acidic: Canada Post is a joke. US to Canada mail arrives faster than Canadian domestic. For Canadians close to the border who have time sensitive mail, it makes more sense for them to drive into the US and send their mail from a USPS post office. Go figure.
That's exactly right, Neez.When Canada Post accepts domestic mail for delivery, it ends up taking way longer than when the US Postal service accepts mail to be sent to Canada. Though Canada Post still handles the delivery part of the latter scenario, it still arrives quicker than domestic Canadian mail.
acidic: I still have an omd em5. Mk1. Any reason I should get the em10 mk2? The way I see it, I would be gaining WiFi and smaller body, but would be sacrificing weather sealing. Sound about right?
Thanks for the replies. I am also guessing that the 5 axis IBIS would be comparable between the EM5 mk1 and the EM10 mk2? Assuming I'd have to step up to the EM5 mk2 to see improvements?
I still have an omd em5. Mk1. Any reason I should get the em10 mk2? The way I see it, I would be gaining WiFi and smaller body, but would be sacrificing weather sealing. Sound about right?
It would be nice if they tested low light AF with zooms, and not just primes, since zooms are undoubtedly used by the majority of photographers these days.
Perhaps such tests with f/2.8 or f/4 zooms were omitted because if they were included, dpreview would have to use a less exciting headline.
dash2k8: All commercial forms of photography today are heavily edited. That perfect skin on the perfect body of the perfect supermodel? The skin is fake, the body has extra fat removed, and areas unevenly lit are brightened. I think TR's HDR work is very realistic-looking, not the canned and automated results that come from Photomatix presets. If people are going to slam his work for being over-processed or fake, then they can just go to the mall and start blasting the huge ads everywhere. 99% "fake," all of them.
It's one thing to dislike the HDR style, it's another to outright slam it as garbage or crap or fake. By the same standard, Picasso couldn't paint worth a crap.
His earlier work, work that got him noticed and made him popular among photographers, was heavily processed. I think that was the appeal for many of his fans, the whole digital-fantasy-illustration look.
Go to his site, go back to 2007-ish, and you tell me with a straight face that his photos are very realistic looking. Lots of glowing silhouettes and wild colors. Realistic? I think not.
His more recent work is done with a much lighter touch, to a final look that I personally find much more appealing.
Canada Post is a joke. US to Canada mail arrives faster than Canadian domestic. For Canadians close to the border who have time sensitive mail, it makes more sense for them to drive into the US and send their mail from a USPS post office. Go figure.
ludwik123: What about the fun factor?It may give excellent final results but do people actually enjoy using it?I handled the original RX100 in a store and hated the feel of it.
"A camera itself is not a toy I like to play with."
I think many on this site would tend to disagree.
Not everyone who likes photography is interested in only the end result. Many find the process itself (i.e. taking photos) to be a very enjoyable part of photography. And the camera, as a tool, can affect how much one enjoys the process.
I think Dick Cheney should take Donald Trump on a hunting trip.
AshMills: Congrats DPR, some crappy photos on a dark day for the planet, as a handful of idiots condemned thousands of innocents to death, and awoke a whole new army of enemies.
I know, and to top it off, the photos are clearly not digital. These photos belong on the rival site APReview (Analog Photography Review).
MeganV: The internet needs less photography-mediated-by-Marissa-Mayer and more photography-mediated-by-photographers.
I wish people weren't so intimidated by HTML <IMG> tags.
Because that's really what Flickr is, right--it's an HTML avoidance system. It lets you post photographs by learning to use Flickr instead of the <IMG> tag. It lets you share photographs with links to Flickr's domain rather than with links to *your* domain. It keeps your conversations and interactions within its walled community rather than within your e.mail box, on your messenger, or on *your* web site.
But basic HTML and <IMG> tags aren't hard! If you can use Flickr, you can whip up some tags.
True, web hosting isn't free. But you can get your own domain, comprehensive analytics, and unlimited storage for $5 - $8 / month with just about any provider you might choose. That's not much of a premium over this new Flickr "pro" arrangement.
