Def like the simplicity and minimalism. That's the best advice to people just starting out - Keep it simple, stupid. lol
Horshack: Many luxury/premium brands have tried earning extra revenue by licensing their name to downmarket products but it's a very difficult line to walk. It's very easy for such products to tarnish one's reputation for quality and exclusive appeal. But if those products result in a higher total revenue for the company then it's hard to justify not taking the downmarket plunge. The question is whether that revenue equation holds true in the long term.
Hey, I really like the Panasonic Leica Nocticron - which is sort of a knock off of the Noctilux but I LOVE IT!
I don't agree with this. You're statement comes off as elitist. I think any company can make lenses as good as Ziess or Leica. Heck Zeiss stole some of their optical designs back in the day...
It's going to be fun watching the Micro Four Thirds Consortium eat the rest of the photo industry alive and position themselves at least as a leader and authority that will make all other companies wonder why they didn't follow suite. ;) I love Micro Four Thirds, with all the selection of lenses and manufacturers really chiming in: Panasonic, Olympus, Leica, Kowa, Voigtlander, SLRMagic. Man, the sky is the limit with this open standard.
66GTO: This would then make me ask, what is better than Flickr? PBase seems to have been left by the wayside. What is the better solution?
Nathan Cowlishaw: It's art but there's a fine line between photography and the digital painting and manipulation. I could see this taking off in a graphic arts publication but this is digital imaging in the realm of complete manipulation. Imagine a photojournalist trying to pass this off. In it's context, it's art much like painting and so is photography but there has to be drawn an ethical line between what is photography and what's not so much...
Think about it.
Vlad said: "there isn't any between manipulated and non-manipulated photography."
So does that mean someone could take photos from google images and stitch an imaginary landscape together with NO camera at all and there wouldn't be an ethical line that was crossed!? Sorry, in my opinion creating an an image in photoshop would NOT constitute photography!
That's your opinion, @Ednaz, and it doesn't mean it's valid. There's organizations such as National Geographic that blow your assertion CLEAN out of the water.
@BenSherman, I understand what you are saying. I guess I see a difference between digital manipulation and something more analogue like a photomontage in a dark room. I'm not trying to convince anyone of my argument here. It's more or less how I feel personally as an artist and photographer and not just another gear head. Through my work, I follow my own photojournalistic ethic. In the end, this Moroccan photographer is producing art, and that's one thing I will not argue against. The technique goes against my personal ethic but who am I to judge...? Nate
I didn't say editing, or even dodging and burning are bad, or post processing a digital image is bad. Where the line is crossed for me is when someone begins adding and subtracting objects that weren't in the original photo to begin with or they start to create a digital landscape or scene with special effects. I edit my photos but I don't add a starry sky that wasn't there to begin with. Compositing is another thing I take issue with. If it wasn't there in the scene originally, then how far are we willing to go in calling it photography versus digital image manipulation special effects. I guess as a photographic artist I embrace the ethics of photojournalism to keep things REAL and allow some room for post-processing to a certain extent. The guy whose work is being featured here is not photography to me but digital image manipulation and construction like George Lucas' Industrial Light and Magic and Star Wars.... It looks awesome in the name of ART, but it's not really photography!
Wubslin: How much are the taxpayers on the hook for this particular exercise in adventurism?
Why does that matter? It's worth more than you could ever fathom, I bet? This is humanity's first real step beyond our neolithic selves. We cannot be truly an advanced intelligent life without taking off towards the stars. This is our next step in evolution.
It's art but there's a fine line between photography and the digital painting and manipulation. I could see this taking off in a graphic arts publication but this is digital imaging in the realm of complete manipulation. Imagine a photojournalist trying to pass this off. In it's context, it's art much like painting and so is photography but there has to be drawn an ethical line between what is photography and what's not so much...
Nathan Cowlishaw: Panasonic, Sony and Olympus RULE while Canon and Nikon DROOL!!!
No... I left Nikon in 2008 and joined Micro Four Thirds then. A YES, I know what an F-stop is and different sensor sizes, etc. My work: http://instagram.com/talking_tree - M/43 dominates my professional choices. (;
Panasonic, Sony and Olympus RULE while Canon and Nikon DROOL!!!
Facebook is radically changing Instagram so much that I know that they are going to somehow find a way to butcher it for profit and engagement will go waaay down... Just you wait and see. I'm already transitioning back to the old photoblog format!
Nikon is a stinking bully. I'm glad I abandoned their DSLRs in 2008 when joining Micro Four Thirds and Sigma is a good company. Go Sigma! :)
I'm really excited for the 7-14mm F2.8 lens. I just hope it doesn't cost an arm and a leg. lol I will buy it if it is under a grand. :)
Can I just say, when I heard about the Nikon D600 being so notorious for dust it's what made me all the more happier and merrier switching to Micro Four Thirds in 2008! ;)
Excuse me, you're calling this an "enthusiast" camera!? How about calling it a system worthy enough of professional consideration. I'm sorry but I just get sick of the marketing hype. This is a dang nice and worthy camera worth every inch of a pro's consideration. I love Micro Four Thirds...
I've been doing research on this and it brought me right to the DPReview site! :) I'm sure glad that you guys had a strong article on the exit of Minolta and Konica out of the photo business! What's sad is I started collecting old Konica Hexanon lenses and it's gotten me interested in camera and lens repair but these two great photography companies no longer exist! Gone are the great days of Konica/Minolta! :(
TechOutsider: A Lensbaby competitor? We already have enough toy lens.
This lens is amazing. It takes the boredom out of photography when perfect lenses grow too familiar! Plus this makes my images look ghostly. :)