Najinsky: Our monitors fill a good proportion of our field of vision (well, mine does) so our eyes are likely already adjusted to that.
Less likely for a tablet where much more of the periphery will be in the field.
This seems more of a comfort feature so there is less contrast between the device and the surroundings. A bit like the TVs that throw out ambient backlighting based on the content being viewed, but in reverse.
It's also used for the night shift feature to help you fall asleep quicker when reading at night.
I can't decide if it's a good idea to use it when processing images, I'll just have to wait and see when I get one. But at least it's a push in the direction of having more control over the viewing experience, which must be better than not having the choice.
PS: Remember to look away from your monitor frequently to the furthest thing away from you in the room. And at least 6 mins per hour get up and look at something outside far away. Exercise and protect your vision.
So you have the new iPad Pro already then?
Stollen1234: very good specification especially for photographer...too bad its not possible to download photoshop .. photoshop or lightroom apps are not great
It will sort of happen. The two (iOS and OSX) are converging slowly with each release.
With each release new frameworks are introduced that can allow the development of less hardware specific code. For example, the Metal Framework, introduced in iOS 8 and OSX El Capitano.
From a programming perspective, the two OS's are becoming more and more similar, which will eventually end up making more and more code reusable between Mac and iDevices.
At some point, both OS's will be near enough the same to allow apps to be more easily targeted for each type of device.
HowaboutRAW: Why are these raws so small. Imaging Resource posted 80D raws a few days ago, and they're on the order of 32MB to 46MB per file?
Canon Raws usel lossless compression (like ZIP files).
In general files with more real information compress less so are bigger. You can use the size as a rough guide to information (Image) content.
These were under-exposed ISO test files and have lower captured information. You can see the size increasing from 22MB to 30MB as each file is less underexposed and therefore contains more image detail. A correctly exposed image will be larger still.
Also the captured scene will play a role. An image with a large chunk of featureless blue sky will compress more than an image full of intricate detail.
Well done Canon, about time.
My first DSLR was a 20D and it was a very fine camera indeed, 'well sorted' as DPR used to say.
I don't shoot with Canon any more, but kept some of my L lenses in case I returned one day, and I could be very tempted by this 80D.
But there are so many great choices these days, it's so hard just to pick one or two.
The Pentax's with the great pixel shift feature, K1 and K3ii, both on the short list.
The new 24MP version of X-Trans, finally delivering on the X-Trans promise, when that comes to a DSLR style body, it will be on the shortlist.
The excellent 1" Sensor in the Nikon J5, if we get a V4 body with that, for a very compact option, on the shortlist.
An updated Olympus E-M1 with pixel shift and the new 20MP sensor, that would make the shortlist too.
Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Fujifilm and Olympus, it's suddenly becoming a very long shortlist!
Very tempting, but I'm based in Thailand at the moment.
nimrod1212: Now that we have the "pencil" why is there still no screen recording app for the iPad?
Screen recording is considered to be major security issue. By definition it has to run in the background while the screen you are recording is running in the foreground.
What's to stop an unscrupulous developer recording the screen with your account details and passwords and sending back to the developer. Your digital life has just been hacked.
If you enjoy those kind of risks, just buy Android instead! ;-)
With friends like that, who needs enemies!
JonnyBuoy: Other than the colour adjustment, its looking like an iPad air 3 to me. According to this article only half the RAM of the 12 inch pro model. As photographers we need the RAM! Also I understand the processor has been scaled back slightly as well, way to go Apple!
The lower RAM and CPU throttling are likely due to power consumption restraints. All day battery life is a primary design criteria for mobile devices. The smaller model has less room for battery.
iOS is very efficient at memory management and the majority of applications will be unhindered by 'only' 2GB RAM. If memory does become scarce it will manifest itself as a fractionally longer time to switch between foreground and background apps and be virtually un-noticeable.
If you have a very specific need for a memory intensive application, that application needs to be written to use memory efficiently, and/or be targeted for a device with more ram.
I don't see 2GB limiting what I'll use the iPad Pro for and I'm happy to take the lower power benefits, but you can't please everyone :-)
Our monitors fill a good proportion of our field of vision (well, mine does) so our eyes are likely already adjusted to that.
Nice work guys. Seems like you even managed to curtail your giddiness (well, mostly) at interviewing a hero.
Very enjoyable, thanks.
SteveY80: The lack of exposure compensation in Manual+Auto ISO is really frustrating. That's the mode where the dedicated EC dial would be most useful - in PAS modes the spare dial can be used to set compensation instead.
In a lot of lighting conditions EC is a necessity, e.g. shooting an air show with backlit planes you can end up with no shadow detail without +EC, while in other circumstances burned out highlights ruin the shot without -EC.
For me the complete lack of Auto-ISO in manual was the most crippling limitation of the GX7. It's the mode I use 75%+ of the time on my Sony, especially for wildlife, sport, and action photography. Having to manually control exposure can lead to missed shots in fast moving events with variable lighting. Panasonic lost a sale to me when they only half fixed it in the GX8.
They could sort this out with a simple firmware fix, but that would be unusual for Panasonic. Hopefully they'll finally have this working in a sensible way on the GX9.
Nice logo, you make that yourself?
Auto ISO is the first part of the feature. But the meter can be fooled by tricky lighting, so they want control over auto aspect.
The second part is to tell to add or take off a stop when using the metered reading, like exposure compensation does in the auto modes.
