warmonger87: I've been using this since they provided it as a feature of Amazon Prime, and it does include RAW image support, at least for my NEFs.
Yup, wonder if they ever added support for Oly RAWs... Got two Panasonic bodies now but you never know. If I didn't have Prime I'd probably go for the photo only plan.
brycesteiner: This is seriously considered a sport?
I'd pay to see Bryce get in there with Alison and the rest then come back and quip again about whether it's a sport... ;)
dav1dz: Gear used in this video missing the 17mm f1.8 when Barney was doing the still life high-res test.
Also, isn't that one of the worst primes to do these kinda test with? :P
What I'd really like to see: something like the CM1 prime lens on a little Sony QX module (as opposed to the bulky zooms they tried to push).
Astrotripper: "We also want to add some more reasonably-priced lenses for entry-level users, similar to the 45mm F1.8 - we’re looking into this now. "
Yeah, that'd be nice, but I wonder if it's not too late for that. MFT has already earned a reputation for being on the expensive side, at least in some regions. Excluding body caps, 45/1.8 and 17/2.8 are the only affordable primes here. From zoom lenses, 40-150 is the only good value proposition. All other lenses are either expensive (some rightly so) or just ridiculously overpriced.
And there's still no middle ground zoom in MFT. You either stay with the kit lens, or have to pay serious money for large and heavy f/2.8 PRO zoom. I still can't understand why we don't have a f/2.8-4.0 zoom.
Are we talking about only Oly's lineup here? Cause the Panasonic 20mm runs about the same as Oly's 45mm and it's just as strong of a value proposition IMO, they're coming out with a similarly priced 42.5 f1.7 w/OIS too, and the 14 f2.5 seems decent for the money, even Oly's own 25 f1.8 looks like a good deal...
Dunno how you could say the 45 & 17/2.8 are the only good values. This is without even bringing up 3rd party stuff like the Sigma 60 f2.8, Samyang 12 f2.0 & 7.5 FE, etc.
Fuji looks more expensive, Sony E mount is similar, even if you look at APS-C DSLR mounts with decades of paid off research/designs they aren't much cheaper outside of the cheapest 50mm variants that aren't even designed for APS-C. Their other equivalent lenses all seem to run about the same give it take $100 here and there.
The one exception might be Canon's latest EF-S UWA at $300, pretty much no one else has one under $500.
Only thing it's missing is a basket with E.T.! ;D
Bangers and Mash: Dumbest thing I've seen in awhile. The idea is to take the weight off from around one's neck. Is that necessary with a small system camera like what's shown. Besides that, it looks stupid. I guess you could practice your quick draw. Who knows, someone might come out with a competition. The fastest draw and exposure contest. Good grief!
It's stupid as showcased in that photo, but it has it's usage cases... Sounds similar to Peak's Capture system and they seem to have found a healthy market for that... I could see it for hiking or other kinds of activities where you're already carrying a full/heavy/not easily accessible pack but you want the camera ready at a moment's notice, you can have it on backpack straps etc. For everyday use it does look silly.
Androole: I've always wondered why people are so obsessive about having a lens that's rectilinear "in-the-glass" in this focal range. The perspective distortion is already so radical and surreal in the 11-15mm range that you might as well just digitally de-fish (using an open-source program like Hugin) and get an even wider image.
I guess the rectilinear lens has somewhat higher resolution in the corners, and makes framing easier. But for a 10x higher pricetag, I can deal with those compromises, thanks...
It's a valid point IMO, tho I imagine more/less valid depending on the rectilinear UWA and fisheye alternatives available for your system...
Sometimes I use my 7.5mm FE and 9-18mm UWA on MFT (2x crop) interchangeably, the UWA isn't super great in the corners anyway so defished images from the FE can be just as sharp at times but have a larger FoV, and I can play with the projection opting for something more natural like Panini instead of straight rectilinear.
It's definitely much easier to get composition just right with the UWA tho, and easier to leave it on the camera for hours thanks to the long end, which is true even for this Canon.
Now, if a mirrorless manufacturer ever came out with a live view mode that defished a fisheye or at least threw up some potential crop lines, that'd be really interesting and would take defishing from a fun experiment to something you could rely on...
Sounds interesting, tho a bit expensive. I've only got one lens on which I keep a clear protective filter, if this actually resists scratches better than a typical filter I could be interested in the CPL tho (mostly for the beach, I tend to use a CPL as dual purpose there, for it's polarization and also added protection).
Jorginho: Well...very niced cam for the size. But I have to wonder what it gets us over a GM1 or GM5 basically...Selfies?
No mixup, just different markets and probably more leftover GM stock on this side of the pond... I bought my GM1 from Taiwan (NTSC) for $340, granted that's a body only import so you'd expect it to be cheaper...
Looking at Amazon tho, I'm seeing it for $430 from US sellers without lens and $530-600 with lens. Even if you ignore third party Amazon merchants, it's still only $600... Or was until the other day, it's prone to erratic price jumps.
