The segregation and disconnect of G+ continues. I never minded either way, I never had the phobia some seem to never over been "forced" into a social network, this makes Photos more useful and easier to manage regardless tho... And G+ remains a great place for sharing photos.
ecube: I'm highly satisfied with my Samsung Tab.For REAL computing, my MacBookPro has everything I need and more. Best thing with this combo, I don't have to worry about virus and both system are very stable.
I'm happy with my Android tablet for lightweight consumption tasks, on the couch etc. For REAL computing I have a self built desktop that does things no $3000 laptop can handle for a fraction of the price, with multiple high res displays, GPUs, SSDs, 32GB RAM, a real mechanical keyboard, etc...
For something in between, this Surface looks like quite a good option. Imagine that, a usage case different than your own, will wonders never cease.
Papi61: This should have been the original Surface from the start. Don't know why MS bothered with a crippled Windows version, it was easy to predict it wouldn't be successful.
The success of the SP3 is proof that people will definitely buy a non-Apple premium product, despite the efforts from Cupertino, their minions in the media and their fanatical fanboys to paint anyone who doesn't buy into their cult as "unsophisticated peasants who wished they had money to buy something Apple."
I'm not excusing RT as a product, it was worthless, but it was absolutely necessary from a strategic point of view; and yea they may have lost millions, to MS the venture will still have been successful either way. Even Android was encroaching a bit with x86 support (which hasn't really gone anywhere)... RT will live on in the embedded market anyway where WinCE has long toiled in obscurity.
Intel needed a swift kick tho, which RT provided even as a flop, they would've focused on mobile regardless because it's where the market's gone, but not on low cost mobile. They have fanless Core M SKUs, sure, look up their bulk price tho... It's at least 2x that of an Atom, you'll never see a Core M in a $500 hybrid. Getting a modern Atom for was spurred in large part by MS.
Even something like RAM limits was an issue for the original Atom which could only run x86 and not x64... You wouldn't be able to build an Atom system with 4GB and use it fully even if ya wanted.
GabrielZ: This is what the Surface should've have been from the beginning. A good alternative to the iPad now. Microsoft, Samsung etc..have caught up with and are in places - surpassing Apple at their own game lately.
I hope Apple can counter these recent announcements with the upcoming large screened iPad 'Pro' and iPhone 6S. Next years iPhone 7 needs to be something very special!
No, it's more about RT having served it's purpose and being put out to pasture... This is the Surface they would've WANTED to build three years ago but wasn't possible, you can thank Intel for that.
MS was almost forced to create RT, and then a flagship product to showcase RT, in order to pressure Intel who didn't see ARM as a threat. If MS didn't do that it's quite possible the Atom of today would still be the same slow power hog of 2009... Intel only created Atom to begin with so VIA and others didn't eat into their low end market, but they were trying to avoid cannibalizing their own Core i3/i5 sales. There's clearly room for both tho.
Papi61: Yeah, you can buy a 2-in-1 with 2gigs RAM/32gb of storage from Dell, Acer, Asus etc. for about $300. The S3 may look overpriced, but not when you consider what you're getting:
- 3:2 aspect ratio- higher resolution (the $300 2-in-1's come with a 1280x720 screen)- higher quality screen (the Surface 2 could be faulted for many things but not for the excellent quality of the screen. Pretty sure the S3's will be even better.)- 64gb instead of 32- upgrade to 128gb and 4gigs of RAM for only $100- a true SSD instead of a much slower eMMC in low-cost 2-in-1's- a support system (the kickstand) that's the best solution on the market- an optional keyboard that's thin, light and doubles as a cover- an optional high-quality/high-resolution stylus- will run Windows better than any other device from another brand and MS will introduce optimizations specifically targeted to that device (like they're doing now with the SP3.)
So yeah, the S3 is totally worth an extra $200, IMHO.
Agreed, none of the current hybrids have impressed or compelled me much, the displays are almost always a big let down... I praised the SP3 for going 3:2, I thought it made it much more usable, so I'm glad they kept that here.
I'm very tempted, will wait for reviews and/or edu discounts, this will probably boast better battery life than stuff like the ASUS T100 tho, just because they'll optimize the living daylights out of drivers and every component choice.
HowaboutRAW: Because HP and Lenovo both have real serious tablets running Windows full now.
Also there have been non RT variations of previous MS Surface hardware. The Pro 3, which runs real Windows, has been out for at least 6 months.
Pro 1 and Pro 2 ran real Windows too and were out years earlier. The whole reason MS flirted with ARM hardware for a while and created RT was to pressure Intel into building more optimized mobile parts AND to stop sandbagging Atom which stood still performance wise for like half a decade...
Once Intel saw ARM could legitimately encroach on their low end they were properly motivated, hence Surface 3.
Looks pretty sweet if you ask me, I have a high powered desktop so spending nearly a grand on a laptop or Surface has never been very appealing, I might go for something like this. The ASUS T100 was close, and cheaper, but this is better built and 3:2 works better for a hybrid.
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.