I'd be interested to know how they get enough processing power for the 16 cameras but I'm sure the explanation is for engineers. This could be another Nimslo, but I don't think so. In both form and concept I think they're on to something.
Wow. Lots of surprises (joking). Thank heaven for the 11-24 since it would have been awkward to not include anything from Canon.
Honestly, except for the DxO thing, all this stuff is pretty cool. You really can't go wrong with any of it.
chlamchowder: I don't understand this move. They might be able to respond faster to market forces (i.e., other companies like Nikon buying Sony sensors), but Sony sensors are already quite popular. On the other hand, it'd reduce the camera division's influence over sensors. With Sony going for mirrorless, developing on-sensor tech like PDAF pixels is really important.
I feel like the Sony camera division has more to lose than the sensor division has to gain.
acidic is on the money. Not a perfect analogy but it's a bit like eBay and PayPal. One makes money; the other doesn't but they still work together.
NoMirror99: At long last!!! Finally! Now Sony Camera div. will feel free to buy Canon sensors!!!! Jestially speaking.
Gesture: What an endless update cycle just to have the current RAW converter.1-Use the RAW converter supplied by the camera maker. I hope that tradition never ends.2-Use Adobe DNG converter.3-Shoot JPEG only.
Would like to see Adobe offer Camera RAW as a standalone, but never happening.
Unfortunately, HowaboutRAW is right. And it's a shame, because stuff like localized haze filter isn't enough to justify paying for.
Saea ba ithi: Criteria might be more useful than the rants.
A description of the use case and the value proposition in the evaluation might focus some of the subsequent discussion. And consideration of the product for users.
Some of the marketing pseudo-science- such comparing chips isn't possible.
A discussion of the Total System Considerations and then the components would have been more constructive.
For incoherent light sources- a system should include a source, collection optics, beam handling and processing optics, delivery optics and a detector. It is important to analyze the entire system before selecting pieces of it. The best collection optics for one application can be of limited value for another. Often you find that collecting the most light from the source is not the best thing to do.
There is a difference between total radiant flux collected and useful radiant flux collected.
And Boltzman's constant was omitted from the analysis so- who knows shot noise from ?
I've been saying this all along but all people want to discuss is image quality and ergonomics.
SeeRoy: Lloyd Chambers' take on this latest "must-have"..."I’ll take the Nikon D810 operational behavior and buttons and responsiveness any day over the A7R II. I’ve wasted time constantly with clicks and button presses and trip-me-up lag-time issues in the field—these are simply, ludicrously just wrong and badly designed, unnecessary issues. Especially for a camera that costs a bundle (and more than a Nikon D810!).
Moreover, with cold stiff hands the A7R II sucks (its badly-sized and badly placed buttons and dials are a bane with stiff fingers and/or gloves). Even the weight of the A7R II is not much of a win when extra batteries are accounted for and/or a lens adapter. So while it is a fine camera, it cannot be called a mature and sensible design by any means."Article:http://diglloyd.com/blog/2015/20151004_1524-SonyA7R_II-fieldUsage.html
Sometimes he hits the nail squarely on the head.
Sometimes, Ken Rockwell says something that's accurate. It happens.
MBell: Does it get a Gold in the full review though? Can't wait to read it.
Of course it does. The technology in this camera is a review writer's dream. You could not ask for more buttons, menus and features.
Photoshop Fix seems like an unfortunate name, but if it's part of the monthly rental worth a try, I suppose.
Its a wonderful camera like all the GRs. But here we have a lesson in how to take a compact camera and make it take an entire briefcase. You can say it's just for collecting but in that case 1,200 is too many. Make 300 and you have something a little exclusive.
turvyT: Baloony that statement about the poor quality of GRD1. To begin with, there has been five previous generations of Ricoh GRDII. Four of them, with the small sensor, one with the APSC one. Unbelievably, Ricoh Grd1, with its small sensor and slow writing, is able to render brilliant images. Denser and more interesting than all the other generations --sometimes and with the right exposure. Very interesting cameras, all of them, and very misunderstood, specially by this webpage, that seems to prefer a crappy zoom than a good prime..
Its because a lot of the pros don't go back far enough to when there was no software correction to hide the flaws in zoom lenses.
Q: Is any image posted on the web effectively in the public domain since taking effective legal action is cost-prohibitive?
You realize that anyone who buys this (the Japanese I presume, but even they seem less interested in limited editions these days) will have to leave it in the attache case because if you get so much as a nick in the orange leather it will be tough to sell when the time comes.
If he doesn't already, the guy in Italy who makes the Leica cases can duplicate this one. It does look nice.
Marty4650: You could buy two of these kits for the price of one Leica X.
And in both cases you would end up with a nice compact camera, with a fixed lens and an APS-C sensor. Except Ricoh would give you a case plus accessories, and a another one as a spare.
But you must act before midnight tonight!
--And being digital cameras, neither will hold their value. The Ricoh is a lovely camera; almost as nice as the film ones. But this James Bond package will end up on the cover of the KEH catalog.
Wouldn't it be something if we found a planet like ours and the reason it looked like a speck of dust was because it was a speck of dust.
Cariboou: Like for Nikon compliments even to Adobe, hoping they improved and working any day for make better, fast and responsive them software
dlb41: Why do underwater cameras look so goofy?
Functionality aside, if you've ever been to Japan you'll understand the bright color. Surprised there aren't pink and blue ones. Yet.
Hopefully, they'll donate the junk people turn in to a school or charity. Still, an expensive promotion.
It must be a dilemma for Adobe; how much to leave out of Elements. I don't know about this version but with the previous ones, there are plug-ins that get Elements even closer to Photoshop.
Ocolon: HD PENTAX-D FA 24-70mm F2.8 ED SDM WR – such a poetic name.
Sounds like a Tamron name. Simple, concise.