Key word to why medium format is suffering in sales compared to dslr. Price.
Higuel: some $1300 for a lens that does NOT even close the iris as ordered by the camera...from a white brand on top!
This confirms us all that Samyang has forgotten that their first major success, the 85mm f1.4 owns it to the fact that it was INDEED way CHEAPER then the options from the brands! WITH almost the same optical quality.Start increasing the price like Sigma is doing and in no time Samyang is be story like many other brands who propose stuff way too expensive! They still have a looooong way to catch sigma in AF and ANY automation for that matter! Naturally they can try a crazy move like Sigma did with the SD1 sold at absurd prices, well, actually NOT SOLD! And in few months they had to cut the price to less then half!!! That is what Samyang deserves also!
Samyang doesn't make Af lenses.
I'd love to rock that 14 mm. Sony? What's up? We need primes like these.
Sounds like to me the D600 body isn't properly sealed.
It's really funny reading the reviews on here vs other reviews and others that own the camera feed back. They're never consistent. That's why I do my own test ti see what is good and what is bad.
whtchocla7e: I see a little bit of that :Minolta mind: in these new Sony products. Rock on. :)
A900 looked nothing like anything from Minolta design wise. The A900 looks like a blend of Minolta's older Maxxum film cameras and Canon.
deniz erdem: why do sony jpeg always have that blotchy look to them? i know the raw files are probably very impressive but why sony? why dont you have good jpegs?
@BMWX5. A good friend of mine, images were part of that RX1 gallery. The images with the model in the red gown playing pool. Matthew Jordan Smith is the photographer.
Michaels7: So basically what he's saying is, you're getting a Lexus car aka Toyota Camery. No thanks. Add a medium format sensor in this for the same asking price and I'll take a look at it. They didn't learn anything from Sigma's camera/price stunt.
@Mike. Innovative only goes so far. Sigma realized this after the masses complained about Sigma's insane initial asking price for that camera which brought them back down to earth where the price came down to join them. That was my point. Not the innovation part. Even Hassy has some nice technology in their medium format cameras, but most aren't blinded by innovation to the degree where they're going toss that money out if it's not justified.
Right. But it's still a Toyota car with a Lexus logo and that's pretty much what you're paying for.
So basically what he's saying is, you're getting a Lexus car aka Toyota Camery. No thanks. Add a medium format sensor in this for the same asking price and I'll take a look at it. They didn't learn anything from Sigma's camera/price stunt.
marcocoppiardi: The partnership of Sony and Hasselblad has the potential to be a very good thing for both companies, let's wait and see. However, these early prototypes with the two top plate knobs, make me think of teletubbies ergonomics!
@Richt. Ironically I was thinking about Sony and them making medium format sensors. I'm predicting that this is going to happen and the price will force the medium format prices down, similar to what Sony had done with the f.f. cameras.
edfo4: I'm delighted to see that Sony is offering a new full frame camera. I've had a long term relationship with Sony/Minolta. (My current Sony is an alpha 700..used..a good performer, though not up to my 5d). My 2nd 35mm SLR was a TTL Minolta (whose model number I've forgotten). My first was a Canon AE-1, also a TTL. I carried those things forever. I'm intrigued by the EVF and can't wait to hear how it performs. And the flip down LCD in a full frame is great. I bought a used 60d just for that feature. (I own Sony/Minolta and Canon lenses). Can't beat it for shooting over crowds. All three of my cameras fill a niche, and , if the reviews look good, and the price drops somewhat, I think I'll be replacing the 700.
@Francis. Two different cameras aimed at different targets.
mpgxsvcd: That is a very impressive camera. Two years ago we would have thought it would be impossible to pack all of those features into a $2800 camera body.
@Francis. My advice, buy the Nikon. From what I've seen, A99's target is not the same one that the D600 is targeting. Two different consumer. A99 is targeting the D800 market. Will they get that market? Probably not. But if you look at the promotion that Nikon is doing with the D600, it makes that an expensive camera too, considering their target. I know several Nikon users that don't see the point of this camera and target due to the high price. It's like Apple over the top price for their computers that they know the average consumer can't afford. So what do they do? The make a Mac Mini.
