MarkInSF

Vogue isn't big on rice paddy shots. It's just a different segment of the business. He's been a success because he'd good.

He had an interesting life. I always liked the MASH episodes he was in, the ones where he was listening to their problems. He was remarkably convincing, and seemed a lot younger than he was. I was very surprised by his age when he died, and had no idea before then that he had been married to Diane Arbus.

Eastwood is more than just a good pianist. He has written the scores for quite a few of his films. Very capable guy, Clint.

I'm a bit surprised to see the pink, but they offered the NX1000 in the same shade, so I guess it must be selling. What surprises me is that they made the matching pink lenses. More sense than Nikon. The J3 comes in a different set of colors than the earlier models, and they have matching lenses, too. So there are two different pink lenses in that line, and two reds, etc. I guess they hired a new color consultant. Best I can tell Samsung has stayed with the same repellent shade. I know I'm not who it's aimed at, but I don't think many women are going to want a camera that looks like a Barbie accessory.

It's a completely different sensor design. The novel color filter array allows the elimination of the anti-aliasing filter. That alone will increase sharpness, even using exactly the same lens. Unfortunately, possibly because of the unique sensor, the results are still a bit blurry. The Olympus XZ-2 looks much better, despite its more conventional design. I really liked the X10, and the X20 looks good, too, but I'm disappointed they aren't getting sharper results. These images are too soft and too noisy.

He could have made a more reasonable complaint, as I'm sure the camera isn't perfect, but skin tone problems (in jpegs) seem to have been solved by all makes now. Even recent Panasonics have very pleasant skin tones, where ones from a couple of years ago were hideous.

That's nice to know. Pretty much irrelevant in response to a review of the D7100. I'm sure many would like to see a proper followup to the 7D, but at this point Canon is just treading water until they get a new sensor (a proper modern one.) I expect we'll see that by the end of the year, and then the competition can begin anew. I don't have great respect for Canon's product strategy, but they still sell just fine even without great products. For now, the D7100 is a highly attractive camera Canon can't match.

Harmless bit of fun. The perfect birthday present for the young princess with everything. I'd take the one with the nifty tweedy squiggles, if I were a princess.

I wish I understood this comment. An OLPF intentionally slightly blurs the image, in a controlled way, to minimize moiré. That slight blurring always reduces detail, so removing the filter increases resolution.

The differences in the studio shots were noticeable, but still fairly modest. You'll also note that they only found those clear differences in very specific circumstances, and not in many others. I certainly expected more noticeable difference, but Nikon has reputedly been using light AA filters for a while, and this bears that out.

If you only shoot with the very best lenses, at their sharpest apertures, in great light, then the differences would be apparent, and nice to have. That sounds like studio conditions to me. In more compromised circumstances I'd not find this an important difference. It seems more of an marketing advantage than a technical advance.

Sometimes the remedy cures the disease. CA correction is quite effective because CA is a straightforward problem.

Then you've found your next phone. I found them over-processed to a distracting degree. Oversharpened, too contrasty, just ugly. The HTC images lack detail, but are otherwise quite pleasant. For a phone, less detail is fine with me. I have a real camera for serious photography. The phone just needs to give nice-looking low-res pictures for viewing right on the phone, or on a Facebook update. The HTC has plenty of detail for pictures of my dinner. But overall the Samsung seems the most capable. I was very surprised the iPhone had so many problems.

Possibly a better buy, but not a better camera. I don't expect it to fall quite that far. It dropped almost immediately to $500, where it stayed. If the G6 holds its price better (at least $700), the G5 would still zell at $500. Indeed, if the G6 gets hot, as it might, the G5 may even benefit.

Interesting accessories. The pictures of the flash and the microphone made me snort and giggle. Golly, do they really expect to sell any of those? I assume those are standard accessories designed for other models, but they look incredibly foolish on this little p&s. Even the evf looks a bit oversized (and too expensive), but that mic is really something. Ridiculous.

I could use my 'wrong' idea if needed. I'm not blind in one eye.

The GH3 offers better build quality and far more advanced video specs. Not that this isn't very good, too, but it's not specifically aimed at pro videographers.

This is nice, and if the price quickly drops, like previous G models, it will be a massive bargain. Instead of a sweet deal, which it is already. I only had a few quibbles with the G5, and this addressed all of them. I know people love the OM-D E-M5, but this offers more features for a lot less money, and even bests the NEX-6 in some ways. OK, the sensor isn't quite up to Sony standards, but it isn't far behind anymore. I do wish Panasonic would dump the clunky faux-dslr styling for something cleaner, but that's about the only remaining problem. If I were shopping this would be hard to resist.

People ship electronics all the time and nobody blows them up. On x-ray this is just some kind of camera. Or scientific instrument. Or high school science project. Shippers do not have people minutely examining packages or the price of shipping would be astronomical. They can detect explosives with more sophisticated equipment that wouldn't get upset over a circuit board and some components. They're looking for the stuff that blows up.

No, I don't think it's the same, though it likely shares a great deal. If they can combine this with the exiting Nikon 1 hybrid autofocus capability, it will be a great sensor, at least for video. The problem with the existing Aptina chips has been inadequate dynamic range. The sensors are full of clever technology (a true global shutter, a lot of processing right on the sensor, pdaf af that works), but without better image quality the Nikon 1 remains an incomplete camera.

My V1 is a lot of fun to shoot with because it is so fast and accurate, but I regularly run into the sensor's limits. Maybe this new chip will offer other improvements, too. I hope so, because for a still camera that was already speedy, the announced improvements aren't what was needed. I don't shoot video, though I've been impressed with just how good the existing Nikon 1 models are at video, given the limited press they get. The V3 could be a real GH3 competitor, or a lot more.

I don't know what to make of Panasonic's claims, but other past displays have made 'equivalence' claims, like PenTile. I wouldn't be surprised if this display uses a matrix something like that, with more green than red or blue dots. It does give the appearance of greater resolution and could explain the unfortunate shifting of the display towards the green.