As with cameras, there are too many brands of bags in the marketplace and that's not even counting no-name, OEM and eBay. But I give Tamrac a lot of credit. They took Tenba's concept and left them in the dust. For a while.
This is classic DPR. Your RX100 may exhibit some soft corners or a soft edge but heck, blame it on the 20 megapixels. And besides, we can point to lots of compact cameras that aren't any better.
This translates roughly, to "It's the best you're gonna get in this size body but if you care enough about image quality to spend $800, and you insist on a zoom lens in a camera this size, don't expect miracles."
Stephen_C: Nothing says "Success" like dropping the price so low. The problem is that I am reminded of Admiral Ackbar's famous line when it comes to getting invested in an open ended subscription with a program that uses proprietary image files.
They have a near-monopoly so they're not going broke. But they do need to tell the folks who thought subscriptions would be popular that it's time to clean up their work area and stop by personnel for an exit interview.
Super convenient, perhaps but not super.
Dear Canon, These days, the way things are supposed to work is, you release a great camera, with almost no lenses available for it. So why are you making 4 reasonably priced lenses, two of which are great, but you don't have a top of the line body to go with the lenses?
TylerQ: Still not signing up. Monthly fees for software? No thanks.
And the best part is that your monthly payment will never increase. Just kiddin'.
Hephaestus: Plastic mount. Not mentioned in the release, and not mentioned by dpreview, but it is plastic mount (and metal body). Rather strange decision - the remaining three EOS M lenses have metal mounts.
Has anyone seen one of these? I recall there were several Nikon lenses that were in plastic mounts on DPR but had metal mounts in reality. The EOS-M system is weird enough that this could be true.
Rooru S: No longer listed in Canon USA huh? Interesting...
Every camera leaves all the others in the dust. Some are even full of dust. The original M is slow as molasses but for $300 it gives you a lot or image quality for the money.
RichRMA: Canon M should have been "S" for stillborn.
Obviously there will be a body with faster focusing for Photokina. Otherwise they've just introduced a lens for which there is no camera. Assuming the original M is officially discontinued, there's no M body for sale in the US.
On the other hand, the "mk III", whatever it is, won't be $300.
Foveon cameras are sharp, slow and noisy. If it's possible to make a big improvement in Foveon it will take somebody with more resources than Sigma. Still, it's an interesting novelty and Foveon colors are unique. A mystery why Sigma got into this but at least they realized the world doesn't need any more conventional digital cameras.
Peng Bian: It most likely won't get to 3000, interest has peaked with this camera, until the full review comes out I think.
Maybe they should mark the comments with "Certified Buyer". Easy enough to track who buys from Amazon. The other comments, including this one are like dead people going to the polls.
Everything new is new again. With slogans like this they should get out of graphics and go into advertising.
Deutsch: Yes, the Coolpix A does not have VR, has a fixed lens, is/was priced high compared to competition, etc. But, I had bought one, instead of the Ricoh, and really like the Coolpix A. Yes, I'm limited in some areas but it sure has a great lens, a nice APS-C sensor, made very well, performs well, and just does a good job. So I don't disagree with some of the comments on why a firmware update now, but 8 inches different in normal focus mode isn't a big point that made much of a difference for me. A little faster AF is good, but it wasn't bad before. My main point is the bottom-line, do I get a good photo for it and does it do what I want. Yes. It all comes down to just taking photos. I'm sure Ansel Adams would have been thrilled with such a camera instead of lugging everything else around. But bottom line was was going out and shooting some great photos. You can do that with this camera, and the Ricoh, and many others. So it's getting a camera that suits you and shooting.
Was there something about the Ricoh that made you feel it was worth paying more for the Nikon? Just curious.
JanMatthys: Seriously, how much is Sony paying you (DPreview) to do these daily infomercials on the RX100III?? What's tomorrow's preview infomercial? A look at the sony battery, charger and neck strap?
2600 comments attests to the fact that people have nothing better to do than leave comments. On something they haven't even tried, no less. Like saying "Man, what an awesome car but I've never driven one".
Great video but it's amazing how this has grown from something that was easier to use than Photoshop, to what it is now.
SushiEater: Heard about it few times but never paid any attention.What bothers me is that Canon sent lawyers to shut down the truth and there is something about Phil Askey and Amazon doing the same. Not nice at all. Truth can't be shut down and any attempts will only bite you on the ass in the end.
But what is truth? If you're a Canon fan, all L lenses are superb because, well, they're L lenses. If you're a Nikon fan the complaints about the D600 were a vicious personal attack on your favorite company.
tkbslc: It's funny when you first hear of someone at their retirement. I never knew fake Chuck existed.
Ken Rockwell is going to reveal who Edward Snowden is.
Fake Chuck had me fooled. Despite the vulgarity and exaggeration I honestly thought he worked in the photo industry because so many of his comments were spot-on. But in the end, Fake Chuck was in a lonely place. Canon fans didn't want to hear the sensor in their camera was noisy and Nikon fans didn't want to hear their D600 had oil. And you know what? The top management at these companies didn't want to hear it, either.
The jury is still out on whether you can shame a company into making a better product but Fake Chuck certainly tried.
Question. Was the Motel sign curved? The bottom of the sign appears to be pointing straight up but the top half points "away" as if the sign was wrapped around a ball. The flowers look nice and sharp, though.