i've been into photography for 36 years, and even though, as a Nikon Leica fan, I've never bought any Pentax or Ricoh products, I feel more warm fuzzies towards Pentax than Ricoh.
Question: if any RX100-version 1 users see this photo, can they comment on how the quality compares with their version 1 RX100.
I don't agree with this. I realise many brands are trying to modernize, but the "Carl Zeiss" name has a cachet of quality. I'd not pleased to see it go.
Frenske: I was really hoping that Sony will produce this camera with a improved lens. Something equivalent to a 24-120mm with f1.8-3.2. No need for more MP.
Yes, the lack of a 24mm wide is one reason that caused me to hesitate getting the RX100. It forced me to consider the Lumix LX7 for its 24mm even though that one's image quality seems lesser.
This review finds that the upper ISO performance is stellar. This review thinks that many RX100 users will want to upgrade simply for the better high ISO quality.
The Leica Vario-Summicron 24-90 mm f/2.0 on the D-Lux 5 is an amazingly sharp and compact lens. It's designed for a far smaller sensor. Of course I'm not an optical engineer, but why can't Leica provide a lens like that, scaled up in size for the APS-C sensor? I have previously splashed cash for Leicas including a true M rangefinder, but this f/3.5 widest aperture of the X is a total deal breaker, meaning there is zero chance I would even desire to get it. It is THAT BAD.
If it had, at its widest, a 24mm f2.0 at least, with vibration control, plus attachable EVF, it would be close to my ideal camera.
The Lumix LX5 / Leica D-Lux 5 had a very sharp Leica zoom lens with f2.0 aperture. Why couldn't Leica have provided something like that?
In the past, I have owned a few Leica cameras, including an M, but I consider it a nonsense for Leica to only offer here a f3.5 maximum aperture.
Leica, you missed the boat on this one. Very disappointed.
When I was spring-cleaning once, my cousin reminded me that that all the stuff we've accumulated will all eventually get burnt up.
2 Peter 3:10-11 in the Bible states: "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare. Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives."
I'd be happy with a modification to the Leica X2 that adds a zoom lens. I don't need interchangeable lenses, since the Leica Vario-Sumicron zooms e.g. on the LX5 have fast f2.0 apertures.
And even if the price is not immediately affordable, one can always wait about 2 years until the model gets into the 2nd hand market.
The current generation of cameras are, in my view, so good that I'd be happy to pick one up 2nd hand in a few years time. Once you hit 16MP, there's no need to get 24, 36MP. Generally, the top of the range cameras now have reached a plateau where improvements are minor. We ourselves just have to get on with the artistic side now.
40daystogo: My dream Leica camera would be, firstly, affordable, and have a full frame sensor or APS-C with a non-interchangeable 24-90 Leica zoom lens with at least f2.0 or preferably f1.4 aperture. That would cover most of my photographic needs. i.e. their X2 with zoom lens.
I am disappointed with the Sony RX1 and Leica X1, X2 series because I need a good zoom lens, rather than fixed focal length.
The Leica zoom lens on the Panasonic LX5/LX7 - Leica D-Lux 5 etc is really sharp, and I'd love a Leica camera with non-interchangeable zoom with a decent sensor size.
I wish other camera brands can capture the great looking design or Leica cameras. In my view, Fuji cameras, particularly the X-Pro 1 and X10 look fairly ugly. The X100 is passable, but not gorgeous. Sony's RX100 is svelte, Olympus OM-D too - but the Panasonic M43's are lumps of plastic. It's similar to the case where most Japanese and Taiwan PC manufacturers just can't capture the striking good looks of Apple Macs. I really like cameras that look nice.
My dream Leica camera would be, firstly, affordable, and have a full frame sensor or APS-C with a non-interchangeable 24-90 Leica zoom lens with at least f2.0 or preferably f1.4 aperture. That would cover most of my photographic needs. i.e. their X2 with zoom lens.
An Australian newspaper's report on Adobe CC. The conclusion: "As an amateur photographer, are you ready to sign up for a year's subscription at $600 to use Photoshop? We thought not."
AshMills: Just had another thought about this CC b*llocks- if in the future Adobe decide to abandon a program- like they did with GoLive for instance, presumably if you have it via CC the program will stop working and you will be unable to keep using your own creative files? Will a program they stop including in the CC package cease to work?
The insidious thing about CC is that - although it does not require 24/7 internet connection to work, nevertheless, CC does require regular checkups via internet to check that your software is legitimate. As for your question, if Adobe kills off a piece of software, you'd hope Adobe would keep up that old software on CC with the ability to have online checkups. BUT -- and here's the big BUTT - what happens if Adobe killed off your software to force people to get their new software. Adobe aren't in this at all to please you. They would want to force you onto their new latest thing. So, with Adobe, imagine the worst scenario, and if you're prepared for that, you can't be far wrong.
It was silly of DPR to limit the list to 10. It should have given at least 20.
e.g. Corel's AfterShot Pro (equivalent to LightRoom).
slncezgsi: Thank you guys. This article makes for a good starting point for someone that looks for an alternative to PS.
But there are another few softwares worth a look (some were mentioned already):- Photo Plus: http://www.serif.com/int/de/photoplus/- Darktable: http://www.darktable.org/features/- Acorn: http://flyingmeat.com/acorn/- Picture Window Pro: http://dl-c.com/content/view/47/74/- Photo Line: http://www.pl32.com/?- Perfect Photo Suite: http://www.ononesoftware.com/products/suite7/
For me the worst part of switching the software is not learning to use the new one, but to get through all the candidates and select one ...
Photo Ninja http://www.picturecode.com