MarcMedios: This camera is a real game changer. My main objection (shared by many pros I know) was the lack of viewfinder. First, who wants to look like a soccer mom focusing and second, impossible to really frame and focus in most conditions. The pop up viewfinder destroys all of those objections in a second. Also, it doesn't eat valuable real estate on the top of the camera. Add that to absolutely no shutter lag, a quality lens and a 20mp sensor and you have the beginning of the end of low-end pro-wannabe cameras. Thank god it costs $800 meaning a lot of soccer moms and mammarazzis won't buy it. Next step, a 5:1 zoom, perhaps 24-135? That would be a killer combo
Ah yes, the "don't you have a sense of humor?" good-for-every-situation retort, especially when the joke ridicules another group. Perhaps the joke just wasn't that clever or funny?
But as long as you're relieved to never be mistaken for a soccer mom-- at least if you carry this camera-- more power to you!
It should be possible to talk about the pros and cons of a camera without taking a pot-shot at so called "soccer moms" and "mammarazis" (what's that anyway--the partner of a papparazi?). Ignorance about cameras and photography comes in all shapes, sizes, and genders.
I would have liked to see the original RX100 in the drop-down comparison options, especially in low light, where the RX100 II is supposed to have a noticeable advantage.
I thought "Wow, this looks like a worthy alternative to the RX100-- wider angle, more zoom, brighter lens at tele," until I got to the sensor size. What was Olympus thinking in not doing at least a 1/1.7' sensor? I suspect that the users this camera is aimed at (digitally informed, not invested in the megapixel race, interested in RAW formats and manual options) will notice that "feature," and be unimpressed. It seems short sighted on Olympus' part.
Kevin Chao: is it just me or do the filters look really bad?
It is not just you! That's the way I feel about all the Instagram type filters. It's as if someone in a back room somewhere said "let's take photography back to when most folks owned lousy cameras with cheesy lenses, offer it as new 'apps,' and convince the users that this is the cutting edge of creativity!"
Richard Franiec: I'm saddened seeing so much negativity and hate posted in reply to the news regarding my new grip but on the other hand I'm not shocked.
The idea behind my accessories always concentrate on the voids left by original equipment manufacturers: be that poor handling characteristics or adding missing functions like implementing remote shutter release adapters.
Maybe my press releases published by DPReview (as well as other prominent photo sites) are not newsworthy for some but welcomed by others who look for the solutions that my accessories provide. My experience based on actual users feedback clearly shows that the balance is overwhelmingly positive.
Accusations about business relationship between myself and DPReview (as well as other photo related sites) are utterly baseless, tasteless and untrue.What I do provide is the news press release, that's all. It is up to the publisher of the news to decide if it is worthy publication or not.
I am saddened too, Richard. I have used your grips on two of my cameras, the Sony RX100 and the Olympus XZ-1 before that, and you sent me a free replacement part for a third camera when I wrote to you and said the part I had seemed "sticky."
Your parts look and feel like they were made for each camera, the metals match perfectly, and the grips greatly improve the feel of holding the camera.
But if someone sees it otherwise, why must they cast aspersions on your integrity or on that of the person who sells the products on his website? It seems like some folks are in need of a place to lob cheap shots.
JamesRW: You need:ModeratorsSticky ThreadsMobile versionAbility to flatten threads
Re moderators: I wish there were an express statement here that people are expected to be civil and helpful. I find it pretty disconcerting to read snide, disrespectful replies to innocent questions. Yes, this is the internet, where apparently some people think normal rules of courtesy don't apply. But must this be accepted as with an "oh well, what are you gonna do?" attitude? I had a post deleted because I jokingly referred to global warming, while rude and sarcastic posts remain in place.
inevitable crafts studio: sadly the major issue why i never used the forum, not even for reading through posts, is the cascading design of the threads, if i cant click on a thread and then just scroll down to read it, i will not use it
i cant understand why you dont make a normal forum like all other pages.
you cant read a forum like on your pictures, where you can only see the first post and a "norton commander view" of the threads
thats pointless to read
also, no mobile version in 2012? i only use the dpreview site on my ipad.
i dont read camera forums as a job, i come to this site when allready bored, and if its not streamlined for reading i cant see why i should generate clicks for you ^^
You currently do have the option to view it threaded (the way you don't like) or flat view (the way I think you want to). Open a thread and look to the right of where it says User. There you can choose the view. In my experience, if you're logged in, your reading preference is remembered.
In inbuilt HDR and/or panoramic functions?
David Zamora: Hmm, is it me, or are these images pretty darn soft at 100% crop? I'm not liking the IQ too much.
David, they look a little soft to me too.
To me the images look a bit too smooth--lacking a certain crispness.