This is a sad time for Hasselblad to switch from camera making to packaging design, supplies and warehousing. Another very desperate move. Sony could ease their pains by just buying them out, say for a $1, for sentimental reasons. Looks like their top guys brains have irreversibly calcified.
This is a sad time for Hasselblad to switch from camera making to packaging design, supplies and warehousing. Another very desperate move. Sony could ease their pains by just buying them out, say for a $1, for sentimental reasons. Looks like their top guys brains have totally and irreversibly calcified.
RStyga: I can't see how this sensor is competitive in the APS-C arena today, especially at high-ISO. K-500 provides significantly better high-ISO IQ. 70D's 'new' sensor is as disappointing as 50D's was, when released, back then. The Gold Award is an overall assessment of how much DPR 'likes' this camera... I think I don't 'like' it as much...
granted XM1 is cleaner... but also with a bit less detail
not so convinced about "good color rendition/preservation" as stated in the review, ISO 200,800 darker then other values, colors are different then other cameras in the review and especially highly regarded cameras in that aspect, over-contrasted... "plasticy", made to look good but not faithful (yellows, blues, reds), overall not bad but overpriced, wouldn't touch it
fierlingd: All this anger towards Lightroom in these posts... lol.
1. Yeah surprised Fuji xpro is not better supported too.
2. Sigma support, well i probably agree with you, but i bet it comes down to priority. They probably had more urgant things to work on for the release. I would ask Sigma why they don't support DNG.
3. As far as "Wasting resources" between the various raw solutions. Variety is a good thing! :).. and besides adobe came out with DNG format! which unifies the cameara formats, so if anything i would blame the camera companies that are not supporting that. I mean common, how many raw formats do they have to support?
4. As far as no Offline update for ACR. I have to ask why does your office have no internet connecion? Personally i think it's obserd (or even childish) to block or prevent net access in an office building. People should be treated as resonsible adults, not children. Net access in the office is an assest anyway.
There is one: no one makes money here & big companies don't like open source, brings no revenue... Money is the only driver, period.
not bad but lacks sharpness, definition and depth, good camera though overall
decent but noisyyyy
kewlguy: Good body/sensor combination but looks flat to me. Poor lens?
Real life is not as colorful as these pics... unfortunately life is quite flat. So what do you expect... hot dogs jumping out of the picture barking?
HermanTheGerman: Great device, but no viewfinder, once again.Again a new compact, which can be forgotten for outdoor fotography during winter, or in the high mountains or on glaciers.What a pity.
Thanks HermanTheGerman for pointing it out. All I'm thinking about now is it's glacier performance...
Really nice pics, natural... I can handle "the lens softness", not bad at all. For the size of the camera it's really nice. Bit pricey though for a small camera... but in line with competition.Really not much to complain about, at the moment. The trend is set, there's a market for it and by looking at the posts there's some (a lot!) interest too.Not everyone enjoys carrying 2-3 kilos all the time especially on trips and at gatherings... Not always you're welcome with your big DSLR lens right in someone's face. Compacts fill the gap. Point for Sony.
The answer is simple. One you have provided yourself. Second is : because you can... or should be able to as per manual. People do strange things with cameras, pros too... that doesn't mean they are idiots. They do use it within a provided spectrum of options, don't they?!!! So who are you to call these ppl idiots? They use it within design parameters and both a camera and manuf. should deliver on all levels. An item like this is deemed 1st grade, not some DIY project. For Canon to overlook a simple leak in this one and G1X is unforgivable. They should know better. This is camera builders 101. If cameras could kill like cars we could already be missing few guys... Recall is a recall... This is Canon's fault, period. This is not a $5 ToysRus gadget. Some ppl put serious coin to upgrade to their dream camera so have some respect and don't be a jerk. Just because you think you know better doesn't give you the right to call others, dismayed by the whole thing, idiots (!).
ronniemac: Did I just see a new Canon, and what color was it? ......YELLOW! It seems that where pentax lead, others will follow. ;)
You're right. Except Canon did not forget to waterproof their underwater camera. Are you going to take K-01 snorkling? Yellow IS a common diver's color, Canon matched it. For Pentax... ocean may be not be an optimal environment to use a camera in.
No matter how you guys put it it is NOT going to be a classic... Nikon tries to put a happy face and save the day but there are so many APS-C size cameras in the making by all major players that V1 and J1 was/is sinking from day one and will drown soon entirely. That's the reality. Although, maybe if they make it pink...??? (just crossed my mind...). Nah...
nanoc: Well, you got to give this Newson guy some credit: he has come up with what seems to be the world's ugliest camera ever! Also Pentax deserves some credit: they have come up with a mirrorless camera that isn't any smaller than a standar DSLR!! I wonder... what are the benefits of this new design? Why would I chose it over the k5? (well, price, maybe). The Q system was a mistake, with Pentax failing to address one of the key advantages of EVIL cameras (big sensor = better IQ and more control over DOF), and now, they fail to address the other one (smaller, carry- everywhere cameras).
