That Canon G9x just made my short list of cameras to get my hands on to try as a replacement for my Canon S90. Looks good so far . . . :)
Mike FL: Ricoh WG-4 and WG-5 are very much using the same lens system and sensor as Oly TGx, but users still prefer TGx even it is at least $100 more.
Ricoh should do a market study to find out "why".
BTW, I know why, and most, if not all, of the users know "why", but Ricoh just does not get it.
Ricoh is in the wrong business.
You can't find Pentax in the US either? :(
Was Pentax in Target in the US?
I know more people are buying cameras on-line.
But there are still a lot of people that just want to run out and buy one of these cameras in this category just before they rush out the door for vacation.
In those cases, whatever is available at their local store becomes the camera they buy.
@ Mike FL
"But then Target pulled out of Canada". Same here is the US.
Mike . . . are you saying that Target pulled out of the US market and closed all their stores in the entire country, like they did here in Canada?
I would suspect that distribution (and perhaps marketing) are at issue.
It's not the cameras themselves. Pentax (and now Pentax / Ricoh) know how to make cameras.
I live near Toronto, Canada.
Big city, but I could probably count how many places have Pentax or Ricoh cameras on the fingers of my two hands. :(
Target was carrying Ricoh waterproof cameras! :)
But then Target pulled out of Canada. :(
Where as I can walk into a Best Buy and pick up an Olympus waterproof camera no problem.
Well . . . Talbot definitely made a better mousetrap . . . in my books anyway. :)
I read things like this and I think . . . you can't sell a camera to someone that doesn't want a camera. Maybe some people want an image maker, and that's it.
It kinda reminds me of the Kodak Brownie. That camera was designed to sell more film. Perhaps the smart cell phone was designed to sell more bandwidth and digital downloads. The fact that it takes pictures is kinda a side effect. LOL.
But a cell phone has a lot of things right for a parent taking a vacation. Take a picture. Sort pictures. Post pictures. Share pictures. Save memories. A complete all-in-one solution that is convenient and effective.
How do you sell an additional piece of equipment to that market?
There better be a pretty good reason to buy an additional piece of equipment.
And it better be really easy to integrate with what you do with the cell phone. Not only easy, but better. Clearly more powerful that I couldn't imagine living without it. LOL.
McCool69: I am slightly amused at the amount of people that seem to think the point of this is to make an exact measurement of how much Instagram degrades an image.
Of course it isn't - it is first and foremost an art project that also points out something that a lot of people (I'm talking non-photographers and casual users here...) are not aware of.
I think it is an excellent idea that gives the artist tons of exposure. Would have loved to come up with it myself.
David Hockney did his polaroid work, which I thought was super, super cool. I guess presentation wise the repetition of the frames, but concept was different.
But most recently I love what he is doing with iPads.
Take care & Happy Shooting!:)
Mike FL: It would be nice to have PASM, TG-5 may be.
OR PS without AM are fine too, but "Aperture Priority"? No kidding?! get real!!!!
OR, get an real Aperture.
Thanks for the reference. Is there another reference to confirm this?
I went to the Olympus website and found this reference about the aperture priority mode on the Olympus TG-2.
"The Stylus Tough features an Aperture priority Mode to allow greater depth-of-field and Microscopic Macro Mode that enables shooting closeups 1 centimeter from a subject."
Olympus has put that using aperture priority mode can increase depth-of-field. My understanding is that this is only possible if you actually use a smaller aperture / stop size. [Besides the stacking mode.]
Is Olympus wrong on their website or is the Neocamera website incorrect in their review?
If the aperture priority mode on the TG-2 isn't affecting the size of the aperture, but just putting the ND filter in / out, wouldn't it make more sense to just have a function / menu item to move the ND filter in / out of place? . . . Like on my Pentax Q.
Is there a reference to the Olympus TG-1/2/3/4 having a fixed aperture?
I'm curious with stuff like that.
It is possible that the shutter is acting like a variable aperture. Such as a shutter that is made of 2 pieces of metal that can be opened to varying degrees.
[I actually opened up an old non-working Sony T1 once that someone had given me. It had a 2 part shutter where I could see that it could be possible to open up the shutter at varying distances to form an aperture of different size. But then again, I remember opening up old 35mm focus-free film cameras and seeing that the aperture was a fixed size and the shutter was a single piece of plastic, so no variable aperture possible there.]
But it doesn't have PASM on the dial!!!
Oh, wait. It has PSAM on the dial. ;)
Ok. I want one! :)
cptobvious: Is this what camera previews have become - camera companies giving out free vacations to reviewers? Olympus gives out free trips to Ireland and Bermuda, and now Samsung gives out Hawaii trips.