Several years ago, dslr cameras cost 10,000 grand and up. The technology from those cameras can't even compete with today's point and shoot cameras. The fact that we have dslr/dslt cameras that can beyond those cameras for 1000 and up is very good.
Rooru S: Wondering Why Sony choose to use a single Bionz Processor instead of Dual as they did with A900... Not sure, but maybe by using a single Processor, they're limiting themselves to 6fps and not 8 or 10 fps that everyone was expecting given the use of SLT.
Main concern here is, the EVF... I really want an EVF as big as the old A850/A900 OVF and really hope they corrected some little issues while panning.
@Rooru. I'd like an explanation for this too. Seeing that they want us to pay a lot of money for this unit, 8 to 10 fps would've been nice.
Maxfield_photo: Hey, they put a normal hotshoe on it, good for them.
@Plastek. It also gives us the same luxuries of using Pock Wizards and like, without having to add an adapter.
Donnie G: Sony's A99 is a handsome looking beast. Looks absolutely huge with the vertical grip attached. Even though I'm not sold on their SLT concept, I'm glad that they are sticking with it, as it gives them a very distinct brand identity that separates them from the rest of the players. I'm guessing that there are a lot of photo enthusiasts who are plunking down their cash for Sony's SLT equipped and ILC mirrorless cameras, so now we get to see how many pros will do the same. It's a big gamble for Sony, but they are doing it right by backing their offerings with massive lens, accessary, and advertising support. Now we just have to wait and see if the strategy pays off for them. Go Sony!
"Big Gamble." If it works, it works. So far it's been working for them. People are taking pictures with good results. All of the camera companies have flaws. I don't see any major flaws in the SLT concept.
abolit: Hey, Samsung ! Don't you think it's time to stop sniffing apple's ass and come up with something new? Apple will always be ahead because it does it first and it does it right. Please stop replicating iphone. Thanks!
Wow. I sense some projecting here. If you read another report on this, Apple 4s has borrowed from the Android smart phones too. Even Apple gave in to multitasking that Android used first. Amazing how some of the Apple fanboy drama queen get emotional over Apple. Apple isn't paying you anything.
sdyue: Copyright the entire visual spectrum . . . watch out, you cannot use MY colors... in any way, shape or form, altered, or not, etc
I just love how some of you try to simplify this. It's more than just about having the tools. It is what was done with those tools that help to create the concept in the artist's mind. I'm not a fan of David's work. But being in the industry myself, you know about him and you understand concept and copyrights.
Bryan Costin: It's a bad precedent. Even if the scenes were visually identical, there's absolutely nothing wrong with making a new photo/video/drawing/whatever that looks like someone else's photo/video/drawing/whatever. The photographer owns the original work that they created. They don't own the idea behind a photograph, or the scene you built, or the landscape you pointed your camera at, or the style you've cultivated. All you get is what you make. You don't get to stop other people from making it themselves.
@Breko. To answer your question. You already answered it. It's to make the singer look better, but to give credit, pay and acknowledge the originator or influenced would take away from the singers creativity. Or lack of. It's the aesthetic part that is just as strong as the singing that define a singer's image. Yeah she was better off vs. looking foolish in the end.
hdc77494: What's shocking to me are the number of photographers who have no comprehension of copyright law, and worse, don't seem to recognize the elements of their own work that are original and protected. While anyone can copy Ansel Adams style, he didn't create the scenes he photographs, they exist on their own while we as photographers interpret them. In this case, LaChapelle had an idea and selected every element of his staged photograph to convey that idea. Fair use doesn't protect Rihanna because her video is a commercial piece of art. You can't steal someone else's idea to make money, you have to pay the creator in order to use their property, including intellectual property. Yes, everything in the room was created by someone else, however LaChapelle used those things in a new and different way in creating his art. If Elle magazine lifted an entire set design from a Vogue fashion shoot for their magazine, it would cost them millions. The elements YOU bring to a work can be protected.
Ditto. Photographers do need to get informed on copyright and concepts that they bring to the table.