Robgo2: The covers of "Abbey Road" and "Sgt. Pepper" are almost certainly the most famous in the history of recorded music and are fitting icons for some of the greatest pop music ever.
@JDThomas: Perhaps I'm not as hip as you, but it seems to me that Elvis's following these days is rather limited. My son, who is in his mid-thirties and is very much connected to the punk and indie music scenes, would not agree with your assessment of Elvis's popularity with younger generations. It's not non-existent, but neither is it very significant.
FWIW, I am of the generation that grew up on Elvis's music. I remember distinctly just how quaint it became after the Beatles arrived on the scene. We liked Elvis as kids and teens but lost interest when something fresher and more creative came along. And as the Beatles matured musically, they essentially redefined popular music. Even musicians who follow in their wake and seek to return to the "authentic" roots of rock are deeply in their debt.
@JDThomas: No doubt Elvis was highly influential, mainly through popularizing black music with white youth, including the British lads who became the Beatles. But my point was that Elvis's own recordings have not been embraced by succeeding generations. Granted, there are still some Elvis impersonators knocking around, but who goes to see them other than people above a certain age?
You are right about Elvis. The people who listen to him today are mostly the same ones who listened back in the day. That's because his music, with a few notable exceptions, has not stood the test of time. The same can be said of almost all pop musicians of the past 75 years, and I have no doubt whatsoever that it will be true of today's teen idols. Their appeal is in the glitz and the spectacle that surrounds them, not in their music. Once the glitz fades, people will lose interest. Does anyone know where Britney Spears is today? Does anyone care?
"Dark Side of the Moon" was certainly one of the best selling albums of all time, but the cover art is pretty pedestrian and never reached the universally recognizable status of "Abbey Road" or "Sgt. Pepper." There is hardly a person on the planet who does not know most of the songs on the two Beatles albums, but there are plenty who know only a few on Pink Floyd's. Also, the Beatles albums still sell very well to younger generations more than 40 years after the group disbanded. Can the same be said of PF? All of which suggests that the covers on AR and SP are the most famous in history and by a fairly wide margin. One might argue that there are albums with "better" art, but not that they are as well-known.
The covers of "Abbey Road" and "Sgt. Pepper" are almost certainly the most famous in the history of recorded music and are fitting icons for some of the greatest pop music ever.
The Leica T will likely sell well to its target market, i.e. those who are seeking status and/or great lenses. However, M lenses can be used on far more capable cameras than the T. T lenses are, on the other hand, only usable on the T. Anyone who chooses a Leica T over a Sony A7 is in need of therapy IMO.
Michael Piziak: If Ansel Adams were alive today I think he would use this camera.
"He would be 112. I doubt he could lift it."
Yeah, but the new Pentax is a whole lot lighter than the massive view camera that he used back in the day.
TechManager: This review states that the Pentax 645z uses the same Sony CMOS sensor as the Hasselblad and PhaseOne. This is incorrect as the Hasselblad and PhaseOne are CCD.
I am very skeptical; this camera seems more like a glorified DSLR then a move into a higher quality MF system.
What about tethered shooting? Is this an option with the Pentax?
Can you imagine what a Leica S3 will cost?
Calvin Chann: Full review please.
DPR is typically very slow to review Pentax products, so it will probably be quite some time before we see a full review or, just as likely, we will never see one. The 645Z is a dazzling specialty camera with a limited potential market, which means that many people may lust for it, but few will buy it. DPR is most interested in reviewing cameras with strong sales potential.
SDPharm: I wish Pentax had made an EVF and made it tiltable like the Panasonic GX7. It just does not seem comfortable to hold such a big camera at eye level.
I think the 645Z is best suited for tripod shooting, in which case one can use the rear LCD for LiveView, which I presume it has. It then almost becomes a miniature view camera, only the image is not inverted.
JonB1975: Want, want, want....... My first dream camera since the 1Ds MkII! As for those people saying Ansel Adams would never touch something like this - How the hell would you know???
I am sick of hearing people opine as to what Ansel Adams might use if we were alive today. All we know is that he was fanatical about image quality and used the best technology available in his time to achieve it. How anyone can think that he would reject digital technology out of hand is beyond me. He was not the purist that some imagine but was an artist and craftsman who chose the right tools to accomplish his goals. He would do the same today.
Zvonimir Tosic: 800g with a battery. DLi90 is about 50g. So without it, it's some .. 750g ..?
K5 was light-er, yes. But this camera is light-years ahead of K5. I wouldn't be surprised it hasn't been made slightly bigger and heavier to sport an FF sensor in some future model, that will share same tech, including same battery grip too.
Guys at CR Kennedy have already seen a K-5-bodied camera sporting an FF sensor, a year ago.
"What's your source for that? FF sensor in a K5 body?"
Well, Sony put a FF sensor in a much smaller RX1 body, proving that it can be done.
Gesture: Welcome, welcome upgrade and features to K-5 and a great competitor to Nikon D7100. But what is it with companies and naming. The next camera will be the K-1 and, then, there is no where to go. Others have boxed themselves in with naming everything the X Z and/or 1.
"Should have been called the K5IIs-2"
Are you serious? The K-3 is almost completely new, including the 24MP sensor, and you regard it as a minor upgrade from then K-5II? You must be living in a 5th dimension of reality.
tompabes2: The best selling accessory for this camera will be a Pentax logo to cover the Ricoh writing on the back.
The "Ricoh" name may be associated with office equipment, but the company has manufactured some very fine, innovative cameras over the years as well as some excellent lenses. And they have very deep pockets, much deeper than Nikon and Canon. So it would be presumptuous to dismiss their ability to compete aggressively in the photo market, if they choose to do so.
Robgo2: Anyone who cannot see the superor output from Photo Ninja is either in denial or needs an eye exam. And this superiority holds for other cameras and sensors as well.
I have extensive experience with Capture One, and while I prefer it to ACR/LR, it is no match for Photo Ninja. I say this having run numerous head to head comparisons. I also take issue with those who dismiss PN as superior only at default settings. There are no adjustments in any other raw convertor that I have tested that can match what I can get from PN, and I do not rely exclusively on its defaults. PN's defaults are superb, but they should serve as a starting point for the editing process. If you routinely accept the defaults as final, then you are missing much of the power of the program.
Anyone who cannot see the superor output from Photo Ninja is either in denial or needs an eye exam. And this superiority holds for other cameras and sensors as well.
The biggest surprise is how absolutely awful the Sony looks. And this is from a company that manufactures some excellent cameras.
If Pentax ever produces a FF DSLR, I think we will see the classic FA Limited lenses get the same treatment. They should also add SDM, except this time, it should be with a mechanism that is reliable.
While some might consider colorizing these iconic photos to be a sacrilege, how does it differ from transposing musical pieces from one instrument to another or even to an entire orchestra? It has been done many times. It is up to the listener/viewer to decide whether the transposed music/image can stand on its own.
A separate question in the case of colorized photographs is whether the original photographer would approve. On that point, we can only speculate, but I suspect that most would not.
rhlpetrus: Well, I'm catholic re cameras, use the iPhone, the V1 and the D7000 and several lenses, can't see a single reason to restrict myself to just one kit. Why, in a site dedicated to photographic gear, echo the big media calls for the demise of dedicated photographic gear?
When EVFs can produce IQ as good as the best LCD screens, DSLRs will no longer have a reason to exist. Of course, they will still work, and some people will prefer to use them, but the advantages of EVFs will then seem overwhelming to most people. We are not yet at that point, but no one should doubt that it is coming.