tinternaut: Only 6MP digital files from a medium format film scan?
Well, that's all you get without an upcharge!
Langusta: Unnecessary complication I guess; just one more thing that can break down and that costs extra money...right software can do same trick just fine and most people (who can afford such camera) probably already have it.
Actually, you want to quash moiré at the source ... software has no clue as to what image created the values on a given spot on the sensor. Of course, if you are diffraction limited, you no longer need an AA filter (you've effectively got one!)Personally, I'd rather have it "in or out" selectable (flip up like the mirror?) than have several more layers in front of the sensor.
wlad: there's a whole paragraph about "speed" and it does not have the most important information - average transfer speed.Which would be a pathetic 1MB/s at most.
I have an Eye-fi connect x2 card that has been gathering dust for the last 2 years.
Not useless for me; I used an earlier, slower version to transfer small jpegs to a 24" monitor during events (with software to display the latest files for a few seconds, or until a new picture arrived.) Got a crowd around monitor quickly! Downloaded the RAW files via adapter, later. I've also used the quicker, later version.That's really the only use I'd ever have for WiFi, until they get to full power wireless N with real speeds. I no longer do events, so I gave mine away.
There are many branding restrictions out there for all sorts of products. You can have a Jones Honda dealership, for example, but your Accura dealership must have a location or something other than a proper name: Accura of Cincinnati."Insta", however, has been used a lot in the past relating to photography. Everyone had a Kodak Instamatic or two in the family!
In 1990(!) I purchased a Canon RC250 "Xapshot", a still video camera (which I have to this day!) It used a tiny lead-acid battery, and recorded analog images to a 2" special floppy disk. One could view the output on a television, or use a "capture board" in their computer to save a digital copy. I chose the latter (replaced with a "Snappy" years later.)In 2001 I bought a 3mp Kodak fixed-focal-length digital camera, which was nearly as good as film for simple snapshots. Still have that, of course!I was certainly ahead of the curve in digitizing stuff, what with scanners and a capture board, but I didn't really switch over until 2002, when the Canon EOS-1Dinosaur came out. $5400, plus a grand for a couple of microdisks! I still have one of those in my collection.
YouDidntDidYou: Ah OK so shooting live view for photography the Canon EOS 70D's focus performance is just as good as the Panasonic L10 (which has full tilt and swivel LCD) from 2008 hmmm....
The Panasonic has a smaller chip and fewer pixels making up the video, both of which will "hide" some focus issues. But I haven't read here that the L10 has "just as good" performance, have you? Gonna bet it doesn't, in the real world.
I wonder if they can take separate readings from each of the dual pixels to increase dynamic range?
CameraLabTester: Those long lost toys do take me back...
I kinda miss "the smell of Sulphur Dioxide" in the morning... even though it was a killer for your health...
Eat some egg salad before going to bed ... that should satisfy your jones for SO2 smell in the morning.
dr.noise: Changing mount must be at a fixed price no matter what lens. It is kinda obvious because only mount is changed, not other part of the lens.
How wrong can you be!? You believe that the lens electronics that are "talking" to the camera are the same on Nikon, Canon, Sigma, etc.? Think again ...
mpgxsvcd: My telescope is only an 800mm lens! Why in the world would an entry level user ever need a 1200mm equivalent camera? They can't possibly hand hold it at that focal length.
At least Panasonic is pushing the limits of reason in a good way. 20mm @ F2.8 is much better than all of the other super zooms.
I just wish they would make a simple 8 megapixel 20-400mm F2.0-F4.0 small sensor fixed lens camera. Give it the true 1080p @ 60 FPS video from the FZ200 and make sure it has RAW. That is a camera that would take great still images and videos.
What you want wouldn't be practical: a 400mm f/4 lens has a nominal front element size of 100 mm, about four inches! Gonna guess it would weigh five or six pounds.
BillSprague: Amazon bought dpreview on May 14, 2007.
Dpreview opens a camera and gear store on July 17, 2013! I'm surprised it took 6 years.
I enjoy shopping at Amazon. The GearShop experience should be at least as good.
Above somewhere, it says it is OK to mention other retailers, so it should be noted that B&H does not charge the 9.8% sales tax collected where I live in Washington State. dpreview, Amazon and GearShop have to charge sales tax. So everything at B&H starts as a "10% off sale"!
B&H has one store in NewYork and, so far, is not required to be tax collectors for the other 49 states. My understanding is that with all of their distribution centers Amazon has to collect sales tax for many, if not all, states.
Actually, virtually all states REQUIRE that you pay sales tax on online purchases! Very few people do so, however. So ... if it's too much for you, move to a state with a lower tax rate.
justmeMN: When they do camera reviews, Consumer Reports doesn't have any financial conflict of interest. The problem is, they don't know what they are talking about.
Web sites have advertisements, so there always has been some degree of conflict of interest.
