Dimit: Nice upgrade,nothing special indeed,,with the usual Canon overpricing!Should be 280 $ less..so boring in 2014 surrounding..
And the accessory hand grip costs $30! It's an outrage.
VaLeX: I'd like to know more about:1. Sensor size: in relative terms, how does it compare with APS-C, m4/3 and Sony's 1"?2. How are the control rings on the lens working? Fly by wire? How fast and responsive are they?3. I don't think I've missed something, but the camera is not weatherproof, right?
The results from the current G1X make it pretty clear that a big sensor makes a big difference (and Canon isn't known for state of the art sensors to begin with). But when you see these numbers it's obvious how much you give up if you just have to have a small camera.
Looks good. One thing I knew for sure was that Canon wouldn't give it a logical name (G2X). Not a big deal. G1XmkII reminds me of that Stallone movie, First Blood, Part 2.
love_them_all: The viewfinder trolls will be all over this camera! LOL
You can get it without a viewfinder or get it with a viewfinder but some people will demand a third option.
ryanshoots: I think if your work is good enough to get license you can do better selling it on your own or seek out a deal with an agency directly. These opt in to the agency pools deals are never as good as if the agency wants your work because it's unique. And by the way, do we really need anymore photoshopped to hell and back landscape stock?
What we need is more guys with a D800 and Zeiss lenses shooting landscapes. Any photo agency will jump on this stuff because it's so unique.
BNapa: D's30% for the photographer sucks. That is true. But do you know how hard it is to market directly to the marketplace.1. You better have spectacular photos2. You need a web site to show the stuff3. You have to create and manage the contracts4. You have to have a web site that is capabale of commerce5. You have to get the word out as in all the marketing work.6. You are going to fight the fact that you are an unknown and anyone who has the money to license your work will be hesitant to work with an unknow (rightfully so) photographer7. You have to secure your site, e-commerce from hackets... and the list goes on. So you see, it is not that easy to go direct.I know because I have tried.In 2003, I came up with the idea, photographed, designed and did limited print run of 2,500 copies of an oversized B&W calendar. By the time I paid all the vultures and ate the cost of all the unsold copies, I came up on the loosing end big time. And this was for a calendar which everyone thought was an Ansel Adams calendar. I identified local retailers, presented to store managers and got them to agree that it was going to sell like hot cakes only to be overridden by a jerk out of New York who killed the idea because hedid not Iinitiate it. So I ended up dealing with Borders and Barnes and Nobles of the world. Sure they gave me my 35% but wait, out of that I had to take out the cost of printing, shipoing the inventory to them, pay for shipping back to me what did not sell. And the time it took to creat the work. Lets not go there.As I said, it is not easy to go direct.The biggest lesson (albit an expensive one) I learned was that it is all about distribution not the work. That is why you see so much sub standard work (at least in calendars) out there. The are crappy photos printed for pennies in China and on the shelves where you are going to make money.
One thing you didn't mention is that calendars are dated material. They have to be back from the printer in China in time to be on the shelves by Thanksgiving (in the US) and if they are unsold by first week, January, they are worthless.
Iif you make an "Ansel Adams" book it can stay on the shelf, have price reductions, be remaindered, etc. Might even become more popular as time goes on. But with calendars, even if you pick the right subject--swimsuits, cats or quilts--it's a very long shot.
grock: I used to think the comments on indie music blogs were the worst, but photography websites are really catching up. So much freaking jealousy and pettiness. So many people here can't stand it if someone is successful if they have what are deemed to be less than perfect technical skills with a camera, or if their composition seems amateurish or non-groundbreaking. Photography exists so that people can look at and enjoy photographs. Guess what? If someone enjoys looking at a photo you took, you succeeded. Nothing else--the brand and cost of your camera, the artistic merit, the people paying for the photo, the post-processing, the lack of preparation, etc-- matters.
Whatever you think of this guy's photos, he knows how to promote himself and if you're idea of success is to get paid for doing what you would typically do for free, marketing matters.
Marty4650: Stanton has brought a new element to the equation, something much more powerful than better gear or photographic skill.
He brings empathy, personality, and a genuine affection for his subjects that make his portraits so meaningful.
This is so much better than those stealth street photographers who take photos of homeless people with telephoto lenses. Stanton walks right up to them, engages them, and listens to their stories.
This man is a real artist.
I agree, but if it was 1940 and you were Walker Evans, hiding your camera in a coat, snapping photos of people, on the subway (without their knowledge) it would be considered great work and end up in the Museum of Modern Art.
