No Photo is to be trusted. #fu photojournalists. Manipulators.
I don't trust photo. '.' Good Job. U earned it.
if it used APS-C/43 sensor, it would have been just about perfect camera for me.
i can't wait to hear what people do with that. New Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG with metabone.. yeah.. can't wait to put it on my GF2.
WTH.. it is an arts contest, not a photo contest.
Damn American Journalism to lead the charge in fakery in public images. OJ Simpson photo was my eye opener and then on I realize that ALL photos are touched. Therefore ALL FAKE. Current acceptance of HDR is totally inexcusable, too. Damn the industry and all its contributors in making photo worth a toiler paper. I trust 4chan photo far more than anything on the mass media. Shame on us.
JonSr: D5100 was a D7000 with a few flaw. D5200 sounds like D3200 with a new number. Doesn't sound like an upgrade but a downgrade. That's sad.
you guys are very naive. dxomark does not indicate 3200 sensor is any better than one in 7000 which 5100 had. D3200 has lower Dynamic Range and lower Low Light sensitivity. I don't think there was much problem with focusing system. And I can't careless for gains in megapixel.
D5100 was a D7000 with a few flaw. D5200 sounds like D3200 with a new number. Doesn't sound like an upgrade but a downgrade. That's sad.
why make a toy camera look so serious. put a hello kitty outfit. neutered loser of a product that should shame any nikon badge owner.
if u r 2 satisfy my addiction, u gotta increase content output at least 2 fold. pump out stuff faster.
When GF3 is being sold for $300. What Canon and Nikon is doing with their tiny sensor compact seems price gouging naive people.
tutek: See the G7 in 2006. year. What has changed in 6 years? Almost nothing!
@calmwaters don't we know now that 1/1.7" sensor size is what really matter as far as the quality is concerned. For the cost of G15, it really outlived its sensor size. G15 should have been at least m43 size if not APS-C. The cost just doesn't justify the size.
JonSr: GF3 was a cursed crippled miserable creature. I couldn't get rid of it fast enough. Panny is showing their determination to produce crapware to lure unsuspecting buyers a junk they have to replace as soon as they purchased this. Total Assory of a Product representing true nature of the management. Shame on you.
example of Lens Barrel Shadow on GF3https://plus.google.com/u/0/115412895113423610903/posts/3JdxbenYKx3
true. 1. Lens Barrel Shadow with Standard Zoom Lens. 2. No Remote Control 3. No External Microphone Jack. 4. Tripod Base Mount blocking SD Card access. 5. Uncomfortable Handling Ergonomics. Except Lens Barrel Shadow, rest I can live with. But that's fatal flaw because it is all you get.
If you are using a GF1 which was what I wanted initially, GF3 is not an upgrade. GF5 won't be either.
GF3 was a cursed crippled miserable creature. I couldn't get rid of it fast enough. Panny is showing their determination to produce crapware to lure unsuspecting buyers a junk they have to replace as soon as they purchased this. Total Assory of a Product representing true nature of the management. Shame on you.
facebook trashes photo.
I no longer read Newspaper. I no longer believe media. I read comments. I look at snapshots bystander took. I listen to heresy of people around. So I read reddit and 4chan(believe me it is a real source of real life). So goes all my respect to those in that field.
Journalism and Photo Journalism is dead to me. And its all your fault, you fancy tricksters. Mr. Novaks and Newsweek photo editors of these world, go to hell. My anger is deeper because I had much respect to those who took journalism seriously. I hate you all and if you are a youngster trying to make it in the world, remember, you are there for money and it comes with attention and journalism has nothing to do with it. So go for the money and you can go to hell, too.
JonSr: oh come on.. one of the best lense maker keep making crappy lense what is with this? i swear that made a pact with Panny to never make a high end lense to lure them into m43. I just can't understand this spec. f2.8-4 of previous excellent 43 lenes than this lense would have been the best lense on the market.. They intentionally refused to make it that. Both Panny and Oly can go to hell. This is intentional sabotaging of their own platfrom from within.
most equivalent lense to this is Zuiko Digital 14-54mm F2.8-3.5 II, a total marketing flop even though the quality was much better than kit lense. But that one was a fast lense. It seems Oly wanted to make a "video" kit lense. Tell me one lense with such spec F3.5-6.3 that produce quality photo? I can only think of crappy third party lense of old vivitar time.
fmian: This lens only confirms Olympus' strategy to dumb down their own current and potential user base.
Give more zoom and a 'power' label, with smaller glass so people can less appreciate good optics.
Market your macro numbers so the number is bigger, confusing and misleading novice buyers.
State in product brochures that the 4/3 sensors are LARGE. (seriously, WTF?)
Start a marketing campaign in which your own cameras are called 'real' cameras. Whatever that means.
It's about as genius as Apple calling the ipad 'magical'.
but iPad is magical. you likely don't have one or don't have a child.
problem is that this is not the kit lense. we have decent kit lense both in panny and oly camp. This specific lense does not add much value over kit lense. I do not believe this lense will yield clearer photo. Only benefit is slight increase in FoV and sealed body. Would you like that on your kit lense for $350 more? One more step down and it would have been the lense everyone salivates to.