DStudio: Interesting how they know the exact serial numbers of some copies that apparently shouldn't exhibit this issue.
It shows that they may keep really close track of how they manufacture each individual camera.
It also makes me wonder what the cause is.
Pentaxforums speculates it's a hardware issue ... this will be interesting!
Interesting how they know the exact serial numbers of some copies that apparently shouldn't exhibit this issue.
When Lytro released their first camera it was written off by many as a gimmick. But I think the company's shown they are serious.
Rosenthal clearly believes in this vision, and it's slowly coming into focus for consumers.
Sounds very interesting. Hopefully it'll be a success, and we'll hear more about it!
nikkornikon: GoPro..the Bose Speakers of Video.
Fizzunk, were you even listening to the video, or just watching it? They even concluded that the GoPro won OVERALL, not to mention how it was better on many individual points!
This is how it outperforms in many areas, and why many professionals still depend on them.
Fuzzunk - I just watched the first 3 minutes of the video - so far it's confirming what I said - so what's your point?
If you'd ever seen the low-light capability, exposure performance and video grading latitude compared to e.g. a Sony you'd know this isn't true. Bose has great trouble even matching the (more affordable) competition; GoPros continue to outperform others in many areas.
(unknown member): I'd buy all of their lenses in a heartbeat if they'd also make a 70-75mm and a 55 macro ... there is not a single lens maker out there except Leica that makes a full line of fixed focal length lenses.
Pentax makes a 77mm and a 50mm macro - is that close enough for you?
DStudio: I really like #14. Maybe others have seen this effect before, but it's new to me.
Very interesting - thanks!
I really like #14. Maybe others have seen this effect before, but it's new to me.
Papi61: Sad truth: Apple is greedy, Taylor Swift is greedy, the photographer is greedy. This society has made greed into its main value. Despite what they claim, no one gives a crap if someone else is exploited in the process, as long as there's some financial gain. The hypocrisy is virtually infinite.
Will we ever reach a money-less society, where poverty, crime and ignorance no longer exist, as envisioned in Star Trek? Nah, more likely we will self-destruct in just a few decades...
Just to be clear here, I'm a Chinese racist communist homophobe in China who wishes he could live in Russia. I've made a lot of money copying name brand products from Asia and Europe, but I identify with American products. I have a Buick, iPhone and iPad, and love to wear Levi's.
Papi61 - I was pretty sure you believed you had integrity - thank you for explaining yourself.
Don't forget those with opposing views usually have good reason for them. Even most prejudice is born of actual experiences and real facts. The problem is it often gets misapplied to the wrong individuals, or to entire groups which *may* not exhibit that characteristic on the whole.
I find that many of the people I like the most, get along with, and enjoy talking to face to face have vastly different political beliefs when the subject comes up. But we seem to often have similar motivations - even through we end up with different conclusions. At the very least, our ideas are seldom flippant.
There *are* those who genuinely don't think it out, or don't CARE that much. But I doubt you'll find many of them bothering to post here.
Same problem we've had in the USA for over 200 years. States have varied laws, and the Federal government tries to force them to uphold a uniform standard.
Usually it comes down to some states trying to force other states to give up long-held standards and laws.
The US Constitution is written to uphold states rights in most cases, so in order to enforce new universal standards it usually takes laws or judicial rulings that override or simply ignore the constitution.
So while virtually every country has to deal with various levels of government from local to national, I don't think Europeans have had to deal with it on this scale until the EU came along.
Americans had compelling, dramatic circumstances which coalesced them - to form a union on this very day. Later the Constitution established "a more perfect Union."
Since the EU came come together more out of logical convenience than a felt need, I think they can come apart more easily, since they are not tightly bound together.
DStudio: How are they going to distinguish between live streaming and video recording? They'd have to look closely at your phone while recording.
Or if they're still banning video, how will they know whether a smartphone is in photo or video mode? The screen looks nearly identical in most cases.
That's what I'm afraid of.
Alphaloki: If 4 of these have the same life as one Canon flash, then maybe Canon has a point. For most users who aren't shooting commercially, the knock off flash will live just fine. If I paid full Canon price for the knock off I'd be angry, but if I knowingly bought the knockoff for a discount, understanding the tradeoff I'd made, then I just made a choice. Canon wants to protect its market, we want to spend less. Ultimately, if the knock off is good enough, it puts Canon at a disadvantage and Canon has to lower their price to compete. I can live with that too. Ironically, articles like this - if properly translated, make the next gen of knockoffs harder to spot... Please understand I'm not arguing the morality of this, Canon has intellectual property rights, and their advertising budget helps sell credible knockoffs, based on Canon's popularity. I'm just watching from the sidelines. I have some Canon flashes, and I have some off brand flashes, according to my needs.
But when they put the Canon brand on it, that's a real problem.
Canon invests the time and money; Counterfeiter takes all the credit for their work.
How are they going to distinguish between live streaming and video recording? They'd have to look closely at your phone while recording.
Charming, yet painful (the video).
DStudio: "That was remedied with the borderline ridiculous $1,600 lens made from what has to be glass from the fires of Mordor; the Panasonic 42.5mm F1.2 Nocticron. That much bread for a Micro Four Thirds lens goes against everything (we think) the system stands for, which is why the Olympus 45mm F1.8 still stands as our studio lens."
Isn't this hypocritical? Top 85/1.4 and 1.2 lenses go for between ~$1000 and $2000 (and tends toward the higher end of this range, if you only count prices for new lenses). But this 85mm (equivalent) f/1.2 lens is outrageous at $1600?
But wait - this is the *same* article where you praise the $4500 OTUS?!
*** double-standard alert ***
I haven't used the lens (and don't shoot m4/3), but it's as if this was thrown in there just for the purpose of being hypocritical. BTW, it's $1400 and is only one star short of a perfect user rating (94 of 95, with a lone 4-star review) from NY's biggest camera retailer.
I'm not sure what you're comparing the Zeiss Batis to (price-wise), but it looks pretty good from the sample photos I saw.
It really depends on what you want, doesn't it?
For example, I'll shoot action on an 85/1.4 at around f/3.5.
But it's far from a "waste" to have an f/1.4 lens here, because this lens has the focusing speed and image characteristics I want. If I open it up too wide I don't get the results I like - plus the focusing accuracy becomes too critical.
Furthermore, at other times I shoot it between f/1.4 and f/1.8 because of low lighting.
In either of these cases, the Panasonic 42.5/1.2 could be fine. From what I read (and what little I've seen) it's a nice lens. It would have to be pretty bad for me not to prefer it over the Canon 85/1.8. The images from that lens just aren't special - at a focal length where many special lenses exist. I think there's a good reason they've priced it so low.
DStudio: The Nikon 85/1.8G looks more 3D than the others. But the OTUS does hold an advantage on hair and bristles. And this Canon sensor gets the most out of it when it comes to detail.
The Canon 85/1.8 is a classic example of how they drive you to L glass - by producing under-performing entry and mid-range lenses (although thankfully, they're slowly improving that situation).
I think the 85/1.8G is the easy choice for most uses. Plus, it has auto focus!
They kept the scene relatively planar to minimize DOF issues, but it's still very 3D in its elements. But perhaps you haven't noticed, because ... Uh ... this is so hard to resist ... you're not used to seeing it in photos? ;)
Sorry, don't own Nikon. Only a fan when they do something well.