Thomas Traub: I don't need a disassambly-guide!I need a re-assambly-guide!;-)
Plus the camera companies could set up whole new complexes just to sort out all the failed assemblies, and employ whole buildings of lawyers to fend off people shouting that the reason for their failed build was all down to the camera company not explicitly stating that a 4lb hammer shouldn't be used to help parts fit together.
In fairness this is what anyone shooting with a film camera has to shoot with. I'm busy resurrecting my film camera (it still works after getting a new battery, but a little oil is needed too) and that has no image review or menu of options. I wonder how I will ever use it... oh, wait, just like I used to...
(Although IMHO the Leica's price should be a lot lower.)
Aroart: Its Canons own fault for not giving 4k to cameras less than $3000.. Dave Dugdale from learning video.com summed up Canons demise for videographers with one statement.. He said when he was at NAB this year that he did not see anyone shooting with a Canon when 3-4 yrs ago the 5dm3 was the go to Camera... The camera he saw most people using was the Sony a6300...
I think Canon pretty intentionally don't sharpen it much to avoid artefacts you can't remove later. As Philip Bloom showed it sharpens up quite nicely in post. Although I will say my 5Dsr is a way better video camera for IQ (although lacks many useful features to be a video camera, for 1080p it's better than both my GH3 and GH4, although the GH4 in 4k is what you want to use).
"Nobody used a 5DmkIII" - what a strange thing to say. Canon are selling so many of them (although not to me) that they aren't rushing the replacement. I see several most days when I'm out and about in London.
Retro1976: Well good new for Canon. I just sold my Fuji gear. Been round the block Olympus, Sony, Fuji and now I'm returning back to a DSLR. Why you ask ? I miss the nice grip, the intuitive menu system, the fast accurate focusing, the ever growing array of killer third party lenses and the week long battery life. Trust me I love mirrorless and will miss many aspects of the bodies I have used, but no one yet to had figured out how to make small without compromise.
I'm not really switching back, as I still have and use my GH4, especially for video. However I much prefer using my 5Dsr and the proportion I take out a DSLR vs Mirrorless has swung wildly back from 80:20 to 20:80. Partly helped as the DSLR has similar reach, better AF and IQ and the big optical viewfinder is a much much nicer way to watch an event than a small fairly low-res TV. (I do miss in-viewfinder image review, and focus peaking, though.) I don't see it as an either-or, just choosing whichever is best for what I'm doing. I'm probably stopping buying m43 lenses for now though.
jaykumarr: The king is nude, because he traded of a lot for video in SLR. On the other side, Nikon lacked in video only but seems to do faster focus in stills( I really don't know, some experts should confirm), better color and clarity in high iso and higher dynamic range, low contrast details too.
Most differences between Canon/Nikon are temporary and will change over time, they've owned the bulk of the ILC market since film days and their market share doesn't change much.Canon may do better in mirrorless if Nikon really do ditch the 1-series and start again, but neither company seems to be hurrying into a market where most companies are losing money.
tonyC1994: How are the other two guys doing in terms of profits?
Since most of them were losing money and the market has declined it's really a case of how well they have cut costs and how well they are moving to selling more expensive cameras. Nikon are making decent profits (although well below Canon), Sony appear to be making a little money. The others are in the noise (Olympus made a big fuss about having their first profitable quarter in many years, but you'd really need to see whether that was due to camera sales or more general accountancy reasons to know what it means).
BTW my favorite one is Ricoh/Pentax, which Thom Hogan likes to describe as a "hobby business" for Ricoh, as it's such a small part of the company it barely warrants a mention in the accounts.
It's their fault they are flat in ILC sales when the market is falling - that's most people's definition of out-performing the market.On video the pro video business used to be Sony and Panny as the top two and Canon have taken over second position from Panny. They also have the only really good video AF system. I think 4k will come. I don't see Nikon as ahead, the 1DxII is a miles better video camera than the D5 (reviews suggest the video version of the old 1Dx is a better 4k camera than the D5, e.g. http://www.eoshd.com/2016/01/nikon-d5-versus-canon-1d-c-cinematic-4k-video-wins/ ), it's only the D500 where Nikon did fairly well (although with an annoying crop factor).
itaibachar: How about Nikon, Sony, Pentax sales?Are they on the rise?
Overall shipments are down, if Canon are flat the others shipped quite a bit less between them. Someone could be doing well, but the more people who are not losing out the more grief to spread among the rest.
quiquae: >Interchangeable lens cameras account now account for 49% of total unit sales and 84% of the company's revenue.
These are percentages within the "Imaging System" segment, not the company as a whole.
Good point! The article probably needs that fixing.
mvmv: Surprisingly, in declining ICL market, Canon seems to be profitably increasing their market share about 4%
The Rebels are where they make a lot of their money, they can afford to sell them cheaply as they make so many of them. When they aren't selling them at low prices they make a lot of money, which is one of the reasons they still make more profit selling cameras than everyone else put together.
Has it been sorted out if it has 5-axis IBIS in the camera or do you only get 5-axis correction when IBIS is combined with OIS (so it's less good than 5-axis IBIS with non-OIS lenses)?
Richard Murdey: There is no such thing as a bad 90-105 mm telemacro, but they are not all alike.
It's the little things that end up mattering, like how much the focal length or aperture changes at high magnification, or if that nervous bokeh when stopped down bothers you. Whether you want the last word in sharpness at the expense of some color fringing, or can put up with slightly softer rendering to get cleaner high contrast edges.
I found I preferred the Tokina (softer, cleaner, better behaved at high magnification) but my advice is this: take some time to try a couple of different ones, even if it means buying used and flipping a them on ebay after a few months. It's worth making the effort.
I changed from the Canon 100mm USM to the L version recently (shortly after a camera upgrade). I really only used the old lens for macro work, as it made a poor general-purpose lens. However the new one is excellent, with really nice bokeh and shed-loads of sharpness at non-macro distances. I'm actually using it more than the 85mm f1.2 II for portraits at the moment. (Also for macro work, of course.)
Raist3d: So some questions- did they allow exposure compensation in manual mode with auto ISO?
And is this the same old m4/3rds sensor or a new 16MP sensor?
They might have made it easier to read out pixels for phase-detect AF? I like read-out speed generally too.
As soon as I saw their last camera needed to be focused before taking re-focusable pictures I thought they were in difficult territory...
Not arguing, my memory didn't provide the middle digit plus I didn't see the announcement - thanks!
Revenant - I think the "new 16MP sensor" was a misunderstanding and it was the old one on a list people hadn't seen before. As far as I know Sony only have the old (GH3, E-M5) 16MP IMX159 sensor and the new 20MP IMX269.http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/IS/sensor2/products/index.html
AdamT: 16Mp .............. :(
If they`re going to use a new sensor (the 20Mp one in this case) , use it across the range like DSLR makers do instead of hanging on to old sensors . Kinda expected it in the G7 but not in this model ..
So a grown up GM5 then- nice option, probably a sweet spot but IMO needed that 20Mp sensor
It's price-point, they want a cheaper camera for their range so they use a cheaper EVF. The shutter might be a limitation of the new mechanism. If you want the other stuff they will sell you a GX8.
TheClueless: The 12-32 as standard? That's going to hold it back with a 16MP sensor...
...and shutter shock or not, I love the sound of the shutter on the GX8 :p
The 12-32 is a kit lens option, you can you the body only (well, at least where I am) if you want a different lens.
The only new m43 sensor since the GH4's Panasonic one seems to be the Sony 20MP one, so I assume it's the same sensor as the GH4 (anything else wouldn't make sense).