Seemingly, imaging will develop similar to music consumption. In former times electronics companies could sell relatively big hifi installations to households even with vinyl records. With mp3 or streaming you can just use a smartphone and perhaps a WiFi-connected active speaker system or headphones which seem to be selling well. With lower mp3 qualities, a super hifi system does not make sense.For many users smartphone cameras deliver what they need and by using them they can deal way better with display-based framing than many of the older DSLR-guys. This increases the likelyhood that if at all they will step up to enthusiast compact or mirrorless cameras.Recent fullframe high resolution DSLR combined with up to the task lenses are far above what the average Joe will ever spend.We have already seen the biggest innovations with DSLR and there is not much in it for new models of APS DSLR having reached 24mpix or even more combined with the usual kit lenses or superzooms.The age of diminishing expectations has begun.
Photato: Looking at the specs of this phone makes me puke.This is one of the reasons Sony has been struggling with their Mobile division and keep losing money year after year.Somebody there needs to understand the value of balance, optimization, restraint and user experience are more important than filling spec sheets with bigger numbers.Meanwhile Apple has no problem selling their iPhones in record numbers at MSRP with "just" a 1080P screen and a 8MP camera.
... It is about many appleholics too who have no clue of specs.
Thanks for the review Damian.However what you have written concerning highlight recovery/shadow lifting in post pretty much reminds me of my experience with the Pentax 645D and it would require further testing to demonstrate that this - at least at base ISO - is superior over a Nikon D8X0 or Canon 5DS/R.Moreover there are not that many fast lenses for medium format and MF sensors are usually smaller than the respective film formats which results in not that shallow DOF than one might expect.Generally larger sensors have been somewhat overrated taking into account that sensor development is focused on small sensors and high pixel densities which results in a trickle up of technical progress to larger sensors which eliminates some of their size-related advantages.Thus the air for medium format has become somewhat thinner.
light_bulb: It is one of the most obvious contradictions of our days that we see how insecure the internet is, while at the same time more and more business models are based on cloud storage and permanent internet access.Every hardware that has significant resources to offer and is permanenty online is just an invitation to NSA and other hackers to apply their malware.Farewell Adobe!
I did not suggest that CC requires a computer that is permanently online (how often do you have to to qualify for using a service you have paid for?) or that you have to store your files in the cloud. I was referring to a general trend and Adobe has done a first step into that direction that you may or may not like.
It is one of the most obvious contradictions of our days that we see how insecure the internet is, while at the same time more and more business models are based on cloud storage and permanent internet access.Every hardware that has significant resources to offer and is permanenty online is just an invitation to NSA and other hackers to apply their malware.Farewell Adobe!
What they did not tell is that this sensor has been designed on behalf of the NSA.
adrianf2: OK. Olympus won 'fair and square'. But what exactly did they win? A popularity contest among the visitors to this site from a pre-determined list that excluded many excellent cameras.
I have bought a D800 and voted for it. However if the OMD were able to properly AF my FT lenses I do not know what I would have done.
In a side by side comparison with low dof shots (D800 85 1.8 G versus OMD 45 1.8) the OMD was the clear winner. With its image stabilisation and face recognition it was good for so many keepers, while the D800 setup was a lot of miss and seldom hit. The focus sensors are simply to big for this kind resolution/low dof and focusing accuracy seems to lack too.
This OMD technology is what every low dof portrait shooter would like to have instead of fiddling with focus sensors. You can even choose which eye the camera should focus on.
Thus the D800 certainly has its strong points but the OMD is a much smaller package combined with very good image quality and some compelling innovations.
Sigma has managed to do some serious overhaul with their lenses.I am using the Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS and am very happy. No reason to go for a 5k $ Nikkor.
Jeffrey Lockwood: Can someone explain to me why Canon would get rid of the ISO dial and instead keep the exposure comp? I never, ever, use the exposure comp settings on either my G11 or my 7D, but I change ISO all the time. If you shoot RAW, why would you ever need to? Other than doing some HDR work, which if you are advanced enough to want to do that, you should be using RAW. I understand that a lot of photography novices will buy this camera but it really is a very good pocket camera for those with DSLRs and why wouldn't you cater to that market a bit more? Can someone give me a good reason for exposure comp that perhaps I don't know about?
What I cannot understand is why the default crop is always on the label of that bottle. It does not provide sufficient fine detail to allow for a reasonable comparison at this level of resolution.Better stick e.g. to the feathers on the right hand side of the picture to establish what the selected cameras can resolve.Cheers Andreas