a timelapse/timer mode? I've been doing AP since 2007 yet do not "trigger" the camera. I simply shoot continuously (rubber bands hold the shutter down), which works great because there' no way you'll hit the trigger very many times, and therefore will miss many interesting shots. Many times my interesting shots are 180 degrees from the "subject" that I planned to shoot.
It only weighs 7 ounces with the 14mm F2.5 lens. GM1 bodies are still selling for $200+ used on ebay.
This was done years ago on 1 or 2 cameras but it did not work well: "Equally it would have been nice to gain a four-shot, 16MP mode that offered Foveon-like full color resolution images, but I'm not going to criticize a pretty cool new feature for not offering something that I hadn't even thought about until I played with this camera."
Pandimonium: Is that the future? 24hr surveillance from space?
I agree 100%. As I wrote above, it's NOWHERE near enough resolution, but the paranoid crowd will be up in arms over this. One engineer at work even thought goolemaps' satellite view continuously monitored the whole world - he thought the images were live! And this was an engineer, imagine what average Joe's think!
Luckily, 99.9999999999999% of the time, I'm not walking around outside naked (only did once when I was 4 years old, on a dare). and that video has nowhere near the resolution to tell one person from another or see body parts, but the whacko paranoid types will be worried over it.
well not hardly seeing each video is of .000000000000001% of the earth.
I think most of us would extract a still image from video as a secondary/bonus feature - most of us wouldn't take 4k video with the goal being to get a still image. Also, cameras shot full res stills at very high speeds nowadays...even at 5FPS, you will have almost as many keepers of group shots as you will at 30FPS (IF all of the kids have their mouths shut, they ought to remain shut for 1/5th of a second for Pete's sake!).
lacikuss: If you alredy own canon gear I'd recommend save a litle bit more money and get the FF 6d at $1,399 Body only in Adorama.
If you're looking into APS-C sensored camera without any past equipment then the Sony A6000 is the best overall for the price.
Lots of fixed costs - engineering/labor, profit, advertising; etc. Large cars don't cost more to make than a small car (and don't sell for much more either if similarly equipped).
I'm somewhat surprised that m43 lenses are not much cheaper than larger lenses actually...they need to make a profit and pay for engineering...lots of costs are fixed regardless of lens size apparently. Similar to how a small car isn't much cheaper to manufacture than a larger car.
nananananana: I'm not convinced the sailboat example is an issue related to not having micro adjustment.
Why, because it's a non-STM L lens on a crop body. The 760D focuses much better with STM lenses.
(On the "recommended lenses" on the canon site for the 760D, they have STM lenses as the choices, 18-55 STM, 15-135 STM, 24 STM, 40mm STM , 50-250, STM new 50mm STM, and so forth. None of them are older USM lenses. Canon does recommend STM for the 760D)
The lens you used is an older $2000 USM lens, not a recommended STM. Also not a standard lens at all for a crop body, I don't know that many people putting $2000 glass on low range cameras.
As several youtube peeps have shown, non-STM lenses, are focusing slower and less accurate. I have not heard of anyone having STM focus issues.
If you can reproduce this issue on an STM lens, but I have my doubts.
I wonder if they expect/suspect users will mostly use Live View.
Scott Eaton: One thing, or two things than have driven me nuts with older Canon dSLRs like the 7D is their blatant habit of 'sludging' up warm and saturated colors, especially magenta's and reds. This was an eventual deal breaker for shooters like myself when dealing with macro, or just needing some degree of color accuracy. The second problem is colorblind Canon fanbois who are blatantly oblivious of the problem when it's obvious looking at the test chart here compared to the 7D.
For a consumer orientated camera it's nice to see Canon has finally fixed the problem. At the least the 750D has come close to matching the detail and color resolution of the Nikon 7100, although it can't match the Nikon's low noise floor at higher ISOs.
I think some cameras reduce/hide red because that's where the noise is.
nananananana: what I like about them
-horizontal level assist on T6S-top LCD on T6S-considerably lighter than a 70D-pictures all look natural on them, true to life-3X video zoom is LOSSLESS, that's amazing, it makes a 300mm into a 900mm lens by choosing center pixels
what I don't like about them-1080p at 30FPS, ugh, make it 60FPS already-viewfinder, 0.82 pentamirror. ugh (less than the much cheaper SL1 with 0.87, seriously, what the hell?)
what I don't care about-the fact they don't have micro adjust, frankly I don't care, I think it'[s overrated, most are going to be using the kit / pancake lenses and 50-250mm crop tele, it's not going to be an issue, too much fuss about this, personal opinon
Overall I think they will ge good camera, all considered.
Also, I want an SL2 with the new sensor!
Can use CDAF/Liveview for landscapes, and I always manual focus when shooting a baseball pitcher, for example.At 24MP though, there should be a micro adjust option.
Larger lenses inherently due to physics do not need as high of resolution per mm because they have a lot more millimeter's.And the fact that each pixel on a FF sensor is larger helps too.
Joseph Black: You say this occurred in most sailboat shots. Were the all moving away from you at a speed that might get them a couple of feet outside the focus plane between your focus lock and shutter release? I guess I'm asking, was this a swift click or was there a delay between focus and release?
Sailboat looks far away and isn't going 100MPH...and his focus point is clearly right on the sail. To test PDAF, he should have shot in CDAF/LiveView mode too, but he didn't know he had an issue until later....
If the AF sensor (which is NOT located on the sensor) is not in the exact/expected location (due to random manufacturing differences), the PDAF sensor will think the image is in focus (because it IS in focus at the PDAF location), but it is not in focus at the sensor's location. None of this has anything to do with the type of lens.
JJ Rodin: Bad photographer or ?
Author complained about the auto ISO in A mode, he said he could 'resort' to M. Well as a reminder, there is also a Tv mode that allows choosing a shutter speed and I would hope the cam would choose an appropriate ISO ? Hmmm.
Intentional lapse of memory or intentionally producing a reason for negative comment - and Yes, a 1/30 or 1/40s shutter is too slow for most situ.
if light is low, and therefore you need auto-ISO, you ought to be shooting wide open anyhow. Yes, more options is always better though.
CNY_AP: To increase ISO, are other cameras/sensors using fixed amplification and software/firmware to brighten the images instead of solely using electronic amplifiers? Amplifiers always add noise, so maybe using them is a mistake???
I agree...seems to me there has to be some amplification (hopefully very close to the pixel) because the amount of energy from each pixel has to be tiny (a pre-amplifier).
With feature sizes of CPU's getting so small, one would think they could fit A/D circuitry on the image sensor...or at least do something such as convert volts to frequency (voltage to freq converter is simple), and then read the frequency off-sensor).
BSI would/should allow them to put more circuitry on the sensor w/o losing/blocking light.