HubertChen: It is interesting that most posts are complaining how Pentax made this camera wrong. However, there is something they made right: This camera is extremely interesting! Check in the news section of dpreview. This camera evoked more posts (by a huge margin) than any other camera announcement :-)
I wonder, could it be because people simply can't believe their eyes looking at this design "breakthrough"? It looks like someone hammered the lens into the DSLR body... actually very entertaining, haha.
Just wonder why so many Co. go full circle and revert to very simplistic, Ikea-like designs, are they really running out of ideas or just hire bad designers. There is a growing number of Leica alike designs either the front or the back or both are copied or stolen... I'm getting sick of it. The IQ may be great but the design... UUUGLYYY. Add yellow to it and you end up with a gadget straight from ToysRUs shelf. Is this really what we were all missing so badly? Really? "Bold effort" maybe... and nothing more then that. Yellow will scare the hell out of any potential customer. Maybe that will teach them a lesson.
howardroark: 'Tis but thy name that is my enemy; —Thou art thyself though, not a G1X.What's G1X? It is nor lens, nor flash,Nor shutter release, nor display, nor any other partBelonging to a camera. O, be some other name!What's in a name? That which we call a rose,By any other name would smell as sweet;So G1X would, were it not G1X call'd,Retain that dear perfection which it owesWithout that title: — G1X, doff thy name;And for thy name, which is no part of thee,Take all myself.
Just my way of saying, who gives a flying rat's posterior what the thing is called?
For several years, since its introduction, there's been a place for cameras like Canon G. This one is a logical continuation to a very succesfull product line. It has been missing on the market for some time and missed by many who had a chance to appreciate Canon Gxx true value. G1X, an awaited successor to all G's so far does not disappoint. It was designed exactly to fit into the very same spot. It does not pretend to be a quasi DSLR. It is what it always has been before......and I'm sure it will do the job it has been designed to do, just like previous models of Canon Gxx, only better.
Cont. You can see that Canon lens & sensor work with ease and huge amount of reserves. ISO 200 picture is indeed very good. x10 is not in the same class and you can see the sensor struggling but that is to be expected from a small sensor camera. I have a very high confidence in G1X lens and abilities after seeing so many pictures posted on so many sites. It would have been a great replacement/upgrade for G7 if not for 5N. I'm very used to Canon G handling. I may actually go for 5N AND G1X. Still have several Minolta and Sigma lenses... theres no conflict there.
Excellent link even though I don't speak spanish the pictures speak for themselves. Looking at straight comparison between G1X, Fuji x10 and Olympus EP-M1 finally one can say that Canon lens is indeed very sharp. Sharper then EP-M1. As I posted earlier in G1X preview comments my G7 lens outresolves Sony kit lens ans well as Olympus highly acclaimed 14-42 zoom. Actually my personal tests (2 weeks with NEX5 &5 N, EP-M1) lead me to conclusion that resolutionwise G7 beats the other 3. ISO 200 comparison proves that if not for huge amount of sharpening Olympus cannot keep up. The result is sooo... oversharpened and unpleasant. So much for Olympus superiority (claimed here), lenswise and "spot on processing" which I found simply subpar (color incl.) and this test has clearly confirmed. That applies to all Olympus models as all of them use same guts, just UI is tweaked differently, and the very same "benchmark" lens. Noooo, thank you. I returned the Olympus as a clear looser and kept NEX 5N.
About Canon, Sony, Nikon skin tones... subject that keeps on coming back.Every Co./Manuf. has its own unique profile programmed into their cameras.Quotes from respective camera reviews at imaging-resource (examples):
"Skin tones. Here, when adjusted for the correct white balance, the Sony NEX-5 did well, producing natural-looking skin tones."
"Skin tones. Here, with the color balanced properly for the light source, the Nikon D7000's skin tones looked just about right. There were some slight pink tints in places, but overall skin tone looked very natural."
"Skin tones. Here, the Nikon D3S also did quite well, producing natural-looking skin tones, though just slightly on the pink side."
"Skin tones. In this case, the 1Ds Mark III did render skin tones slightly on the pink side in most cases. Still, results are quite good, well within an acceptable range." For detailed description of spec. camera color profile refer to resp. review. So where is this expected "perfect tone"?