Imagine a dancer continuously moving across a stage at a varying pace and with varying lighting throughout the scene.
You have one hand supporting the camera/lens, possibly using it to zoom/focus. With the other hand you grip the camera, using your index finger and thumb for controls. 2 fingers, 2 control points.
In many shooting situations you may have the time and opportunity to exercise full control over every aspect of exposure.
Sometimes you can even supply and control your own lighting, like on a model shoot, but the above event is not one of those. Many aspects of the above event are beyond your control so you have to adapt and react.
The cameras metering system works at light-speed and can assist you in adapting and reacting quickly.
You are perfectly at liberty to choose not take advantage of the feature. But others will and do want to.
Also, they want to exercise some control over the meter, hence the need for this feature and why the lack of it is a negative.
caver3d: Have you noticed how all these mirrorless cameras - which are exceptional by the way - are now receiving silver awards instead of gold, even though they are more than equivalent to - actually superior to - the earlier versions which received gold awards. What's up with that, DPR? Care to explain?
The name Usain Bolt is known because he breaks records, not because he equals them or gets near to them.
Who remembers the 8th man on the moon? I mean remember, not able to use google to find out.
There are a few of reasons the GX8 doesn't deserve a gold award in my eyes, these are the reasons I won't be buying it, even though I am looking to buy a new camera and have a great collection of M43 lenses.
Yes, that and the shutter shock problem left me shaking my head a bit. They make a whole new body and still can't fix this?
Shame, it's nearly quite a compelling camera, but really wouldn't want to be chimping for shock/rolling shutter when I should be shooting.
Looks like Ricoh were really feeling out. While the D5 looks like it was clean sliced with a laser or even moulded in halves, the K1 looks like someone just grabbed the nearest hacksaw and set to work on it.
I can hear the conversations in the booth at pack-up time, hey yoshi, you seen my K1 anywhere? Yes boss, it's over there and over there.
rsf3127: ZS-100 is the DL killer.
LOL. Nice one.
10x zooms in this size are massively dependent on software correction which will eat into the resolution.
While at the long end, F5.9 on a 1" sensor will be already starting to suffer from diffraction, further limiting resolution, as may the multi-aspect modes.
This will be a 20mp camera in name only.
I'm not dissing the camera, the move to 1" is welcome, and at some focal lengths / aperture combinations will give nice images.
But wile it may compete for the same shelf space as the two compact DLs, they are targeted at different consumers.
BRWAT: Sigma going it alone is just a bad idea.
I think that Sigma should make sensors to sell to other manufacturers. I don't think their camera line will succeed, because they're seen by the public as nothing more than a 3rd party lens vendor.
If this sensor technology was adopted by any of the large camera I'd succeed.
ISO is itself a strange beast on digital cameras, the purpose of which seems to be to simulate film sensitivity to enable the expected functioning of the auto exposure modes.
For JPEG shooters the results need to appear in-camera as well exposed JPEGs of suitable quality.
To sell their cameras, manufactures obviously have to meet these needs and that seems to put the Foveon at a disadvantage.
Some sensors (e.g. Sony) are now being referred to as ISO-invariant, and Fujifilm perform some tricks with their ISO settings.
But this topic is of more interest to raw shooters who process their own files.
From what limited discussion I've seen, an ISO 400 Foveon image could be underexposed by 2 stops to preserve highlights and then pushed in raw to create a 'good' exposure and have less noise than if shot at 'iso' 1600.
So their may be some hope for Foveon, but it needs better support from the raw community and a rethink of in-camera processing, like Fujifilm, did but different too.
art99: Does the world need another aps size sensor ?Cannot Foveon make a real FF sensor with exceptional low light performance ? Like a sd quattro FF.
@deep7 - "What's the obsession with an arbitrary, film-based sensor size?"
The obsession is photography, that's why we're all here.
The specific size is not an obsession. For me, when all the convoluted arguments, opinions and myths are normalised, it all boils down to this.
It's all about capturing light.
Bigger sensors capture more light - It's an advantage.Larger aperture lenses transmit more light - It's an advantage.Better sensor technology captures light more accurately/efficiently - It's an advantage.
The holy trinity forms a mythical camera that has the biggest sensor, best light transmission and best technology for capturing it.
What we really do here in this forum is discuss the holy trinity of trade-offs. Between the mythical camera and; the ones that actually exist, the ones we are willing to carry (size/cost/ergonomics/etc), and the ones we would like to see come into existence.
And in that simple pursuit, we get to have all these lovely discussions.
Cameracist: Want the 18-50. But I am not sure if it outweights my lust for Ricoh GR...
I put together my own ranking of my m43 lenses a few years back based on my own shooting experience with them and the results (IQ) achieved.
When DXO mark introduced their Perceptual Mega Pixel, the ranking of those lenses based on DXOs PMP was a very accurate match to my own.
For primes that perform well across the frame at all apertures to the diffraction limits, the result are visibly obvious and almost indisputable.
For zooms and any lens where the performance varies significantly at different apertures and/or focal lengths, a single score can not define the whole lens and you must examine the results to see the true story for the lens.
Lenses that don't get a high score are not simply 'bad' lenses, they just didn't score high in a test, but learning its characteristics can help get the best from it.
Rather than criticising the attempt to give a score, I am just very grateful of the effort put in to test the lenses and publish the results. Same goes for the DPR lens tests.