Elieser: Too simple for profi, too expensive for amateur.As for profi: any camera without1) Viewfinder2) Interchangeable lenses3) Phase detection focus4) Convenience of holdingCann't replace DSLR in any circumstances.
As for amateur or diletant - too expensive
5) No alarm clock settings.
hlritter: The lens hood costs $179, optical VF $599, and thumb grip $249! These prices are so unreasonable that they must be seen as opportunistically set. This calls into serious question the credibility of the camera as being worth $2800.
I added your figures and it comes to $7.927 before taxes.I would reroute the question: What subject, animal, landscape, woman or child, would be worth & credible to invest this kind of money to take a picture of it with this camera?Welcome to the age of insanity.
Francis Carver: DP REVIEW SEZ: "discussing whether we think the world is ready for a $2800 full frame, fixed-lens camera."
SHORT ANSWER: No, the world is probably not quite ready for a $2,800 fixed lens camera.
The world may be more intimately ready for the $2,100 Nikon D600 camera, or even for the $2,800 Sony Alpha 99 camera. Just not for a $2,800 CyberShot.
"There's a sucker born every minute" P. T. Barnum.
Why not a little zoom?
Ben O Connor: Now wait a minute, what is that? ITs not pocketable, look at sony´s up coming R-X1
Definately joking, and joking bad...
Actually there's a Sony RX-100 inside. Remember Ansel Adams? There was a Kodak Instamatic inside that 8x10 box.
Jogger: For some reason, I always thought Hassy was a German company.
I visited the Zeiss Manufacturer back in the late 80's. Since I owned two Contax RTS equipped with Zeiss lenses I was as exited as a kid in a chocolate factory. My enchantment wore off when I noticed that the lenses were a secondary part of their interests. Zeiss is more oriented in developing precision instruments than lenses.
That's it!! I'm selling my house and empty my kids college fund.This is the toy to die for!!
My father owned a Pontiac Catalina 1955 and the Indian Head was oranged illuminated. What year is this one?You make me go back when.GREAT image!!
JazzMasta: I think what upsets some of the 'real' photographers (whatever the hell that is!) is that with instagram, regular people are taking really good pictures without using 10k dollar cameras. This is causing stress and bitterness because it's like they are taking a shortcut, not buying all that expensive equipment, and 'not taking it seriously'.
Too all you bitter 'real' photographers:Yes we know, there are lots of crappy mobile pictures out there.But with millions and millions of mobile cameras out there, some pictures are bound to be good too, and some are really really good! All mobile camera users are not the same, please acknowlage that!
And don't blaim instagram or hipstamatic, that's just the final touch. Good pictures run through instagram may look even a bit better (to some) but a crappy picture will never look good whatever app you might use.
So, stop being anti and bitter and embrace mobile apps as a compliment to other kinds of photography instead of as a threat!
Amen to that!!
exPanasonic fan: A question to R butler,
I am totaly new to the sony camera´s, i have the rx100 4 days, but what recommend u me, how to use the rx100 in bars(low light), where there is is lot of movement, i use the Ia+ but this make 3 pictures and then fuse it together as result they are blurred, but in Ia take 1 picture and they have no blur but it take forever for the camera to recognize the face detection, the facial tracking is not fast like the lx7, i have seen videos where the lx7 is very fast at facial detection.
SCENE mode Anti Motion Blur, resolve this problem but dam it goes directly to iso 6400, if I limited it to iso 3200 it dont expose it well like 6400, though iso 6400 have lot of noise.
For me this is the best compact camera ever made, the lx7 is a shame for the LX series. thx in advance.
Do what I'll do: I'll buy the Sony RX100, the Lumix LX7 and the Nikon P7700..ALL three!!!! Since my rule as a consumer is: in case of doubt BUY them all. One can NEVER be completely satisfied. Remember that he who dies with more toys wins the game.
WalterPaisley: "I would suggest you also shared the camera settings used." - what does that even mean? The exif is all there. isn't it?
cpoole7: I think most folks will agree that we are not attempting to compare an iPhone's photo quality with a good DSLR or even one of the better compact cameras. But as continues to be mentioned on various discussions about 645 PRO, most of us will have our iPhone with us many times when we do not have our DSLR's with us. And that means we can take the shot vs not taking the shot.
Also, I have been surprised at what an 8MP 4S can do under good conditions. Here is an example of a 4S using HDR Pro and then sharpened and cropped in PS-CS4: https://www.box.com/s/ad5d1063ad731a1ac36a (Downloadable JPG on Box.net so you can view on your computer)
This was shot without the benefit of the cleaner output of a TIFF, so I for one am looking forward to having the expanded capabilities of 645 PRO on my iPhone.
And lest I give a wrong impression, if I am after maximum quality, I will continue to pull out my D700. No contest on that point at all... : )
I went to visit the site. I couldn't see the image you mention.
Amazing Image!!I would suggest you also shared the camera settings used.
Jacques_t: There is something to be said for taking a photo and having a person 'work it' to conform to the artist's vision. What I find disturbing about digital art and 'artists' is that any Tom, Dick and Harry can press a button on a phone, apply an instant filter and call it 'art'. Where is the artist in the art in that process?
Digital art becomes forgettable very quickly, it does not hold much value, other than instant monetary value.
I have no problem with technological progress, but don't leave the 'artist' out of 'art'.
I guess the REAL artist in all that process is the guy who invented the filter. Then, as you said: Any Dick, Tom & Harry becomes an artist, but that was also said when digital cameras came out, remember? I agree with you, but then again I accept (snif) that monetary value is a fact that's always involved in art.
Well, it seems that ever since silver halide left town, and it was replaced by electronic technology, we can't stop progress, can we?Remember TV? It wasn't supposed to stay.Cinema was booed by theater, and the list went on.I truly admire what these guys are doing.These image manipulating programs are far more friendly user than Photoshop, and they are cheap.Welcome to the 21st Century!!
ROlleg: Прекрасное фото. Есть много мест на Земле, где люди стремятся к самой кромке моря. Этот снимок - квинтэссенция этого стремления. Такие места можно увидеть и в Крыму, и в Греции, и в Италии. В Японии, - к сожалению, именно такие места пострадали от цунами. Но люди всегда будут стремиться к этой границе - земли и воды. Именно здесь мы выбрались на сушу. Именно здесь человек чувствует душевное успокоение - рядом и море, и берег. БРАВО!!!
I agree with you, Roleg!!Я согласен с вами, Roleg!
What? What?!!!!Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Raphael, Milo, even the guy who shoot the famous Che picture....What do all these guys have in common? NO ONE made ANY money out of their works.Don't tell me that you've just discovered capitalism?
My cousin who attends AA meetings thinks this is a great non addictive camera.
maboule123: Magnífica fotografía, Stefano.Bravo, hermano!!...With all due respect.
Keep on clicking.Keep on sharing your great images, bro!!:)
Magnífica fotografía, Stefano.Bravo, hermano!!...With all due respect.