VENTURE-STAR: Who are Konost? Do they have any kind of track record? Where are the company located? Can they seriously compete with the big players?
Even if this re-invented Leica is a good reliable product, you can bet it will be priced beyond the reach of most serious photographers who always prefer to stick with established brands.
I'm a little sceptical about all of this!
The number of dead end photo equipment proposals really can't be overlooked like the Nimslo 3D camera, 8mm Polavision and plans for CCD units that would fit into the back of film SLRs.
Having ideas is one thing, but turning them into a commercial success is another. Even big companies make mistakes and these unknown people are doing little more than promoting ideas, which are not exactly revolutionary anyway.
Who are Konost? Do they have any kind of track record? Where are the company located? Can they seriously compete with the big players?
No complaints about these products, but Canon will need to lower the price a bit to compete with broadly similar cameras from Nikon. I also hope some affordable replacement batteries become available, as the ones provided by Canon and most other manufacturers are a rip-off and copies generally perform just as well, if not better.
JohnK: The model holding the camera in these photos should have had a manicure, fresh nail polish and hand makeup. IMO, the unappealing appearance of the hands is a distraction. Or is it an editorial comment? :) IMO a photography website should do better than this.
As for the camera, I live in the U.S. and have two L lenses I'd like to shoot with a Canon MILC, why not sell it in U.S.? Are they ashamed of it? Is it not good enough for the demanding U.S. market :)
Maybe the reason for Canon not giving North Americans priority to buy this camera is something to do with economics and they recognize that the Eurozone and Far East are bigger potential markets for products like this? Whatever the reason, who cares? Wouldn't it be more interesting just to discuss the actual camera here? If Americans are so desperate to buy one, I'm sure they can do so quite easily online, probably tax free with an international warranty.
This camera certainly looks promising and depending on street price, I could be tempted, once it's been on the market long enough to establish if there are any major shortcomings or problems.
That said, I can't help thinking that the design of the hinged screen is just a touch clumsy.
This just seems to be another compact digital SLR with a hint of styling borrowed from the OM-1 film camera of the 70s. Can't say I'm blown away by the OM-D. It's certainly too expensive at the current suggested price.
VENTURE-STAR: As we've seen recently with Apple phones (that cost just a few dollars to make), goods are simply priced at what the manufacturer can get away, not what they are actually worth. All present day companies are driven by an unending quest to maximize profits.
Although I am not a fan of Microsoft, I was reasonably happy with Windows XP and continue to use Windows 7 as I don't like anything about 8. I suspect 10 will have too many pointless bells and whistles. If Linux was better, I would swap immediately. Nothing to dislike about Macs, apart from the price! But really, there's not a lot of choice, is there? I've been using desktop computers almost daily since the 1980s, but as for mass purchasing decisions, ermm, well, no, I'm afraid to say.
Go and buy one in the Far East, if you want a real deal!
I would beg to differ about Microsoft only remaining barely dominant. If Windows 10 is released as a free upgrade, it will secure their position for some time to come.
Yes, Samsung, Sony and LG share the same display screens, Apple buy in their components from many suppliers and most cameras use the same chips. Many cheaper Canon and Nikon cameras use optical components made by Sigma. So what?
My original point was the comment that companies like Canon price their goods at what the market will stand, as opposed to a fair value. If you've ever visited the Far East, you will be astonished at what some expensive items sell for there, even allowing for US or European taxes.
Of course there is R&D, staff, marketing, distribution costs, etc,etc, but that is hardly the issue. Large companies like Canon simply charge whatever they can get away with for their goods. We are not forced to buy their products, but you can say the same about Apple, Microsoft and many other organizations who establish a dominant position and then exploit it for all it's worth.
As we've seen recently with Apple phones (that cost just a few dollars to make), goods are simply priced at what the manufacturer can get away, not what they are actually worth. All present day companies are driven by an unending quest to maximize profits.
tabloid: The truth is that nobody knows where their camera is made, until they look to see the small print.I suspect that they will have a factory in Thailand/China, and a factory in Japan.When its beneficial they will increase production in one or another country depending on the state of the currency …simple.
But who actually makes the parts that go into your camera anyway? From what I've been told by two different camera engineers, the lens cells used in the cheap Canon SLR zooms are almost certainly produced by Sigma and they are the same as those used in similar spec budget lenses produced by Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, etc.
I really doubt if this will benefit the consumer in any way.
It would certainly be nice to see Canon reviewing overseas production of their ridiculously overprice accessories, that are often of inferior quality to copies available on eBay or Amazon costing perhaps a third, or quarter of the price.
This includes batteries, which I am sure Canon will continued have knocked out in China for a few pennies each.
justmeMN: Canon estimates that, this year, they will sell 9.5 million compact cameras, and 7.0 million DSLRs.
Not bad, for a company that does everything wrong, and that everyone hates. :-)
I've used Canon and Nikon cameras for many decades. They both make very good professional products, Canon makes pretty good amateur products. Both are relatively unpleasant profit driven corporations and as a photographer, I certainly owe them nothing in the way of support. What's wrong with bashing stupid hype when they treat their customers like morons?
Yawn - boring!
It's another "okay" camera that does have some shortcomings when compared to a reasonably priced SLR. Even if it produces nice results and has good reliability, the focal length range is very poor. As for a wide aperture - big deal. Most amateur users will rarely use this, or the high ISO rating.
There's no mention of image stabilisation or comments on the viewfinder in this brief preview and the price, even if it drops, is much too high. No doubt, it only uses very expensive chipped Panasonic batteries?
VENTURE-STAR: I don't doubt this is a superb camera and I wouldn't mind owning one. However, the price tag puts the instrument way out of my reach and carrying it around and using it in public places would be a liability from the point of theft and accidental damage.
The question is - would it actually improve my photography and the answer has to be no.
I'm not going to add anything more. I honestly have nothing against Leicas apart from the price!
HowaboutRaw: I'm sure we'd both agree that a degree of common sense is essential if you want to visit many of the more interesting locations that lend themselves to good photography. My original point was simply that a camera like this is realistically outside my price range and I don't think that owning a digital Leica, - athough I have owned a couple of 35mm Leicas in the past, is worth considering. Nice as this camera undoubtedly is, it won't make me more creative and I would personally be very concerned about walking around many city areas in the US, Europe, or anywhere else with $8000 hanging around my neck and goodness knows how much more value stuff like lenses and maybe a second body in my bag. Not for me I'm afraid, even if the camera in question was half the quoted price!
HowaboutRaw: That's okay, I've only been to Beverley Hills a couple of times. However I would mention that on my last visit to LA, the idiot at Alamo LAX gave me road directions which took me into the nearby Watts District. The place where I stopped to check my directions was the same place a German tourist had been robbed & blown away in his rental car the previous week. There are very dangerous places everywhere. You could easily run into serious trouble by visiting the Brixton area in South London if you wandered around with an expensive camera and a casual attitude.Maybe you've been lucky but there are very real dangers out there and I speak from experience. And BTW, if you ever visit somewhere like Jo-burg, the hotel staff will almost certainly warn you about showing jewellery, phones or cameras anywhere in public.