My understanding is that camera companies send DPR cameras to review. That is also a conflict of interest. If DPR's review is too critical, they could stop sending them new cameras to review.
The real world is filled with conflicts of interest. That's the way it is. Deal with it.
Hey, tritx ... at least one car magazine now has a setup similar to this marketplace. It doesn't shock me.
SRT3lkt: My eyes got more efficient mechanism.
Nishi, your eyes have pretty lousy instantaneous DR! They DO have a pretty good "ISO" range, but it can take 20 minutes to go from ISO 100 to ISO 64K (much more quickly the other way!) A brightly backlit subject (such as a road sign whilst driving west in the evening) is impossible for human eyes.
jlehet: All freelance creative professionals are getting squeezed from what I see. I know one good long-term designer who just became a massage therapist.
All the talk about Corel: Just my experience, but I had a horrible time with Corel, trying to upgrade/install Painter on the Mac last year. Their service was even worse than Adobe's, and I ended up getting my credit card company to dispute the charge. I never did manage to install the Painter XII upgrade. If you read the Painter forums you can see the horror. Corel bought Painter, a vibrant Mac application, and all but killed it.
Pixelmator is suddenly number 4 on the Top Paid list on the mac app store! Probably many people like me who thought, "What the heck, $15, I'll try it."
I do my fine art photos RAW -> 16 bit pixels, so I know Pixelmator won't replace PS right away for me. I was amazed though how solid and snappy it is, for $15! I tried doing a web image workflow with it. It was a little clunkier than PS, but very workable.
Painter is not the flagship Corel product; I've been using Corel PhotoPaint and Draw for nearly two decades! I also use Photoshop at work. I find the higher-end (and therefore not inexpensive) Corel products capable of anything I ever need to do. Clunky in spots, as is Photoshop.
AlanG: So now innocent looking packages may be spying on you. Too bad it wasn't sitting on a desk where it could show people in a compromising situation. Like the NRA bribing a senator. Or a guy cheating on his wife.
Nice political snipe. The NRA doesn't need to "bribe a senator" in order to have them vote for the rights guaranteed by the constitution. It scares the weak and meek, but the SOLE purpose of the Second Amendment is to allow the people to kill their government if it gets out of hand (by, say, infringing on their right to keep and bear arms.)I'm a gun-toting liberal, BTW.
Mssimo: Global shutter is a big deal. I hope we see them in DSLRS soon. They will be silent, and able to sync any shutter speed. Shutter speeds of 1/20,000 plus will also be possible.
Heck, Canon's first pro DSLR, the EOS-1Dinosaur, had a CCD chip, which allows for global shuttering. All high shutter speeds were electronic. It had 1/16,000 as the fastest! There was no real flash sync limit, either ... except that you'd "clip" your flash pulse, albeit with the frame illuminated corner to corner!
Jun2: Is cropping factor 3X vs full frame?
Best to think of it as "full frame Super 16"! Those of us who have shot on such will know which lenses are needed. Of course, there's not yet a cinema-ready super-mega-ultra-hyperwide, and if there is, it likely won't fill a MFT frame.
Mike Walters: The only time it should be valid to shoot another animal is ;1. If it is in pain and cannot be cured.2. For conservation purposes (i.e. numbers growing out of control and killing off the habitat)3. For food (Inuits taking a whale now and then to feed their people, that kind of thing)Hunting for sport is sick which ever way you look at it and those that hunt for sport are also sick. What right do we have to kill for fun?
I have no issue with manufacturers producing items that ensure a clean kill for points 1-3 above, but Nikons marketing does seem to be aimed at the sports hunters. I also do take into consideration the fact that the sports hunters may also be paying for this, funding conservation etc but I still cannot get around the fact that they get any enjoyment from seeing a beautiful creature killed.
The urge to hunt is built-in. When I see a wild turkey, I salivate. Perhaps you'd starve if you had to kill your own food. I would not.As to simply "sport" hunting, as I mentioned, hunting is part of the survival instinct. Kill the bad animals before they kill you, eat the tasty ones. Given that, would it be OK if someone ATE the lion that they shot, and wore its hide? What if we farmed them for consumption? Are they still special, or now just like cattle?Don't misunderstand me - someone killing endangered species should be imprisoned. But one animal is really just the same as another, beyond its rarity.BTW, I believe that cattle are beautiful creatures - and turkey, and pigs. Good eating, too.
PunkRock: I am anti war but they are amazing amazing pics and really give a feel of what the drama and tension and just general all round days were like...excellent stuff.
Oh, pretty much everyone is "anti-war", including all of the folks I worked with in the USAF.
bondiblue: 50mm aperture over that focal range = f/4.5 to f/25
Diffraction will make images soft past f/15.
Thanks but no thanks. My maksutov - 180mm aperture, f/15 ie focal length a real 2700 mm will slay this, anytime.
Reg, you forgot to take into account the 2x (or so) crop factor, as they gave the FOV in 35mm equivalent.