Yes, Flickr is a crowd sourced site, full of user generated content, and that's how they make money. DP Review creates it's own content, but there is also a crowd sourced, user generated content aspect to it as well, and it helps them drive traffic to its bread and butter (advertisers). And guess what, MeganV? YOU are a participant.
It's called web 2.0, lol.
Yes, because GoPro users are incapable of sticking their own GoPro mounts to their windshield.
K I E N: It looks to me that such a connected camera is designed for the emerging IoT (Internet of Things) applications. There will be 26 billion 'things' by 2020. They will be used mainly by online applications. Check out a recent paper on 'ThingStore' in the Proceeding of the 2015 International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems (DEBS'2015). ThingStore is a market place or ecosystem for collaboration on IoT applications development and deployment. A user can deploy 'things' with software thing operators and sell the services in ThingStore. Some software developer can then develop IoT apps that subscribe to these thing operators and sell these apps in ThingStore to consumers. IoT apps can also enlist the help of other IoT apps; and we have a web of such online applications. They are running all the time much like a Web page.
your post has very little to do with the actual announcement
ThePhilips: I can't understand why there are so few 4.0/100mm macro lenses.
2.8 is useless for the macro, and it only hikes up the price and size of the lenses.
Macro lenses are not restricted to macro uses. I use my macro lenses for non-macro purposes all the time. I welcome that extra stop that f/2.8 provides over f/4. And I'm not talking about bokeh either.
RPywell: Too much money if you only do macro occasionaly. What we need is a modern equivalent of the "plastic fantastic" Vivitar/Cosina 100mm macro lens, ideally in all the mirrorless bayonet fits.
The Vivitar/Cosina 100mm macro is hardly too heavy for m4/3. And at the prices they were selling for, would hardly be considered expensive.
It was a fantastic budget lens. I had one in EF mount and one in FD mount, and absolutely loved them.
Peiasdf: It is not going to be on the 6S but will arrive with some nice new features on the 7. Apple never rush to put half-baked stuff on products.
The iPhone4's antenna was thoroughly tested too.
acidic: My 24mm 1.4 can also do 35mm 1.4, and everything in between. It's called Crop Tool.
Thank you everyone for pointing out how useful this particular lens is. I was wrong all along. I will order this lens now, as you all have explained in great detail why I need it.
I will buy this when factory refurbs are available on ebay for $69. So maybe in two months.
I can simulate a 35mm image taken @f/1.4 by cropping a 24mm image taken at f/1.4. Photoshop -> make selection -> Lens Blur. Heh.
Average User: Size of lenses doesn't really detract from the A7 series...especially the A7r for the reason that there are high quality 1.8 primes like the F1.8 55 and the F2 28 that are quite small...admittedly the fast zooms are going to be much bigger, but with the number of pixels, zoom gets to be less important because there are sufficient pixels to crop and still get really good images. It's also a little dumb to say that because you have to carry a big lens for a particular purpose, you should always have to carry it and you should also always have to carry a big camera body. There are things my D750 does better, but as a light versitile camera for scenery type uses night and day, the A7r has been awesome and the A7RII will be even better.
I'll take a 14/25/45 trio on a mft body, and.. oh wait I already have, and my back is happy.
Parallax1: I've noticed how over the past 2 years I've found myself more and more without my D800 with me, mostly because of the annoyance of carrying such a big camera with me.
In dedicated shooting situations, I still take the D800 and 70-200, but I find myself more and more settling for the phone because of the convenience factor. I've been looking at MFT, but the Olympus bodies are annoying replicating the viewfinder bump, making the bodies too big.
This article really has me hitting the preorder button on Amazon. My last hesitation is that it seems like all of Sony's focus is on using Canon lenses, it does not seem like there is any discussion about using Nikon lenses on the sony system - guess the adapters aren't there yet?
Besides the belabored to death 14 bit (which is a huge and curious issue) the things that would cause me to switch would be a good nikon lens converter and a pancake lens (protrusion about the size of the handgrip)
You haven't looked at enough MFT bodies if all you are concerned about Oly's viewfinder hump.