And just to make a few points myself:
Sure, a fully articulating display is good for taking selfies, but how often do we need that?for a lengthy photo session I usually need to have a quick access to the EVF as well as a quick access to the LCD - which is best given with a tilting LCD by handling it with just one hand hand, actually with just my right thumb and right ring-finger without even removing my index finger from the shutter button.To use a fully articulating LCD I need to move at least one hand much more than with a tilting LCD. Not to speak of how a fully articulated LCD is in the way of my left hand, is more likely to be damaged, needs more moves of hand and fingers to be employed or put back.If I use just a simple push with my left thumb to deploy it - then I cannot review images on the LCD monitor, I have to swiwel it first.
So what else is there to love about the fully articulating LCD display?
I see a few positive comments about the articulating LCD display. I on the other hand hate that change. Sorry, big partybreaker for me :(PS: Can anyone make a list of advantages of a fully articulating display versus a tilting display - including the frequency of use of each specific advantageous use of one or the other type of display?
Tears come into my eyes reading about this marvelous device for I have no use for it since I have abandoned all my apple hardware (well, except my imac which i'm using with windows installed).
For the apple protectors: whatever you say in response to so called apple bashing like "this can be done on apple devices too" - well, yes, but on non-apple devices it can be done with much less hassle and without workarounds. Example: i plug in my android phone to my pc, i open in any file manager of my liking the phone's drive letter OR device name (both is available) and start copying and whatever else is needed. Please notice: the mentioned steps are THE ONLY necessary steps. No WinSongs or iTunes or any other jumbomumbo-no-other-can-do-it-miracle-software-or-super-duper-in-between-device is necessary. That's what the apple protectors always forget to mention.
When hacked, apple stuff is quite cool. So what the heck, let's hack it ;)
He Leute, lasst euch nicht verappeln ;)
I own now an A3000 for some ten days. I am very satisfied with the image quality and with the shape of the camera and the ergonomics. I really don't understand the previous post by Neodp. I don't share his/her experience. And yet there is a thing that keeps nagging and annoying me more and more. This here is now intended for the engineers from SONY to read, maybe to respond, and just, just maybe to do something. I'll put it in a sarcastic form:What is the benefit of shooting in RAW + JPEG without having the option to shoot just in RAW ? I would like to know it so I can enjoy fully the benefits of this most likely very wisely implemented restriction in the A3000 too! Please tell us! OR FIX IT!For years now I am shooting only in RAW with all my cameras. I don't need the in-camera jpegs. Does that make me a bad person, dear SONY?!
Michel J: @ plastique2
The whole 38 millions accounts was hacked by the N$A through Adobe itself?
I don't understand, thanks to explain to me. ;-)
Did I say or write "The whole 38 millions accounts was hacked by the N$A through Adobe itself?" No, I didn't. So what exactly do you not understand?
No need to panic. All this was hacked by NSA and CIA and who not else a long time before. So they maybe know who hacked Adobe now ;)
Excellent work! This gets very close to how I see scenes like these with my eyes. I would love to see these images in a higher resolution so that I can "delve" into all these details.
Jogger: i really dont understand all the pandering over the retro design.. who cares what it looks like as long as its not offensive.
oh boy, of course i care how it looks like if it looks like as it looks like just to look like as it looks like and therefore has no grip and i get cramps from holding it even after a short time - so what does that that look like? soon we'll have cameras without a shutter button - but you'll have to lick the touch screen to release the shutter, sorry, not the touch screen but the lick screen, that would be fancieee
Could you please list me some cameras looking like a fisher price toy? (although i have no clue what a fisher priced toy is in the first place)
plastique2: Like all the other PEN cameras and many other similarly designed cameras by Sony, Pentax, etc. - a fine piece of engineering - but NOT as a photographic tool should look like! Simple as that. Pretty camera? Maybe. A matter of taste. Ergonomic camera? Surely not. As so many cameras recently. I hate that. Who needs a pretty camera anyway? Any camera that would have an outstanding performance and would be easy to hold and easy to handle would be pretty because of that. Everybody would want to have it. But these new (ehm, old retro whatever design) cigarette box cameras are a hurdle to serious photographic work, amateur or pro ...When will this 'who makes the camera with the smallest grip and the most invisible viewfinder' craze end?
And yes, maybe the E-P5's images are shaky because it is difficult to hold it steady without a viewfinder pressed against the face to hold it even steadier ... it's meant to be a joke, but maybe it isn't so far from the truth ...
