FantasticMrFox: It saddens me to see a brand as old and thoroughly accomplished as Leica jumping onto a bandwagon driven by offering meaningless gadgets for the rich that promote style over functionality. They used to offer the exceptional for a large amount of money, now they are adding the pointless for even more money ...
The buyers in that segment are basically screaming at the luxury brands to take away their money. Leica is just exploiting that - without even introducing new tech. Any company would want to do that.
UnOfficiallyDNG: Sorry, that camera is as ugly as sin, can't believe that it's the same company that brought us the 503CW
If it looks ugly then it must suck at taking photos then
drawer77: for my instagram selfies, i only use Hasselblad
barely enough resolution for FB profile pictures, though
The expensive casing should compensate all the aberrations of the poor optics.
quangzizi: Hum let see: http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_24_2p8_is&products=nikon_24_1p8g_ed&products=panasonic_12_1p4
Canon 24 2.8: 7 bladed - 11 elements in 9 groups - No sealing - Plastic construction - Heck, even the 24 1.4 only have 8 blades - 13 elements in 10 groups
Nikon 24 1.8: 7 bladed - 12 elements in 9 groups - No sealing - Plastic construction
Nikon 24 2.8: 1990s lenses - 7 bladed - 9 elements in 9 groups (no ED or any special element, questionable coating compared to modern lense) - No sealing - Plastic construction
Panasonic 12: 9 bladed - 15 elements in 12 groups - Weather sealing - All metal construction
Ah let me throw this in as well. Panasonic gives you a metal hood.
Any objection here?
Too expensive for small sensor.
Funny though, at the price of the best overal crop sensor camera you can buy 6D, D750, etc for a lot less money with arguably better IQ.
haydukelives: This should be renamed the "everybody gets a prize" for participating "school" of photography
Reminds me of Tipa photo awards. There is always an award for everybody.
Sean65: Day 2 and I thought I'd revisit this article, the works and the comments. Two things come to mind.
Whilst I've never really been a fan of the work produced by photography degrees, I do like the fact that this is classic in the sense that it is photography and free from in-camera and post processing wizardry.
In the last eight years or so, the sheer amount of cliched gimmick laden garbage being produce has swung the balance from photographic ability to camera ability.. You know the long exposure, filtered to hell, process beyond recognition type of stuff.
It's a bit like music. If I were to play Miles Davis's Bitches Brew album to the average X Factor viewer they would be horrified. They wouldn't understand the complexity of the music because they are musically ignorant and need formulated pop musical cliches before they can relate.
So that leads me to think that most commenters here are just a bunch of handbag swinging, ballet dancing, Brittany Spears fans.
I got lost in the second paragraph already.
Mediocre camera shoots a nice video
LEGACYMOMENTSPHOTOGRAPHY: DOES IT SHOOT 4K........................................? LOL!
Cheap keyboard tends to exaggerate what you're typing
Morpho Hunter: Well (presumably) this camera is already "dead in the water" after it's been rumoured that Olympus's EM-1 mark II camera (with its comparatively tiny, super high quality lenses) will produce 80 megapixel hand-held images .. for a fraction of the cost of the Hassy body and lenses..... but hey .. it could all be a scam!! The era of full frame and medium format cameras is about to end ...
kewlguy: Usually a review helps us to decide whether or not to buy, but this one is the first that helps us to decide whether or not to sell! Luckily based on the review, it's a keeper :P
Switching to K1?
Usually a review helps us to decide whether or not to buy, but this one is the first that helps us to decide whether or not to sell! Luckily based on the review, it's a keeper :P
Prognathous: It's interesting that the only Pentax camera mentioned in this review is the 645Z. I think you may have missed a somewhat more relevant model...
the review was written long before that relevant model came. It's a historical camera review, remember?
NIce video, very inspiring!
Joe Ogiba: Smart idea of Ricoh using the older 36mp Sony sensor to keep the cost well under $2K. Too bad Pentax did not have 4K video mode with H.265 like the Samsung NX1 to increase sales but it looks like most Pentax users are not interested .
I thought NX1 is a washing machine type, Samsung makes camera too?
The lens is still soft. That said, the high iso looks better than D810. Good camera, but only few lenses compared to Canon and Nikon.
Sunshine4784: Well Pentax used FA 77mm f1.8 limited lens while Nikon used 85mm f1.4 lens. Pentax 645 used 90mm macro lens which is very expansive lens but inferior to Nikon and Pentax FF. Both Pentax 645 and Nikon shot in 2014 btw. Pentax FF should try recent 85mm lens but they don't have it...
Base on images from LR, Pentax 645 is very useless. It's not even sharper than 77mm f1.8 while Pentax 645 used that god damn expansive macro lens. Pixel shift is not that impressive from this images. I demand better testing with pixel shift.
Anyway, both Nikon and Pentax should try similar lenses. FA 77mm f1.8 is basically a film lens.
Most likely the 77 is decentered - which is not uncommon for Pentax lenses, plus it might have a strong curvature at this distance hence the soft corners.
beemerman2k: That Pentax 645z is like, "All y'all bitches get outta here!" Lol!
Oops, typo, I meant, not *all* the lenses are good. I run my own print workshop, and I often print for my clients who use Pentax 645Z. the 90 is very sharp, but 55 is not, for example. So it depends on the lenses, too.