This is posted on the wrong website. This is DPreview. As in Digital Photography Review. But I forgive you, just this once.
Peiasdf: CEO is at wit's end and hoping the Japanese will pick up the company. Sorry, Lytro is Vietnanese and no Japanese firm will be that stupid.
"Lytro founder and CEO was Ren Ng before he was forced to give up his seat after the failure of the 1sy product after the hype."
And what does this have to do with your statement that Lytro is Vietnamese? Are you trying to suggest CEO Ng is Vietnamese? Based on what? And why does it matter? Plenty of CEOs, successful or not, have had failed products.
This is not youtube, so drop the racism.
Lytro is an American startup. There is nothing Vietnamese about it. Trying to pass off fiction for fact just so you can imply racism will get you nowhere fast.
0.92× mag, and they call it a macro. meh.
Kerensky97: It's a small gripe but why can't lens manufacturers make lenses with the same filter sizes (or 2-3 main sizes)?I love that the two 2.8 Panasonic Zooms have the same filter size. When they make a lens that is 1mm smaller than a previous lens I start to think they're just f-ing with us.
Step up rings and new lens caps, all to match your largest diameter lens. Cheap fix for what most consider a non-issue.
riknash: Wow.. Not even a headphone jack! Another camera built by committee missing key components to bring it into step with its competitors. Sure, it's 50 Mp ...and.. almost $4000 and it's crippled for video with a very pricey 1080P at about $1000 overpriced for a slimmed down video camera. A first gen 50Mp DSLR sensor which hopefully doesn't suffer from banding or other impairment. Crop modes, but for which purpose on a studio landscape architecture intended use, camera? It will be interesting to see what the photos look like.
"and it can't mount EF-S lenses?"
Of course not. EF-S lenses were designed to be smaller and as aa result, do not have the clearance for full frame mirrors. Doh!
If you want high quality video features, get another camera. Video is obviously a secondary feature here. Like duh...
Get this only if you want ultra high res stills.
DanK♂ FP6900: I looked at some image comparisons in this review and other sites with FujiFilm X-A1 and this and I don't know who would be smart enough to buy this overpriced POS with subpar IQ. When you can get better IQ in a smaller and cheaper package why bother with this at all? Yes, there are more features and lens options with this cam, but I personally don't need all that.
Re-read your comment, and you'll realize that you answered your own question.
Gesture: Kardashian family just made a bulk order!
the Karadshians are famous because people apparently like them. So it's not just the Kardashians that are stupid.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: Somebody should have told Casio people who take selfies don't give a damn about cameras. They do selfies because they have smartphones with front-facing lenses. They won't buy a camera solely to take selfies. That'd be too fussy.And no - the fact that this camera has a mirror doesn't make it an SLR...
The world is a big, diverse place. And your comments clearly illustrate that you have only been exposed to a tiny portion of it.
People in some parts of the world were taking selfies with their pocket cameras (sans articulating LCD) for quite some time.
People do buy cameras solely to take selfies. It's not a huge market, but Casio has pretty much been dominating it as of late.
'female specific S-shoulder straps'
Don't forget that some men have boobs too.
In about two years, I'll be able to take photos with similar resolution without a robot, with a single frame, on my phone.
Leandros S: Is this a new PR gimmick? First, you propose something outrageous, get lots of press coverage and then make a generous-seeming offer to placate the complainants? I say that because anyone with half a brain should have realised that 30% was not going to be an acceptable deal. It's hard to think that the backlash was unexpected. And if they had started out with offering 70%, would that have seemed okay? Or would you have wanted to push for 80%? Ask yourself the question.
Most people would have been pleased with 70% from the start.
Perpetual license? Probably not.
BarnET: $349 and €399 for the powerzoom. That is one weird exchange rate.I don't like €399 for the 25mm either.
That is way too close to the 25mm F1.4 panasonic which actually says leica on the front. The 20mm has a very good reputation and is cheaper. So I think olympus has overpriced them. Here i was thinking olympus was heading in the right direction with the EM-10 prices.
The 20mm focuses slowly and poorly, especially in low light. But it's good enough for me to not want to spend the additional $$ on this new 25mm.
acidic: Ducks and rabbits are delicious. I hope the kids get to enjoy them soon.
True, but a younger dog would undoubtedly be tastier than the one featured in the photos.
Ducks and rabbits are delicious. I hope the kids get to enjoy them soon.
What a sexy lens. But I won't be getting one. I still use my 5D2 for portraiture. Coupled with the lowly $400 85mm/1.8, it does just fine, thank you.
This one sounds nice though, especially for a portrait lens for a travel system. But come to think of it, I rarely traveled with my 85mm when I lugged any of my FF kits around.
Still a drool-worthy lens though.
larrytusaz: One page--again, ONE PAGE would be nice. Next, next, next, next--what is this? (Hint: view it on a tablet or smartphone with a browser in "mobile viewing" mode, something like Opera Mini or Dolphin Mini.)
I'm not complaining about the adverts, I get why they are necessary. I also get why the page is laid out the way it is. Like most businesses, DPReview is a revenue-driven site. Money talks :-)
"If you end up scrolling aaaaaaaaall the way dooooooooooown you wind up in a dead zone right at the bottom of the site, away from all of the links to other things you might want to read."
Yeah, away from all of the adverts and such. :-)
Also, requiring readers to click click click results in more page views, which advertisers are willing to pay more for.