how about another 23mm 2.0. Lens is perfect already
Quick question about the EVF. Does it lock in place, or do you have to be careful not to push it in when you press your eye against it? Thanks.
I prefer the new power switch. On the old one, I had to look to turn the camera on. It takes two hands now, but I can do it without looking at the camera.
Joseph Mama: I wish they could expand some of their bizarre statements, such as "The Sony Cyber-shot RX100 offers more bells and whistles, but you're limited to its fixed zoom lens and much smaller sensor. "
What does that actually mean? How is a 1 sq inch sensor "much smaller" than a 1.66 sq inch sensor?What exactly "bells and whistles" are on the RX100 that this thing lacks?
Perhaps this image from the article will help you visualize the difference:
I pay $300 every two or three years to keep PS up to date. At $20/month, Adobe wants me to pay twice as much for a CC subscription for just PS. I'm sorry, but as an enthusiast, its just not worth that much to me.
vFunct: HDR style is really the worst, ugliest most over-processed photography style imaginable. There is absolutely NO art critic that would find this look acceptable.
And really, art critics are the only viewpoints that matter, since they reference the leading edge and do not care for populist appeal of the Wal Mart crowd that so many photographers love.
HDR is the equivalent of a Thomas Kinkade painting, and even looks like it. THAT'S how bad it is.
Photographers: do NOT do HDR. Learn the subtleties of a proper naturally lit non-overprocessed photograph. Study Hedi Slimane or Terry Richardson or Ryan McGinley or Ineez & Vinoodh for some proper fine-art photography. Learn why the art critics love that, and learn why they hate Thomas Kinkade paintings so much,
You people are missing the joke. vFunt is kidding you. The giveaway was the line about art critics having the only viewpoints that matter. C'mon that was so obvious.
jpr2: alas - yest another Samsung WITHOUT eye-level VF = DOA, unfortunately :( !! which is a great, great pity
You are definitely not not condescending and patronizing. Your posts come more under the heading of rude and obnoxious. You've posted to DPR 139 times and pretty much every one is insulting to someone. To top it off, I'll be damned if I can find a single one that contains anything of use at all. You seem unable to post anything but vile and vitriol.
And to top it off, you now fall back on the "oh, I was just trying to help". If you are going to be an obnoxious SOB, at least do it proudly.
Best Wishes, Michael
You seem to get upset every time someone posts something about a missing feature they would like. Perhaps you aren't clear on the concept of a discussion. They way it works is DPR posts information about a camera, and then people post the things they like and don't like about it.
So, in this case, someone didn't like the fact that it didn't have an EVF. This is a reasonable statement as some people prefer an EVF and the fact that it doesn't have one may influence their (and other folks) decisiions. Then someone else posted that there is an optional EVF. This was useful information to the EVF-preferring folks.
Your post was neither useful, nor did it add to the discussion. Surely the existence or non-existence of an EVF in a camera is more on-topic then information about what p**s you off. Many people care about the EVF, and I guess that only you care about what p**s you off.
I hope this little guide helps you in your future posting.
Most be a pretty flimsy camera. He bearly touched it.
Bastian Junker: I can't understand why people keep saying that x100 has so many oddities. I think it's quite easy to handle, it took me about half hour to figure out how it works. Afterwards I looked through the manual and founded some great tips to make some shortcuts.
Agreed.The X100 is the most fun camera I have ever used. Great pictures and a great form factor. Does it have a few minor quirks? Certainly. Big deal. Every camera I have ever used does.
While I never used the MF (Because I stopped MFing about 20 years ago), the AF worked perfectly well for me.
bentheoandrews: Whoaaaa, everyone calm down. Just to clarify, I've got this app on my iPad 2. I can load and work with jpegs from my Sony NEX 5N with no trouble (larger than 1600x1600) - layered up and edited 4 images in a project of a snowboarder jumping and worked fine with no lag. I think the pixel limit is output size.
Good to know. That's better then what the review at (I think) Gizmodo said. They thoght that it will not load or save larger files.
That changes this from a completely useless App to one that I have no interest in. I can't imagine why I would want to spend a lot of time editing a picture, just to have to start over again when I got back to my computer.
I can see how people who only upload to the web might find this useful.
Shirrif: 4 stars for what?
"The Refine Edge technology is a little 'hit or miss'""What we like: selections made easy (especially with Refine Edge technology)"
Apple fever is definitely on...
While I don't want to get in the way of your Apple bashing, this is actually a review of an Adobe software product that is directly competing with an Apple software product (iPhoto for iOS).
I am not sure how even the most virulent Apple hater could view a positive review of a competitor's product to be "Apple Fever".
I'm not sure how you can give a 4-star review to a program that is so limited that it will not even load a screenshot from the new iPad. Remember, it doesn't downscale large images, it just refuses to load them.
Isn't that like saying that a race-car is really great even though it only goes at 20 MPH?
stonycreeker: Would not this camera compete directly against the Panasonic GH2 (which I love) and which of them appears to be the better camera? I'm thinking of the OM-D as a companion to my GH2.
I wouldn't worry about it too much. I'm pretty confident that they will not release the camera with the beta firmware you saw. So that's one update for sure.
Sergey Borachev: A 24mm-85mm lens that is fixed to and therefore optimised for the all-conquering Sony 16MP sensor (Hope it is that sensor!). I think a lot of people would be happy to sacrifice some high AF speed or very high ISO capability(ISO 6400 and over) in a camera designed to provide top quality images in a small package. Yes, landscape shooters who regularly use tripods should love this. The only thing that remains to be seen is how good this lens is. If it delivers, this will be something very attractive. I think it should not be too difficult to make a lens that beats Sony's E zoom and therefore outperform the Sony NEX 5n in terms of still images. It is a pity that IS is not included, and optimised also for the characteristics of the lens. Ricoh should really consider release a larger version of the GXR to accomodate IS and a builtin VF as an upgrade, to satisfy those who want it to be a more all-round camera, which will be better balanced and can have more buttons too. A Super GXR?
I had a GXR for a while, and while I loved it, I couldn't get used to the external EVF. If they had done what you suggest, I would still have it now.
CrashE3: Sure, there are still many users that need CSx. BUT Adobe has, for way too long, benefited from the basic to intermediate photographer that thinks they need it because that is what all of the great photographers have. I am one of those who does a lot of portrait work and just really felt like I needed CS for good retouching and the support of plug-ins that I enjoy using. It is just not the case anymore.. there are way too many options and way too many "plugins" that have come out as stand alone programs. CS3 is the last version I am likely to have bought, as everything that I do to a photo can now be done in my OnOne software suite.. for far less money.
I think ou are probably correct for 90% of the functions in CS5.fCertainly Lightroom can do almost anything a non-pro would ever really need.
Having said that, I think its worth upgrading to CS5 just for content aware fill. That has saved me so much time.
match14: They should have put an EVF rather than optical viewfinder on it.
Agreed. I would have happily taken a slightly larger camera with an EVF. This one just misses for me.
harrisoncac: So ugly.
As someone who would use it to take pictures, I think it looks fantastic.
But, I can see how as a decoration for the house it is not too attractive.
h00ligan: Sorry MT - not at $200. The leica one was already too expensive, and the price was raised. I'd love to have one, sure.. but not at 1/6 the price of the camera.
I predict they will sell a few, however, nowhere near as many as if they had priced it according to the actual market.. which is not Leica.
Interesting. I have only had perfect experiences with them. They've always shipped when they said they would, and never gotten anything wrong.
Wbat was your problem with pop flash?
You can also get the thumbs up from the manufacturer if you want to.