dbo: It is the contest itself to be criticised.
Don't get me wrong - most of the ideas the guys have had are ok, and the composing looks fine for the purpose.
However almost no image has left its authenticity of the moment it was taken.A lot of the winning images don't have a natural look anymore. And, and, and.
Nice arts anyway, but the name of the contest is a joke and potentially blinds reviewers.
A photography contest shall be contest where captured images are in competition. Any falsifying shall be forbidden. If at all post processed than limited to setting compensation (wb, exp comp, etc.).
I am no native english tongue so I assume I did not chose the right words to say what I wanted to say.
It was not my intention to blame heavy post processed photos - I assume I did not.I am well aware that this is part of modern photography these days (and some older days, too).
The point for me is that this contest has had the intention to reward the best image captured by an iPhone and not to reward the best creation out of photoshop or whatever program.
It is the contest itself to be criticised.
Didn't we got this video in DP a couple of month ago together with the blackmagic stuff?
dbo: "The thing about the A7 and A7R that concerns us the most is pricing."
You guys are really funny. What's wrong with the prices? Actually the body prices are quite fair. Neither unliked design nor body size shall be reason to blame the price level.
And btw, both sensors are claimed to be a completely new design, meaning the A7 does not have the A99 sensor, and A7R does not have the D800/E Sensor.
They referring to the body pricing separately.
And yes, 999 for a 55/1.8 is expensive, but it is a Zeiss. Comparing it pricewise to the Nikon is bit of comparing apples and oranges...
"The thing about the A7 and A7R that concerns us the most is pricing."
.....The Lunar has a total other approach - being sold to rich people buying the brand. Golf players, boat owners, H5D owners, etc.Even if some people here don't believe, I am sure the Lunar will not end as a non-seller.
Totally other with the X Vario. Rich people don't mind to pay a bit more for the M9 (looking for the brand), so they don't want to have a proletariat's Leica.Advanced users being able to efford the price of the X Vario certainly will expect more versatility, and probably spent their money on a more matching camera.
Best luck with your (in my mind) bad idea, Leica.
I really love Leica. For me it always has been kind of mystically what Leica designed and built. Especially the high-grade lenses on their systems are among the best this planet has ever seen.
And then they announce this X Vario.I don't doubt that the body will be of high quality. But to be honest - how shall this annoying slow lens convince people to buy this camera?
What is the target group?People buying a X1/2, a RX1, a Nikon A, Fuji X100 are mostly advanced users appreciating fast fixed focal lenses suiting every situation.
Even if the Vario's lens is slow in order to keep maximum possible IQ capability - it simply doesn't match the needs for a "everyday everywhere" camera due the fact of limited speed.
I assume this camera will become a shelf-hugger.
Outstanding quality. nothing else to be expected with htis equipment and the budget for the production.
For me personally at this moment I give a damn on professional 4k video.I would love to buy a FHD camcorder that can capture up to 120 or better 240 fps.
DVN: Why doesn't anybody make a "rugged" camera with raw capture? How hard is it to do? The first company that does will get my business.
+1Was my first thought, too.And why not giving it their 2/3 sensor?
MuMinded: Yep, I'm having me one of these.. Fujifilm makes another winner.
What's wrong with the max aperture?
This camera is just a fun thing man gonna use in 98% of the cases outdoor where enought light should be available.Except if you are caves-diver... :-)
For serious photographing you need some other gear.
PatrickP: the resolution of the said lenses seem to correlate with age more than anything. for premium lenses, the newer ones always resolve more.
Canon had a 24-70/2.8L for quite a while before the Nikon 24-70 shows up. Nikon 24-70 was crowed as the best out of the best for the past 5 years, until the Canon MkII shows up and claimed the throne.
I am sure once a Mark II from Nikon (hopefully with VR) shows up it would be the best again, so would be the Mark III from Canon. it's always a leap-frog between the two.
@Ubiquity99You don't know anything about the Sony-Zeiss history - seemingly.When the coop started it was corporate rule to manufacture the lenses in Japan.The whole Sony-Zeiss fabrication machines, measurement facilities are designed and built by Zeiss. The quality assurance is designed, audited and certified by Zeiss.
