Le Frog: More than half the cameras in this group are the same size and weight as the film SLRs and rangefinders, that some of us are old enough to remember (and to have used extensively). Is this the new definition of "small" or is it just an euphemism?The NEX-5T does not seem to have more manual controls than cameras that will probably be classified as "entry level", such as the GM1 (which, at least, seems to have well thought out touchscreen controls) and the PL5 (which benefits from in-body stabilization). The NEX-6 and the Samsung do have an extra dial (and the NEX also has an EVF), but of course can't compare with the GX7 the EM5 or the XE2 in terms of manual controls. Is this the new definition of "serious"?The XE-2 is probably a better proposition than the PRO-1, which was classified as "a cut above".Lens-wise the NEX and the Samsung hardly qualify as system camerasI know that there is no such thing as an obvious and clear-cut classification, but this is too much of a mixed bag.
And the NX300 has some touch-control options as well.
ianbullock: NX300+30mm f2 fits in my jeans pocket. Yes, it looks a little silly, but it fits. I have it with me all the time as a result.
That might seem like a little thing, but for me the selection of tiny pancake prime lenses (16mm, 20mm, 30mm) was what drove me to buy the NX300.
I love the Samsung 16mm - a joy to shoot with. Fantastic for the price asked.
pixelpushing: I can't help but think the NX300 deserves a second look, here.
We have two ends of the decidedly non-compact Micro 4/3 model spectrum: Pricey, loaded and fiddly (E-M5) and steeply-discounted mixed reception Panasonic plastic-fantastic (G6). Meanwhile, the NX300 gets marked down for lack of external controls but no credit for a 3.3" touchscreen, and the fact that it has a very competent 20MP APS-C sensor with excellent RAW performance (and despite what was said here, a vastly improved JPEG engine over prior NX models) in one of the smallest cameras in the collection...apparently isn't enough, coupled with solid build, Samsung Galaxy WiFi NFC control/integration and a street price under $600 with an OIS lens..??
Agreed. I'm a big Oly and Panny fan, but have recently been using some of the Samsung cameras and am now very enthusiastic about their line. The Nx1000/1100 is one of the best values around. The NX300 did not, indeed, get much love here. The APS-C sensor is very good, the iFN control is awesome, I love it. The lenses are very good (and they have a decent line at modest prices that really deliver quality and value). The NX300 has been tweaked and including Lightroom 4 is a big plus if you want to shoot raw. Personally, I have not had any complaints about the JPEGs, but I shoot mostly landscapes, not as much indoors at high ISO's. Still, more of a quiblle, I think. For me, it's the sensor, lens, handling and value combo that make this line a winner. The fact that it also makes for a fairly compact kit is another plus.
xtoph: I have to add my objection to the new "click and load 12 pages to view content worth maybe 2" design i have seen a few times here recently.
Not only is it tedious and timewasting, but it is incovenient if you want to compare anything or review anything you just read as you go along.
Please dont go this way--just makes your site look like "10 wardrobe malfunctions" clickbait nonsense.
+1 - hate it, <click>, hate it , <click> ,hate it!
Bob Meyer: 11. By dividing short, simple articles across 10 or 12 pages you can get more clicks and make your advertisers happier while annoying your readers.
Very irritating trend.
Adios, Adobe! I was getting quite tired of you anyway. You have now won the trophy for dumbest software company of 2013. The competition was stiff, believe me, but you pulled it out! Congrats.
Yeah, yeah, Daddy's always love their little daughters, and these are somewhat creative and cute, but really...I'm sorry...they just do not seem that great to me. More like something I would get in a chain email...again, just my opinion.
Artistico: The lens is made by someone with 25 years of expertise in making (presumably non-zoom) lenses for CD players? I don't know about you, but that fills me with confidence that the optics will be absolutely pristine and perfect for this zoom range, offering image quality to rival anything we've seen before. Especially since it's Japanese
Anyway, advertising claims aside - if I ever feel like getting a super-zoom for when image quality isn't essential, the big selling point here is that it starts at 20mm rather than 24mm or even 28mm. That makes a huge difference and gives it a major edge over its competitors.
"the big selling point here is that it starts at 20mm rather than 24mm or even 28mm. That makes a huge difference and gives it a major edge over its competitors."
Exactly! 20mm is very tempting...
Clint009: !!! No mention on lens brand! Leica?
I have an old FZ20 also and love it! Don't use it as much anymore, but it is a great camera and I still do use at times.
Greg Lovern: Isn't it great that the original perps can't be charged because the statute of limitations has expired on their crimes?
Makes me feel like a chump for being honest!
As a teenager, I saved my money mowing several neighborhood lawns to buy an OM-1. Makes me sick what those guys did to that great company.