The GF7 is $600 with lens and I'm not seeing any discounts anywhere, tho I'm sure they'll come eventually. For the purpose of the US market they're effectively priced the same and the current GF is coming in at $100 more than the previous one was at launch.
tkbslc: It's basically a GM1 with a little size added to make room for the odd flippy screen. Extra button or two. No surprises here.
Pretty sure it has less buttons and less useful controls actually... No custom modes or AF/MF switch, not a big hit for the target demo, but it also has less control points than the previous GF.
brendon1000: This is the sort of camera that mirrorless is all about. Good IQ in a very small compact body with small compact lenses too.
Sony and Fuji offer better IQ especially the A7 but those aren't terribly small anymore once you factor in the lenses.
That's largely why I bought a GM1, less conspicuous (small + super quiet shutter even when not using the electronic one), and great backup/second body on other occasions to keep a different lens on for less swapping.
It's not any cheaper than the GM1, tho that may be on it's way out eventually... Flip screen and slightly more to grip some will be a plus to some, worse controls or battery life compared to past GFs tho.
coyot3: I relly need wifi raw transfer but 32gb itto muchh for me i prefer 4 sd cards of 4gb if anithyng goes wong with the card. Somebody knows if there ir another option like this?
So you're saying you want to make it so it's 4x more likely that something will happen to your media? Juggling multiple cards just increases your points of failure... Figure out a backup strategy on the go instead and you'll save yourself a lot of hassle.
These days it's pretty trivial to copy a card's contents over to a phone/tablet or to a thumb drive thru the use of a phone/tablet, at least with Android devices ands USB OTG.
0mega: I just don't see how this can compete with Sony mirror-less.
It's not trying to... Different price bracket, different market, and very different size once you account for lenses. It's priced kinda high for an entry level body still, but at least the kit lens is solid.
CNY_AP: Any shutter shock?
Same shutter as the GM line, with the same benefits and limitations. It's a hybrid shutter, but even under 1/500 it's very soft and uses an EFC... So SS is very very unlikely.
Peiasdf: Poor ISO performance like most cheap Panasonic m4/3. Only the GH4 and some say the GX7 have comparable sensor to Olympus' SONY sensor.
This has the very same sensor... Along with the GM line.
justmeMN: A mirrorless camera in a camera bag isn't significantly more convenient than a small DSLR in a camera bag.
How is the comparison not valid? I'll give you a less extreme one... A G6 with the largest M4/3 lens (for now) has a 600mm equivalent range and it's still about the size of a 70D with a 400mm max zoom. Add an UWA zoom and an f2.8 zoom and the disparity continues to grow... A 28-280 equivalent zoom is about the size of an APS-C kit zoom, etc etc.
GodSpeaks: I think they missed the boat here. Tenba says these are for mirrorless cameras. So what are the primary traits of mirrorless? Small and light. Yet these bags are designed to carry a camera and multiple lenses, tripods and large tablets. None of which meets the small and light criteria.
How about a smaller bag(s) that could carry a mirrorless camera with lens attached and one additional lens. No tripods or tablets. In other words, keep it small and light. A switch 4 or 5 pehaps?
I already have too many bags that can carry multiple cameras/lenses that I no longer use because they are too big and cumbersome.
I think the problem with designing bags that compact is that then they DO start to become very purse like largely because of the size... Even something like the Crumpler mentioned above falls pray to that a little bit. For the record, I don't find anything purse-like about these Tenba (beyond maybe the leather look of the stock flap, I like some of the other flaps a lot tho).
If you go small enough then it's no longer a purse but a non decrepit P&S case with a belt attachment or wrist strap and those are a dime a dozen... I think there's room for better designed slings in the middle tho. Something like the Thinktank Turnstyle but smaller still, with there was a Turnstyle 3 or 2... The BlackRapid SnapR is pretty clever too but kinda ugly, great functionality tho.
Personally I just use waist packs (yes I'm avoiding the f word), from like surfing/skate brands (O'Neill, Quiksilver), usually slung around my shoulder/back. They aren't built for cameras so padding is minimal unless I add it, but they're very conspicuous and depending on the pack I can fit a small body and anywhere from 3-5 lenses with two being pancakes...
'Course I'm talking tiny lenses (Oly 9-18, 45, etc), not superzooms and large teles. Still makes for a pretty versatile setup that's not swinging around all the time like a shoulder bag tho. I've seen one or two fanny packs (there, I said it) specifically designed for cameras but they were still not very optimal or very conspicuous.
Papi61: "for the PROFESSIONAL mirrorless camera user"
Sounds like an oxymoron... :)
I really don't get it either, I think the trolls are just crankier than usual, maybe a bridge collapsed or something. I actually think most camera shoulder bags out there either look very feminine or just scream camera bag...
There's few styled like more conventional shoulder book/messenger bags (like the TT Retrospective), I happen to think these look pretty cool, I dig the swappable flaps... Maybe it makes me a hipster or whatever, but I'd go for that camo lid or the graphic grey/blue design.
The top facing zipper for going thru the flap lid seems genuinely useful, tho I'd kinda want a zipper underneath too like the Mirrorless Mover.