chkproductions: Several years back I read an article where the most important factor in a consumer making a decision to purchase is from a "trusted friend", someone they personally know. I assume this influencer thing is an attempt to replicate this factor. But the lack of trust that people have with information and commentary outside of their immediate sphere of trusted relationships dooms any real lasting value of purchase manipulation through "influencers". Influencers is just the most current "technique" that will go away and be replaced - much like the technique of the moment in photography styles get replace with the next.
But the real issue to me is this - most everyday people have come to realize they just have too much "stuff" nowadays. They don't need anymore. How many microwave ovens do you really need in your lifetime? And any amount of "influence" isn't going to make you buy more.
when i was growing up we didn't even have a toaster. we had a metal plate that we put on the stove and the bread was toasted on it.
we also had a fork that we used to stick on the side of the bread slice and just roast it over the fire for when we needed a single slice of toast.
these electric toasters are garbage.
(seriously, that story is real)
osu9400: I don't know if it qualifies as true "VR" but the only device that excites me right now is the Hololens. As a photographer, I would LOVE to let customers see their photos hanging on their wall in huge sizes as they walk around.
i think that's AR - augmented reality.
Steve in GA: As the spokesperson for the seven people worldwide who are not on Facebook and don't use Instagram, I say, "Who cares?"
right, that's why you'll only hear drum & bass at those hours from my cave. Steve is the one with rock music at 1 AM.
"paying '$300,000 for a few photographs because the CEO's kid liked someone.'"
i hope that CEO walks in on his kid laughing to Filthy Frank videos. i'd like to see Salamander Man advertise for Olympus.
and before you think it's crazy, FF has more than 2 million Youtube subscribers.
PPierre: Well, you may not know how much you should pay them, but don't underestimate to assess what they could cost. Here on DP, one video in which some stranger shows a malfunctioning of one camera/lens is enough to harm the product's perceived reliability for a long time.
two words: shutter shock.
hello, i am your new trusted friend and i recommend this Panasonic camera.
photoshack: This just means that traditional marketing may make a comeback: the brand is trusted to sell on its own merits. The upswell of buyers that agree/disagree will be the trend that follows (until a replacement product comes along.)
I however, would like to get paid $100k to run around with some Canon or another. Pick me!!
i would also like to run around with a cannon, but i'd rather it be towed by a military Jeep.
i am one of those seven people and i approve your message.
miiicho: XQD? I had to check wikipedia what does it mean, never heard it until now .... And ... Looks like another future-dead technology. And, well, Sony want to push something again? And who invented that "XQD" name for it? Completely unergonomic to pronounce (compared for example to "SD").
Sony Memory Stick.
princecody: Please tell me this is a joke?
"this is a joke".
CanonKen: They going to have a 2-lens kit with the body, 24-90 and 90-280mm?
$18,795 retail, discounted to $15,999 and a FREE 32GB memory card! Woohoo!
not if she takes back the beer when she leaves.
man, if they don't throw in a free cleaning cloth and rocket pump i'm not even looking.
Mark9473: "23 elements (in seven moving groups), seven of which are made from glass with anomalous partial dispersion"
I have zero interest in owning this lens, but I have to admire the skill that went into designing and producing it.
anomalous partial dispersion... would this lens cause a resonance cascade? should we prepare? is this how it all starts?
John _ Finn: The guy with the multi-colored buttons on his head? Me no Leica.
that's the phone sensor equivalent of a full frame head of hair.
RGWR: Why do they keep ruining good cameras by letting them grow bigger over the years. GX7 was perfect in that respect. This one isn't.
they did the same with the GH line. to be fair, other companies do it also - just look at the auto manufacturers. the cars get bigger while the roads and the parking spots stay the same.
taktak91: Wrong partner.Although I can't think of a correct partner.
... anymore. they got out of the smartphone market a few years ago.
SeeRoy: For those M43 shooters for whom the Olympus 12-50 kit lens isn't nearly expensive enough.
for those m4/3 shooters that need a stabilized lens because they have Panasonic cameras.
ikfoto: People have been asking for something like a sharp 14-50 f/2.8-4...
i think you want something else than what i want. ideally, yes, a Leica-branded high quality lens would be great, but i don't have the budget for it. so i would be happy with a normal (not legendary) lens that i can buy now and use instead of something that i can remember because i dreamed about it but could not afford.
Biowizard: It's a shame that Panasonic persist in putting their anti-shake technology into the lens ("Power O.I.S.") while Olympus put theirs into the camera (5-way sensor movement), because this adds a level of incompatibility and/or loss of functionality between cameras and lenses from these two manufacturers, who otherwise share the same lens mount.
Does anyone know how "Power O.I.S." actually works? Some early stabilisation systems used a physical, spinning gyroscope ring couple to a spring-mounted lens element (for example, my old Sony Mavica) - you could actually hear it spinning up when you engaged anti-shake.
What is Panasonic's mechanism?
right, because new lenses are for the newest cameras only. never mind the older models that don't have IBIS, let's just stop supporting those peasants so that they either upgrade to the correct stabilization system or stop taking pictures altogether.