nwcs: Very happy to have the white background be permanent. Any class in usability of human factors or any UX background shows that black text on white background is easier to read. But for those who prefer the opposite, nothing's stopping you.
Exactly with the white background everything looks bunched up. The sections/ads/replies/content looks like one big blob.
tailings: Light text on dark background is so 1995. Welcome to the 21st century. Thank you DPR, you were one of the few holdovers, and as a result, a constant afterimage annoyance. No longer!
If something works why break it and try to fix it the wrong way. Just like websites that don't need mobile mobile responsive deigns do it because is web 7.0 fever and everyone is going it. I still switch to full desktop version as I want all the sites content not left over breadcrumbs.
Back to black for me. The dark shows a much cleaner separation of each section/comment.
I must say two very exciting news Hassy and Sigma in the last couple days. Lets hope the prices on both of these light some fire under other manufacturers.
K2TL: Not bad price, but I heard they are slow in many ways.
Well I've been wanting to get into landscape more since I haven't been able to visit downtown Vancouver much (my fav shooting spot) and this thing looks pretty cool plus with the mount should be plenty of cheap lenses available.
Damn that's cheap, huh might have to get one, always wanted a Sigma camera but couldn't justify the price for what was offered before.
I don't really shoot anything that requires speed this might be good.
SaltLakeGuy: As much as I enjoyed top Canon, Nikon and Sigma lenses on their native products back in the day, I have NO interest in NON native lenses on my A7RII. It all works far too well, and the lenses I use are far too good to compete with. Sadly many are born tinkerers.
Who would not want choice and more options. Besides if I was to buy a Sony and had tons of Canon glass that I could use because of the adapter like this why wouldn't I and save $$$$$ for other equipment or a trip.
falconeyes: Nice body. But the MF problem of lack of fast or affordable lenses persists, i.e., this will remain a niche product although I applaud them to be first for a possible new trend.
2695$ for a 70mm/2.5 equivalent when a very good 85mm/1.8 equivalent (for full frame) is 500$? In theory, MF lenses (with the same equivalent properties) should be cheaper (they are easier to make) but so far, nobody delivers on this technical promise.
Well someone has to start somewhere and if this unit turns out to perform expect fear in other manufacturers to up the game and price war. This means good things to come for consumers and hopefully serious price drops in the next few years.
Got to love proper competition.
dansclic: This format makes sense only if you print wall size. Otherwise, FF is thé best ratio quality/ investment
Nah most formats these days will do just fine.
Cultured Vulture: This camera has a real chance to be a dream camera for landscape, architecture and studio photographers. That is if they support it with a lens set to match. Finally a digital MF that won't weigh you down. It's also the first mirrorless that interests me.
Don't really care that its mirroless as there's plenty of good stuff in M43 (I don't own M43 or plan on) I'm nore interested in a MF manufacturer besides Pentax introducing a new sub $10K body.
This is how prices are driven down and how competition starts to heat up. Hopefully we'll see sub $5K MF bodies in the next few years.
capanikon: Looks great. Finally we can start moving away from the teensy so-called "full frame" format.
@ straylightrun Poor m43 users though, this thing makes their format look even smaller.
I got 4:3 as not to attract attention to my large manhood.
Marksphoto: not so game changing imho. If i have f1.4 lenses I am in the same boat as these 3.5 and up lenses... with less weight and I dont have to break the bank...
Pixel peeping has run its course welcome equivalence the new boss same as the old boss.
Wild Light: This has surely got to be to be the most positive reaction ever on DPR.
@villagranvicent Again with the EM1..!
Because it true 2096
malabito: M43 are great cameras with beautiful lenses, but I don't understand why will someone will pay so much money for a lens like this, which is as big as a apsc or even full frame equivalent lens, (yes maybe not light gathering, but push the iso and you will get as much light and same results). I don't see the need for it. I used to have an em5, great under good light conditions, but as soon as it got dark, it sucked. I decided to buy a Voigtlander .95 and it was a waste of time, and money, camera was as big as a nikon 610/DF with a 35mm 2.0 and you can obtain much better results with it. So why buy these huge lenses for m43, when for a much comfortable size you can get better results with a full frame? And that's taking out the Sony a7 system, which will make the m43 even more silly with one of these lenses...
From the Hassy thread
@villagranvicent >I am sure this is a great camera, no doubt about it but at the end what do I care, I wouldn't get this nor a Leica S or SL anyway.
villagranvicent: Well... the sample shots are nothing my Sony A7 with the Zeiss 35mm cannot handle.
Whooooosh. If you practiced what you preach you would have made the post count in the Panny lens thread quite a bit smaller.
Well if you are talking about post count+ trolls then yes, seems to be very little trolling here as not much to biatch a whine in the * VS FF format depertment. I think the Olympus EM1 had the most amount of posts but the troll ratio was quite high.
Mrrowe8: Blah blah blah blah blah .. Yes it's nice ,yes it's super expensive, so not really a for the masses camera, to bad .. The biggest question is it possibly to little to late to be relevant to the already solid cameras out there with solid image making pedigree.. Feel free to leave a snotty snobby response at the beep .....BEEP
Tesla started not for the masses. They used rich folks and those easily parted with their money to build up their car manufacturing to start bringing in the X3 for the masses.
Average User: Other factors are important but some of the basic math is: Sensor is 44x33 compared to ff at 35.9x24, compared to APS-C at 23.5x15.6. Makes the sensor 68.5% larger than ff and 3.96 x APS-C sensors. With 19% more pixels than a Sony A7rII it has a pixel size which is 41% larger than the Sony A7rII. assuming 100% of the sensor area is used for pixels which is only partly true. BUT if you compare to a 24 mp ff, the pixel size is actually only 80%. The numbers suggest that the improved total resolution plus improved pixel size could result in a nice incremental improvement in overall image quality, depending on the efficiency of the sensor (and many other factors). But by way of comparison, these numbers show that Medium format is not as large an incremental improvement as moving from APS-C to Full Frame. Hoping that DPR will be able to quickly see how much improvement is achieved in real life shooting.
Well if this can jump start the competition in the field on small body medium format eventually the tech will get better and cheaper. More sales = more RND money = better for consumers AS LONG as they they try to play the "boutique" brand.
There you go bagging on other brands again, too bad this time you cant try to say 4:3 is no match for FF.
Personally would never spend at much on a body unless it could also peel potatoes but a gutsy move by Hassy and hopefully a start of some competition in the filed to push Pentax to lower their price and develop the 645 a bit more.
As users we need as much competition as we can to push innovation and price dumps.
Tell you what I'll take my not up to FF standards E5 and you take your FF camera, come back here in 10 days and we'll compare some photos.