raztec: Well done Canon! Finally, a compact camera with the right size sensor and the perfect lens. This is a real home run!
How is an f/2-4 lens 'perfect'? Especially when you haven't even seen sample photos?
Nonetheless, Canon may have finally reached a very good compromise among lens speed, zoom factor, sensor size, and body size. Hopefully real-world usage will prove this to be true.
The P340 had better be small, because that lens at f/5.6 "120mm" is nothing to brag about.
completelyrandomstuff: CMOS sensor in 645D... no one has any idea who manufactured that ;). This should be a bargain medium format if it has the same imaging performance as phase one or HB.
The question is, will Capture One support it? They'll probably be reluctant to, because given a comparable lens, they can probably pull results out of it comparable to their own IQ250. And Capture One's very good at getting the most out of a camera, but this could be too close for comfort.
Miwok: Traveling compagnion?Why would I buy an Fuji XE2 when I can find a Sony NEX-6 for half of the price. I like traveling with a backpack in some not so safe countries, and don't want to paranoid about getting rob of $2k of gear (X-E2 + a couple of glass)
I guess you wouldn't.
Good thing not everyone's like you.
mpgxsvcd: I wish the super zoom category had never been invented.
Superzooms are not only useful in and of themselves, they also helped many of us to get started (or perhaps re-started).
mpgxsvcd: This is a camera no one needs but some will want.
God didn't create us just to survive. We all need at least something beyond these basics.
Other things are not mere luxury. They're what make our lives meaningful. Not just to us, but to others as well.
For most of us on this site, photography is one of the meaningful parts of our lives.
Looks like some nice additions!
Nice IQ on the 25, and a very desirable compact design on the pancake zoom.
tkbslc: How come Canon can build a $250 22mm f2 with a metal body and sharp optics, but Olympus wants double that? (3-4x given the current $125 street price of 22mm). And the Canon 22mm is nearly half the length of the 25mm.
m4/3 has some great lens options, they just all seem priced about double what I'd expect.
Let's not forget all the camera companies patiently waited a few years to slowly adjust prices to match the reality that the economy is doing relatively poorly in most of the world (despite attempts to keep up good appearances), and the yen is rather strong.
We're just seeing that played out. Plus, development costs were probably significant.
Jake2046: With 100+ billions in their reserves...and this is what they come up with? Apple seriously is no longer the leader in innovation. People just buying Apple products cause of the brand name.
Go ahead, pretend this is Apple's biggest invention for the year, rather than just a small, smart piece of the puzzle.
I doubt they had to put much engineering resources into it, yet it could turn out to be very useful.
Paul Farace: I accidentally found myself standing on the very spot that Ansel Adams shot his famous "Moonrise Over Hernandez, NM" (1941) in 2012... he used an 8x10 I used a Canon 50D... point is that except for the church and a few headstones in the cemetery, little was identifiable... what was flat ground in 1941 had become heavily forested (trees and scrub) and homes and structures. Earth and man are dynamic... constantly changing... also the choice of format and lenses are crucial for making comparisons. Adam's print shows the mountain range... my shot couldn't... a bit too wide.
Wow, don't even know what to do with that last one.
Perhaps if I join Richard Sherman's Toastmasters club ...
joe6pack: Used infrared "to reduce the hazy effect of pollution and keep land formations in the distance visible. "
Okay, I don't get it.
Pollutions in National Parks? It is not Los Angeles we are talking about here. How does all the other landscape photographers "get by" without infrared?
How is comparing photos between B/W and Infrared not apple-to-orange?
Funny, I was in Seoul and Beijing a month after the 2008 Olympics.
The people in Seoul say the obvious, visible pollution all blows over from China (nonsense - some of it is local)
The people in Beijing say it's not pollution, but simply dust blowing in from undeveloped areas outside the city (also largely nonsense)
Interestingly, here at home in southern California, the big news this month is that up to 16% of our air pollution blows in all the way across the ocean from China (but that still makes us responsible for 84% of the problem)!
The point is that, while we have a tendency to blame someone else, air pollution does travel *a long way* and combines with whatever amount we already have (be it large or small).
I'm surprised Sony didn't implement Steady Shot or some kind of in-body IS, especially since Sony (Minolta) were pioneers in this.
This would have allowed it to work better with anybody's lens, and mitigated the problem with the 1/60s shutter speed.
Perhaps Sony doesn't want it to work that well with "Anybody's lens."
DStudio: JPEG output is very important - especially in our fast moving digital media society. There are many times when you NEED to use JPEG output, because it's impossible or impractical to do otherwise.
The fact that Sony can't get good JPEG output out of their own camera and sensor is a sign that it's not refined enough yet. JPEG output quality is fundamental, and should've been a given, at the top of the design list.
Sorry, but you don't get to run it through Lightroom if you're at a live event and need to post immediately, or need to send it via WiFi or Cellular to a photo editor who may be quickly culling the photos.
Sometimes we tend to think of only one way of doing things, and discount all others. Obviously this is what Sony did.
JPEG output is very important - especially in our fast moving digital media society. There are many times when you NEED to use JPEG output, because it's impossible or impractical to do otherwise.
jaygeephoto: Who's CMOS would have the best image quality if scaled up to 645 size? Will Leaf and Phase One follow?
Perhaps this will push Phase One to go to 100 or 120 MP to differentiate themselves, even if still CCD.
I think they may still want to use a sensor that is custom designed by them, or at least for them.
Loreno Heer: Coca Cola Classic is back.
Thanks for firing the CEO, finally there is some hope.
Hopefully they haven't also ruined the product by "corn-syruping" the old formula in the process.
This isn't a camera. It's a device to make Android photo and video apps much more powerful. Suddenly you have a proper zoom lens and a decent sensor. You combine this with the power of a quad-core processor. This makes it ideal for applications like live video streaming. The power of this product is in how powerful it can make an Android application become.
The main weakness of this model is the lack of 4G capability. The main problem with the previous version was the fragile lens zoom mechanism (which, unfortunately, appears to be carried over). This camera is conducive to tripod use in locations where it can easily be knocked over or blown over by the wind. And it will almost certainly break on the first fall - even if it falls on grass.
The new, larger battery is also welcome (the old one could overheat). Normal photographic concerns, like its average sensor size and 2+ stop aperture variance, are not big issues here. It's an impressive technological package with the proper app.
Hugo808: I got as far as number 7 before deciding that if I'd taken them they would have gone into the bin and never been seen by anyone!
That's what makes them rare - similar shots taken by others were binned long ago ...
Mateo Miller: For whatever reason the 18-135mm seems to out perform the 16-50mm on the K-3. At least in this small sampling of photos. Noticeably better color and contrast although that could be attributed to the lighting I suppose.
I have the DA*16-50 and I really like it for times when a zoom is needed. But the color and contrast is definitely different on the DA18-135 (and that may be its finest attribute) and the DA*16-50 will never quite match it, so it's possible you'd still prefer it. But the DA*16-50 in combination with the DA*50-135 gives you probably the best two lens set on the market (short of a Full Frame Canon or Nikon with the 24-70 and 70-200).
deep7: You two are expecting a lot of the lens! It's not that bad but not quite up to the sensor.
Right - the DA 18-135 is a good, but not great, lens. It's only a ~$400 lens on a $1300 camera!
Actually the old K28/3.5 MF lens, for a little over $100, would probably do much better.