@cgarrard. well said, sir!
Gesture: Need a Samsung on the list.
I got a Samsung NX1000 w/20-50mm kit and then added the 16mm f2.4 which is a treat. Definitely a superb value at current prices. Samsung lenses are good and very aggressively priced. I love the Panny's and Oly's, too, but the NX1000 at $300 w/kit lens is hard to beat.
The first one is interesting and effective, similar to the effect used in "La Jetee" -- because it is used sparingly and well.
The second (gif) is annoying as crap as are nearly all animated gifs. It would be fine with me if they were banned completely. ;)
Still, a photograph is a photograph and not a movie or animation. Art can employ any tools and any combination of tools for effect, but photography is the still image in all it's majesty. The static nature of the image is, of course, essential (in my opinion). The world around us is constantly moving and changing, a photograph captures a moment from this stream of time. That's the beauty of it for me.
Of course, this is all, perhaps, completely obvious to everyone here.
Combatmedic870: flickr is just an easy way to steal images.
Want a wide angle shot of a barn that looks good. Search for nikon 14-24 lens. Im sure youll find a barn you like, poof that image is now in some book that you wont know about. I found one of my baby goose pics in a book and the author told me to screw myself and that the image wasnt copyrighted.
Water marks are easily removed or cropped out.
Exactly so -- your images are automatically copyright by you without any action other than creating them yourself. Don't let that "author" get away with it - you have a valid claim, you just need to assert it. The publisher of the book will know this. The author probably had to sign something saying he had rights to the images, so hopefully they will deduct their payment to you from his royalties.
CameraCarl: Once again, lots of new cameras but only two with viewfinders. My wife (who is not as serious a photographer as me) won't even consider using a camera that does not have a viewfinder. And after struggling with the Panasonic LX3 and Canon S100 in daylight and bright sun, I will never buy another camera that doesn't have one. I can't figure why the manufacturers do not realize this. Why do they think photos ought to be taken at arm's length?
Amen! And I can compose much better using a viewfinder.
The Silver Fox: This seems quite exciting. Offerings like this are making m4/3's too hard to ignore.
I quite agree. I am astonished by some of the comments. I have been shooting Oly cameras since the E-10 (which I loved) and recently picked up a used Panny G1 cheap with the 14-45mm to give m4/3 a try. Amazing camera with beautiful images. So I got the 20mm f1.7 and the 45-200mm f4-5.6. It's an incredible kit and anyone who casts aspersions on the m4/3 format simply has not tried it. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and my pudding tastes mighty fine. ;)
Sdaniella: I have long lost interest in opaque image media, no matter how it is illuminated from the front, inconsistent as a matter of normalcy, and much prefer light displays of images where one can enjoy a broader, more natural perceived dynamic range, that better captures truer representations of what we see around us. Good riddance to low-representative unlit imagery... Opaque PRINTS... (I'm more receptive to well lit transparent prints at the worst, and light projection, so, in this sense, film transparency can always be used like 'stained glass' is used now, and make room for digital light displays instead (passive or active)... stills or motion. For basic text reading, non-lit media still has an important niche, so, opaque media will remain for that.
To each their own. I have no problems with transparent presentations of any kind, I love projecting my images, but I must admit, I still very much love a good print. The tactile nature and the glory of well reflected light from a physical medium is still something I find entrancing.
Amateur Hour: Kodak is just another company in a long list of companies that suffer from corporate hardening of the arteries. Kodak had every chance in the world possible to make it in the digital realm. They were even digital innovators with some of the worlds first professional digital cameras. But as is usual with long time companies with management that rests on their laurels, the efforts were for show only.
Would be interesting to go back and see when they shifted their emphasis to marketing and short term profits (and stock incentives for the big brass) and started laying off engineers and creative people with a passion for the product. My guess is the decay began right around that time.
Martin_PTA: The problem in today's business world, is that senior management teams tend to be composed of legionaries working on contract for the highest buck! Their passion is more focused on the currency they're earning than on the product generating that currency! Without passion for the product, it's nothing more than gambling with experience, which isn't always enough!
The management team of Kodak took the company out of the high-end market by discontinuing their premium cameras! It's like a famous restaurant saying "Although we established our name with french cuisine, in future we should focus on burgers & fries". What the big Kodak probably did not realize, was that they dropped into the street-corner mass-market segment where the players are quick and light on their feet.
It will be sad to see them disappear! IMO licensing a good name is just another "epic fail" decision. They need a "Steve Jobs" turnaround plan rather!
Amen, brother! How many times have we seen this? I only wonder how huge will be their bonuses for this magnificent achievement.
How truly sad. Kodak was such a good company until the morons took over. RIP, Kodak!