I would not spend e money for my own figurine but would bring my children every 2to3 yrs to do one. Keep a record of their growing. And technically it should get cheaper Looks good.
It's not e first time such works r done but what I admire abt him n his work is e simplicity.
Simple concepts w simple equipment. Basically a ameturist cam w a kit lens n a standard bright lens. TThats it. Rather then being a gear slut, photography is enjoyed in e simplest manner. No expensive gears here but expansive ideas.
iflash: Has anyone evaluated the amplitude of the shutter release. it sounded like a canon (BANG!) going off in the video. This was one of the truly elegant aspects of the X100 - its almost totally silent shutter. I want a silent X200 with an equivalent 35mm lens of about 50mm or near normal (just like the middle lens of the X-Pro1). I want all of the known bugs of the X100 cleaned up and it has to be on the shelf at about the same price as the X100. In other words, the X100 as it should have been when it was released. Oh, and for good measure, it would be nice to have a few of the refined aspects of the X-Pro1. Maybe that is what the Fuji guys mean by a lower level X-Pro1. Will it be an X-Pro0.5 or an X200?
take some time to look through your images and pick out those that you think would have been a goner if taken by fuji cam due to the orb thing.
it is a problem but a very very small problem that affects a very small percentage of images. ( unless you sell lamps and is required to take lamp pictures all the time.)
highlights push attention away. infact, glaring highlights used effective can help draw viewer to what you want them to see.
make the best out of the camera.
Kinematic Digit: I'm excited about this announcement. I hope still that they can get to F/2, but I guess to make this marketable and keep the price point down, the realistic number is F/2.8
imagine if panasonic comes up with 12-35/1.4. then imagine the price and the size. then ppl will say for this price might as well get FF wtih 2.8 zoom etc.
it good that more m4/3 companies are coming up with more lens and different lens.
consumer can buy what suit their needs or pocket...boh financially as well as what that can go into the pocket, i know d3 with 24-700/2.8 such cnt go into any small bag, let alone a pocket.
Claudio Pinchi: I really don't understand all these complaints about DOF of M43. I recently bought a GH2 and (among others) the Leica Summilux 25 f1,4 and I can honestly say that DOF and bokeh are absolutely first quality, also compared to the same lens on my 5D (Canon ef 50 f1,4). Seems that many people ignore that DOF is influenced not only from aperture but also distance from subject. I will not buy these new lenses probably... but honestly who can say a 24-70 f2,8 is not an interesting lens? Kit lens in m43 is really poor in quality. People that look for more image quality (at the expense of portability) will surely buy this zoom. What make IMHO m43 still a little lower step to DSLR is the small choice of high level lens. If I look to the shots of my GH2 compared with ones took with DSLR with APS sensor and standard lens... i can say... NO GAME! The small m43 lens make more simple to reach high optical quality.
P.S: i beg your pardon for my poor english ;-)
this is the same issue between medium format vs 35mm in film days. FOV is different due to film size and now sensor size. ppl who came from 35mm would always refer to FF as if it is the largest format around. you definitely get better quality from a bigger film, but are you willing to carry so much?
try packing 35mm FF with 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 and compare to a m4/3 body with 2 equivalent m4/3 lens. you will sacrifice DOF for sure, but gain increased portability.
this lens does increase possibilitiesin low light, again of cos better lens also needs better hands n brains to produce better results.