The engineers will have a great time with this one. Just the math between the three different layers will make a complex discussion. It will probably produce really sharp images as well.
JackM: Any compact with less than a 1" sensor is DOA unless it is just a cheap mass-market toy.
I loved the RX100 except for the image quality. I'm not sure what I expected since the extremely positive reviews showed the corners were soft at the wide angle setting and my RX100 matched the reviews.
topstuff: There is one potential huge factor here - this camera could make taking stills from video a viable option.
Imagine this - you can shoot at 30 fps in 4k. That is enough resolution to grab a still image and be able to print it quite large and get pretty good detail.
Seeking the "Decisive Moment"? Just shoot 4k video at 30fps and pick your still image at your leisure. What would HCB have made of that? :)
What fun it will be to edit stills from video. Just when I was starting to enjoy sorting through hundreds of shots I wouldn't have taken if I had a limited amount of film; now I'll be able to pick the best shot from thousands or tens of thousands.
Artistico: I'd love to see a proper MF mirrorless camera one of these days. Does someone remember Mamiya 6 and 7? Fuji 645 and 690? Very compact cameras that handled really well. I don't know so much about the Fuji ones, but my Mamiya 7 had some absolutely cracking lenses. I'm sure there must be a market for mirrorless digital MF cameras. If someone makes it cheap(ish) and makes them compatible with legacy lenses, and everyone will want one.
They wouldn't be as small but it might be easier to make retrofocus lenses (vs. non-retrofocus, Leica M type lenses) than to make a sensor that behaves well with a lens that sits right on top of the sensor.
These comments have made my day. At last, people have figured out that "super" zooms offer everything except quality. But you can't blame Tamron for giving people what they want. Their original 28-200 was a stinker and sold like crazy.
Canon or Nikon should hire the guy who thinks this stuff up.
I think the ThinkTank bags are pretty close to ideal, while not looking too much like camera bags and being almost advertising-free. But judging by these comments, bag manufacturers would do well to poll a large number of users about potential designs instead of worrying so much about giving away patent info on zippers and pockets.
twenty200: I own a Tamrac bag and am mostly happy with it. They make great bags... but look at that clip. It's the worst I've ever seen on any bag. That weird almost triangle shape is way to easy to mis-align when trying to close the bag. It's really terrible. I assumed the horrible clip would be the first thing they'd change, but there it is, years later, on new bags. I have no idea what the people at Tamrac are thinking. I like their bags a lot, but that clip is really terrible.
It's great for opening with one hand and literally impossible to close with one hand. Over the years, they've had more clips than a hardware store but still not there. I you can live with the noise, Velcro works and looks less like a camera bag.
wyldberi: What's with the staff here at DPReview that they can't find time to review a significant new camera that was released nearly 5 months ago? From the comments posted here, there's obviously a strong interest in such a review.
In terms of prioritizing, I would argue (assuming you knew the price) the Df wasn't a big deal, except for the marketing. Sure, there were people who would line up to buy it without seeing it but they didn't need a test.
Unless something is unexpectedly good or bad, why not focus on things the largest number of people are likely to buy--and not just the initial, early adopter fans who will pre-order anything they "want" to like.
barry reid: Seriously, i wonder how this is going. The development costs of this thing and the rest of the family are huge. First off there's an entire Italian design studio, prototypes, brochures, market research… Oh.
Maybe not the last one, because if you've ever seen one of the Lunar/Stellar line in the flesh you'll realise that no-one outside the design team ever saw one before they went into production. The Lunar is bad but the Stellar, which looks OK on screen is actually worse. The body and grip look plasticky and the plasti-wood grip held on by IKEA quality chromed hex head screws which shine so brightly they are all you can see.
I know how crass the rich can be (I work near Bond Street in London), but his stuff is egregiously shoddy for high ticket item, and being based on a widely available platform really does diminish it. If I'm gonna drop that kind of wad on a bit of male jewellery I'm gonna have a Leica M TYP240 & Summilux. I REALLY don't want it to be the same as some oik's Sony.
And those $18,000 per night hotel rooms still don't have free Wi-Fi. Don't even ask about the minibar.
alexzn: Tamrac still does not get how a discreet camera bag should look like...
They do, but being really discrete would mean not getting free advertising from the purchaser. But at least with these bags you're only paying $100 to give Tamrac free advertising, vs. Canon or Nikon where you pay thousands of dollars to be a billboard with their straps and bags.
Oh dear. With companies trying so hard to stay in business it's hard to believe a camera company is actively trying to go out of business.