Certainly these cameras can be reviewed competently by just giving loaner review copies, but perks like these just smell like desperate attempts to influence reviewers.
It's not like other industries don't do the same thing. Just think cars! :) Car reviewers point out that the manufacturer has brought writers from all over to test drive their new car on some gorgeous road so that great reviews get written about it.
If a camera manufacturer can entice a camera reviewer to test the camera out in a nice location where the resulting "test shots" end up looking great . . . how is that any different?
BTW . . . DPReview staff . . . please keep up the great work! :)
Jane79: Maybe Nikon should use the remaining R&D budget to produce fewer but more exciting products.
I look at the D7200 and see a powerful tool to get the shot.
Great IQ. Bigger Buffer.
Isn't that exciting? Or is it just me?
Joe Ogiba: Pentax Digital SLR - 6 megapixelPublished Sep 25, 2000 | dpreview staff
At Photokina next week Pentax will announce a new 6 megapixel (3072 x 2048) Digital SLR, it will use Philip's 6 megapixel 35mm size CCD (12-bit progressive, 12 µm pixel pitch).
Pentax Digital SLR Specifications(so far)Body Pentax design magnesium alloy caseType SLR (body only)Imager Philips 6 megapixel CCD35mm full frame12-bit progressive scan12 µm pixel pitchImage resolution 3072 x 2048Image types JPEG, TIFF, RAWShutter speed Up to 1/6000 secLens mount Pentax KAF2 mount (645N & 67II lenses can be used)Focus 6-point AFViewfinder TTL optical (true TTL)LCD 2 inch TFTFlash Built-in retractable flash unit (TTL)Storage Dual slots:Compact Flash Type IIPCMCIA Type IIConnectivity IEEE1394 (Firewire)Sale date UndecidedSale price Expected ~$7,000http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8322647280/pentaxdigitalslr
I believe it was used in the Contax N Digital.
Marty4650: Now that Pentax has fully covered the niche of "colorful cameras" I think there is still an opportunity left for them to pursue.
Pentax should bring back the kitchen appliance colors of the 1970s for the retro color fans. You know the colors I mean.... Harvest Gold, Avocado, Almond and Coffee.
This could be a big hit with with old people and hipsters.
Hey, it's worth a shot. And it would be good for a laugh.
You may actually have something there. :) But I think it would be cool if they started making the shell from Bakelite as well. LOL. Personally, I like the camera. It's just not lining up with the stuff I have to get over the next year.
Ron A 19: Nikon seems out of ideas :(
I've been waiting for my next camera.Now that it looks like it is here, my view on cameras seems to have changed.It's a tool. As long as it does what you want, you're good to go.I think I'm ready to take a lot more pictures.:)
Anastigmat: Grudgingly, Nikon is slowly bringing down the price of FF cameras. That is a good sign. What we really need is a FF that costs $1500 or less that is not built with an all plastic body like a Digital Rebel. DSLR sales are slumping, and the market needs help from one or more entry level FF models that are affordable without being filmsy. That is what the market needs to reignite the enthusiasm of those who still want to shoot with DSLR cameras.
Having the 3 models, allows the bottom model to attack the market on price, letting the other models bulk up on features and capabilities.
This thing looks a lot like my next camera . . .
Just another Canon shooter: Is that the death of the EVF?
When using this without the camera . . . you don't get to see the picture you just took. That sounds familiar. Wait a minute . . . that was what using film was like!
Is there a waterproof case for this thing? That would be cool . . .
Also . . .
For anyone that has complained about the ergonomics of cameras in general, this seems like a blank slate to make whatever body / grip that you can imagine. Anyone for a crowd source project?
SW Anderson: Back to the future with a much better and more appropriate classic retro look -- one of the original Q's enjoyable features. For me, the Q-S1 isn't a matter of whether, but when, I'll get one.
For the Q's sniping detractors, photography for many of us isn't all about big, slick-magazine covers and two-page spreads. We'll never do billboards and might never indulge in exhibition-size prints. We can enjoy on-screen and small-print images, along with using a good-looking, well-made camera that provides an amazingly feature-rich, flexible shooting experience with easy portability. Some of our best images are more about a memory captured or scene preserved than impressive resolution and amazing sharpness seen via pixel peeping.
My Q is fun and useful in many picture-taking situations where my big, bulky but technically superior DSLR would be as out of place as a semi-truck at a gymkhana. Some folks seem to enjoy the Q as a target for put-downs. I see that as their loss, not mine.
But then again . . . there are many iPhone apps that sport a Holga-ish or Lomo-ish filter. . . . Why?