At the moment I have only two Olympus cameras, E-620 and PEN PL1. I have had and used most of the main camera models of all camera makers. I know what I am talking about. I have nothing against good design. But the design has to be ergonomical, otherwise what is the point of a photographic tool? Yes, a tool. You are happy with the OM-D. I would be too. It is much more ergonomical than the E-P5 and that's the model here in discussion. The new OLY which is about to come is even more ergonomical. Yet it is not am OLY PEN. Why did we have to go through the PEN phase with exceptionally good image quality, but with show off design of the camera body? That's what I'm talking about. And you go on being happy. By the way, herd followers are those who are prepared to use and praise a product even if it is clearly impractical in one or another way, just because it is fancy, modern, rare, designed by somebody famous, etc.So do you understand what I am saying?
Like all the other PEN cameras and many other similarly designed cameras by Sony, Pentax, etc. - a fine piece of engineering - but NOT as a photographic tool should look like! Simple as that. Pretty camera? Maybe. A matter of taste. Ergonomic camera? Surely not. As so many cameras recently. I hate that. Who needs a pretty camera anyway? Any camera that would have an outstanding performance and would be easy to hold and easy to handle would be pretty because of that. Everybody would want to have it. But these new (ehm, old retro whatever design) cigarette box cameras are a hurdle to serious photographic work, amateur or pro ...When will this 'who makes the camera with the smallest grip and the most invisible viewfinder' craze end?
As if Sony were reading my mind: the superior NEX image quality in a NORMAL PHOTOGRAPHIC CAMERA BODY ! Finally. Unfortunately the lenses of the alpha system don't fit. Hopefully there will be a solution to that, or at least a series of really usable NEX E-mount lenses.What I like with Sony is they are experimenting around. What I don't like: they produce something fantastic like the DSC-R1 and then completely drop the concept.
And so the metabones speed booster isn't that fast after all - although it increases the speed without any doubt! What?!?!?!
It is really about time to change the term used in the English speaking photography community for the capability of a lense to let through more or less light. The term "speed" is absolutely misleading. We from non-english speaking countries have to endure the torture of reading photography related material translated from English by people who have no clue about photography.
This can look like this (my attempt to make an impression of what we actually have to read in our language - because someone translated literally something he didn't understand what it's about - but then who can blame them given the English text):
"This lens is very fast, although it isn't fast at all."
When we say in our language that a lens is fast, it always relates to it's ability to perform any kind of mechanical operation in a short time period. Yet when we wan't to address it's quality of light gathering, we use two words, the translation would be: "light power". Doesn't that make more sense?!
I see I'm not the only one with similar thoughts about this toy thing.Well, I like all kinds of technical toys, no matter how still imperfect, but I hate ridiculous and absolutely useless design. This Lytro thing is obviously designed for people who love to be pushed to the limits of their ergonomical tolerance. Same thing with the apple mouse, after ten minutes cramps in the fingers and palm. Apple faithfuls tell me: you give up too easily! - Isn't that cute as an explanation :)On the other hand I love this idea of focusing after focusing (I don't know the proper name for it). But designwise ... you guys said it all with your comments before ...
So if we think the camera companies aren't reading our complaints on this and similar forums, then we are mistaken. I think they are reading them very carefully and when they see what we would like to see on cameras - they try to avoid it more or less to incorporate in new models - so that they'll never make THE perfect camera! Why?! Well, once you buy a perfect camera you will not feel the need to buy another one.My suggestion: let's do the opposite! Let's write here how happy we are with all the new camera models, how perfect they are, how unnecessary all further improvements would be, and so on....
It is interesting to read how different the reasons for disappointment are. And I don't see them all to be logical since Canon most certainly isn't closing the DSLR program - and the EOS-M system isn't trying simply to make the DSLR's two or three sizes smaller. I understand that. But here goes my story of disappointment (and not just with this new Canon system, but with all similar mirrorless systems so far): where is the grip???You can have a camera without a built-in flash. You can have a camera with just 3 fps, with most of the functions accessible only through menus ... but you have to hold the camera in your hand all the time - and without a grip you will soon get cramps in your fingers. So this is my reason for saying: I don't get it!On the other hand: I do get it! - We buy a sophisticated camera only to see it doesn't satisfy us for some reason. So after a while we buy a camera from the other class - hopefully (for the respective company) from the same brand.
what's wrong with his ears??