So the only thing that is no Zeiss with the Sony-Zeiss'es is the fact that they are not made in Germany.
wakaba: D6 has skewed color space to give glary pics, overamplifying the sensor. Most likely down to give "vibrant" colors at POS. TV makers do this to their shopdisplays too. Something is amiss in Canonland. Wifi is a slow gimmick at 24mb filesize and 200 plus files to download, dual slots much better. High ISO is a gimmick. Pristine 50-100 is happiness.
Better sensor, better 50-100 performance, better AF, better prism, linear and neutral RAW, two cardslots and better lenses. D600 rules.
@chlamchowderI jumped from a900 to a99 because of my high end lens setup.Having become sick of this discussions whether a99 is competitor of D600/6D or D800/5D3 i wanted to make my personal objective judgement.During Photokina I had a chance to play a little bit with all 5, and I'd rather say it plays with the big guys. Really, nothing critical to rave about D600/6D. There are certain basic things, where the a99 is closer to D800/5D3. Shutterspeed, WB, tracking AF, configurability.I agree that EVF is question of taste (I still love my a900's OVF), but putting away the physical cause of loosing ~ a stop High ISO capability the overall IQ again is closer to the big boys.
650D,A57,K-30 not worth to be on the list
A99,D800,5D3 - FF with a bit new technology, but nothing special
XPro and OMD - capable ML, but not too special
Thereare two on the list.Never seen a 1" Sensor in a compact body before as in the RX100, and never seen a FF sensor in a compact before as in the RX1.
Looking on the intermediate results show me that the C/N Fanboy community is so big, that they f... up a objectively meant vote.
It is an interesting spec, as of the Sony G35/1.4 was a very disappointing lens at large apertures where it is basically made for.
I wonder why this lens here is not indicated as "EX" design - isn't it the high end line? If not it would be a little bit overpriced.
Martin is one of the best for sure.Enjoyed the article quite much. Talking straight to my heart.I'm fighting equivalent difficulties in my service area.
And for the ones who feel themselves insulted by some of his sentences. I assume with "fashion-wannabees" he is referring to the ones who are threatening his business with dumping prices.
My perfect Camera would be a RX1-alike FF Compact with a 20-100/f2.EVF, built in Filters, progammable bracketing option.
Barry Fitzgerald: Disruptive technology = Ignoring usersD600= A99 killer, guess who will sell more?
Sony are way off base, lost the plot years ago and are too bone headed to admit SLT has failed big time
D600 vs. A99Guess that you didn't understand marketing.
A99 is D800/5D3 competitor.For your favored D600 there'll be for sure an A85 or how it will be called.
Rooru S: quality seems to be just OK, nothing spectacular. 16-50 seems to be my next lens.
I tested it on the NEX6 on Photokina. Built quality is quite nice, I enjoyed the power zoom function.The have had a model on a wooden bridge with some surrounding green, so it was possible to capture some shoots of different light situations. The results looked quite ok(I watched them on my iPad).At the low end the distortions are quite heavy, and vignetting seems to be of need to be corrected.Colours and contrast looked quite well for a 3,1x zoom.
In parallel I was able to test it on my NEX7. This is something severe different. It again shows, that budget lenses are nothing desirable for it. The low end of the zoom range was miserable and vignetting was a problem unless you stop down by at least two stops.
Mapel: Nex 6 will surely be my next camera! I can't wait 'till xmas for having it :(
I found it both, more accurate and faster.In bright lights it was not that much tangible.
In the past I've had some issues indoor with focussing the Tamron 18-200 in low contrasts. I tested it with a few shots at the stand, and my feeling was as said, that the AF is a bit more accurate.
I was considering the same.And when playing around with the NEX6 yesterday at PK, I decided to definetly do so.NEX6 is about same size. The additional navi wheel on the NEX7 will not be missed so much I guess.The 16-50 PZ lens was a joy to play with.
Most importantly to me are two points.The corner issues of the NEX7 seem to be sorted out on the lower resolution sensor of the NEX6.Secondly the movie button position is not a pain in the back than on the NEX7.