Omg I spent last hour on the rocket 24 site from your link. It is like a view into different world.
I have one for dslr... funny I have to dig it out of the junk drawer. But I remember the 90 angle makes it very difficult to frame image or even point at something as it fools your perception of axis. You actually fiddle much more with it than simply pointing quickly the camera at subject, snap and go your way.
flo-w: Too bad that rugged seems to translate into toddler toy look with all but the Sony which in turn can't be used for its intended purpose. What are they thinking?
I use the sony (older tx10) and it works great. The only thing is that you cannot change settings under water - but there is nothing much you need to change anyway. The camera works best in its automatic mode. As soon as you get out of water the touch screen works even if it is wet.
Rod McD: Hi DPR, thanks for your review.
People buy these things because there's no alternative other than a bigger camera and a housing. I'd like to see a manufacturer opt for a new approach. Year after year your reviews (and others) comment on their small sensors and poor IQ. The internet is also littered with leak complaints and poor company response on guarantees.
There seems to be a view that wilderness/outdoor/water sport followers don't value better IQ, which is absolutely untrue. And that serious photographers should have a D4 in a housing. Try stuffing one of those in your life jacket. The middle ground - the old Nikonos - is gone.
We need a manufacturer to make a robust, WR, direct light path camera with an APSC sensor, a fixed 24-85eq zoom (or primes) and real "O" rings. One 25mm "O" ring cover could give access to an SD card, a shaped battery and USB plug. Add a decent grip. And useable with gloves please.
Yes it would be bigger and cost more. But worth every cent.
It is extremely expensive to make waterproof "real" camera that would withstand more than a year of use. On all professional equipment you have to regularly change the o-rings and take pretty good care of the housing. A grain of sand can make waterproof camera no longer waterproof.All of those small wp cameras are basically with planned 1 year obsolescence. They are cheap inside so if they start leaking, then you throw it away and get new one. Many of those would leak after some time, some even after first dip :-)You definitely don't want a wp expensive camera like rx100 or x100 and nobody will make it. If you need wp you will buy a marina case that is probably more expensive than the camera itself, but it will protect your equipment.
tvstaff: These are poor choices. I'm sorry but the quality leaves little but for the novice consumer. At some point Canon or Nikon will get serious in this space. I like to shoot Kitesurfing and it would be a GREAT pleasure at under $1,500 to have a quality camera with good IQ I could take in the water as I shoot at times up to my neck to get a great perspective. The KEY word here is IQ. I don't need GPS, a can opener or wi-fi. I JUST WANT IQ and DR.... It seems that Canon and Nikon are leaving the market open for some new 4K cameras coming out of China. Make fun of LG if you want but they are about hit Nikon, Canon and Sony in the chest. Fluff cameras like the 70D and such will be the rope that hung them. For under $1,500 I should have a Point and Shoot camera I can throw in my bag that can take the elements. As good as a H4D-60 or Leica S NO!! But how about the IQ of a stripped down camera devoted to IQ and sans all the FLUFF. Enough DR to deal with PP issues in PS. IMHO ;)
You are in wrong company then. Those tested cameras here are not for professional sports or anything beyond pure amateur pics and mostly for families to take with them to a beach.A professional can easily take his favorite and trusty equipment and buy a marine case for it. There are marine cases for nearly every camera imaginable.
jamesbm: Wouldn't it be a bolder editorial stance to not give awards when basically none of the cameras seem to take good pictures and all have fitness for purpose flaws - displays that cannot be viewed outdoors, poor battery life, badly thought out controls etc?
Those 3 they recommend are indeed the best of the rugged bunch.And they take a very reasonable images in bad situations.
It has japan market written all over.
Don't people see that the images are terrible? What is the point to add terrible effect to terrible snapshots? Does someone think that two bad things make a good photography?
It is cute and in the same ballpark as other kits go. It brushes too much off the actual camera module and operation, it is more like building a dynamo flash light - practically what the kid learns is how a gear works as that is the only real assembly. But cute, 20 minutes project.
So you shoot in raw then process it outside? So what is the process? What software etc?
DFPanno: The conspiracy theory is that NASA hired Kubrick to film the Moon landing.
Part of his reward was access to these lenses.
Yeah but then he was not satisfied with the picture so he financed private moon landing with Russians to be able to film on the actual moon, then told NASA it was done in the studio.
Great piece to read and watch.
From the Flickr set, it definitely progress from just candids towards more elaborate and humorous sets. I think it is very cute.
Maybe big brother can (for some fee) let you search the cctv database for pictures of you. That would be better than a wearable cctv.
Does it have any shake reduction, even a digital one?Otherwise, cool, but maybe too late to the party. Nobody seems to care about bloggie and flips anymore. When looking at tourists I see 3 kinds, the one carrying big and heavy dslr with a heavy optics, the ones who use very cheap PS cameras and the majority that use their phones.
Chaitanya S: This new Canon camera reminded me Panasonic D-Snap series of cameras/hybrid devices that came out nearly a decade back.
Exactly my first impression.
Panasonicus: $1000 body only may be a deal breaker for many. When you consider the price of a G3 or G5 at less than half that amount or the latest G6 with the upgraded kit lens at $799 you have to wonder if the GX7 will see a big price drop early on.
With IBIS it looks like Panasonic may phase out in-lens stabilisation as it adds to cost, size and weight. The ability to use Olympus glass is a big plus and the built-in EVF is a massive advantage. I have never figured out why people buy a GF camera when, for the same money, you can buy a G series with built-in EVF.
The GX7 is heavier and larger than my G3 but not by much and apart from the high price this looks like the best product Panasonic have come up with to date. I may buy one if the price drops to around $699. By the way, I am in the UK and expect the usual rip-off pricing (probably 80% more) will apply making a US purchase a 100% certainty.
I wouldn't worry about the price. Panasonic always comes down, sometimes to really budget levels on older models.
Soon the focus speed will be faster than speed of light after all the numerous updates that dramatically improved it. But kudos for trying and the peaking will be indeed useful for manual focussing. Can't complain.
So much negative opinion. Sure I would love to have phone with dslr quality but it is not going to happen. Nokia beats my Samsung phone image to the point of carrying extra Ps camera that I do now pointless.
I went to the site and flickr and there are actually far better pictures that the two featured here. The two here are something most of us did at some time after we discovered PhotoShop. But there are way better images in his collection, like the roses dipped in white paint etc...