snake_b: Wish they and Sigma would come up with weather resistant lenses.
"Moisture-resistant construction helps prevent water from penetrating the lens."
Jack A. Zucker: price is too close to canon. The IS feature won't be enough to cut into canon's sales IMO. At this focal length, IS is not as important. It needs to be $1k to tempt folks from canon's offering IMO unless canon discontinues the 24-70 2.8 MK I
pretty sure with the MK II the MK I will be discontinued.
Jon Stern: Looking at low and high ISO (raw) what impresses me is how good my 5D Mark II is.
I think I'll keep it!
That studio comparison says otherwise.
This camera oversampled to 16mp is very close to the D4 in noise performance. What is stunning is that the sensor even at 12800ISO seems to retain colour information fairly well, compared to the 5d mk II, and D700.
I suppose its not that impressive if you crop a D4 to DX frame and compare it to a D7000 though.
Telefoto: Why would this lens be attractive at that weight? Its weight is in the same ballpark as the Nikkor 14-24, which is the lens I'm looking for a smaller, cheaper alternative to. My 20/2.8 AF rocks, except for the fairly horrendous image quality :) But otherwise perfect, great size, price, and angle of view. Along comes this prime and it weighs almost as much as the probably sharper, just as fast, but AF-S 14-24. Scratching my head over the value prop here. If this lens were 300 or 400g, I'd be seriously interested.
All because its heavy does not mean its sturdy. In fact there are many issues with a lens that uses materials like steel, such as sensitivity to temperature changes, air pressure, etc. Lenses that use light alloys/plastic combinations (such as those from mainstream manufacturers) are nowhere near as heat sensitive and nowhere near as mallable.
healer81: Lens looks interesting, especially for canon shooters since nikon already has a 14-24 which is spectacular. Canon doesnt have an answer for super wide angle at this moment so this lens will accommodate.People in this site is always complaining about something, dont mind them.
the 14-24 can use filters if you install them on a frame.
Pete_Murrell: I have only one question that may not be answerable by people in this forum however I will ask it anyway.I currently use 4/3rds stuff and obviously I love it. I was just wondering if anyone has heard rumours about Olympus releasing a camera with this sensor in the 4/3 lens mount range (Maybe an E-6 or 7)? ... because I can't see myself investing in a whole new range of lenses but based on this small snippet, this sensor is pretty special. Fingers crossed. Can't wait for the full review.
I doubt that theres demand for 4/3rds gear right now, but you do have the option of retaining your lens kit because olympus does make an autofocusing adaptor for 4/3rds lenses.
However, with that said if a m43 company uses a random sensor layout (xpro 1 style) there would suddenly be a demand for low noise, high speed AF prioritised cameras imho.
Bart Aldrich: These Zeiss lenses don't even get especially good reviews from independent reviewers, like Photozone or Bjorn Rorslett.Like someone also said, they are made in the same plant as Cosinas; not bad, but also not the old Zeiss whose prices they are extrapolating onto these.
he's saying they're just average lenses in general; nothing special for their price bracket. However reason escapes most people as soon as they see the Zeiss badge.
They seem more of a fashion item, which is fine, although that does speak words of many photographer's aesthetic sense.... having a 50 1.4 zeiss looks great by itself, but having it with a normal DSLR body, well, i think they're aesthetically blind.
But seriously, a 50 1.4 EF-S or even a 50 f1.4 minolta will take the same if not better image than the Zeiss 50 1.4. Why do we have to pay so much?!
Hugo808: I have a bag full of Zeiss T* lenses, the image quality is vastly superior to my Nikons. More power to Zeiss, the more lenses they make for my D700 the happier I will be.
please provide objective examples.
tkbslc: I think for point and shoot and simple travel photography, the "cloud" and instant facebook/blog of photos is becoming more and more important. I don't think anyone trying to produce fine art or higher end photos is ever going to want to post unedited instant shots to the web.
Who says you won't be able to edit on camera/phone/whatever device its going to be called.
I believe as soon as this product is released it will force people to look at android in a different light.
Theres quite a lot of negativity here. That just proves how most thick the ego of a lot photographers are...
liquidsquid: Then there are those of us who simply don't want our everyday lives up on the "cloud". Which as the data gets used against us for add targeting or in the worst case, Blackmail popularity will quickly die away. Example: You take a picture relaxing on an outing when you told your boss you were sick and you forgot not to share with everyone.
The Cloud makes it far too easy to screw up on epic scales.
and then there are those who do. I've often shot on my NX200 and have had to wait ages to upload something, due to no access to a computer. Atm I use micro SD, alone is annoying.
I think its a case of "cause we can" for Samsung. They should do it ASAP before other companies.
itd be great if they could make a android NX camera. It'd be the first interchangeable lens smartphone with a flippy screen :P
Its good adobe dropped the prices for this; its nothing more than ACR repackaged...
aarif: D3s is king so no D4 for me
HowaboutRAW, there are RAW samples...
These JPEG samples are very clean, however for a full frame camera I'm pretty sure you're supposed to get more detail than this; theres way too much processing. However colour rendition at higher sensitivities is a very strong point; theres little colour shift, although there is a bit of dynamic range loss.
I'd wait for RAW before making any judgement.
Marty4650: It's pretty obvious what is happening here.
Compact cameras are a dying breed. They are getting killed by camera phones below them, and small MILC cameras above them. Aside from the highest end models (like the S100, LX5 and XZ-1) they will cease to exist in a few more years.
So the marketing departments take over and start stuffing more megapixels, more zoom range, more scene modes, more gimmick features, and more of everything else except image quality.
Because it is physically impossible to provide better image quality when building a 30X zoom based on a tiny sensor.
All of these cameras are a total waste of money for most people.
Get a good camera phone... or just buy another lens for for your MILC camera. You will be better off.
You know what the diffraction limit is right? Even if you make a 100% Antistigmatic/corrected/sharp lens you cannot beat the diffraction limit.
As silly as this sounds the rather limited leads to better skin tone handling... thats just one thing i've noticed with this camera; skin tones are great. Sounds plausible as Samsung's marketing is often crackpot.
snake_b: Practically locks up when writing=fail. I tried it and Samsung has a guy that pretends to be a consumer on the forum that is clearly their sponsored guy and he claims there aren't any problems, despite people coming forth and confirming the extremely slow hardware.
50meg SRW file per photo=Slow hardware= limited utility.
The Nex 5n is such a fun camera, by comparison.
You've went on some sort of anti samsung vendetta lately. Whats up with that? LOLL
Edmond Leung: Not too attractive, especially at higher ISO. Besides, it is too difficult to find third-party adopters for this camera to mount other brands' lenses. I still prefer NEX 5N.
The RAWs are great though.
However the NX200 needs a leica M mount conversion in order to use leica lenses