StevenE: The profession of photography is under serious attack. There are good amateurs willing to give away their work just for the right to brag that they were published. And these pop musicians today are not artists so much as products themselves ... packaged and sold by a tightly controlled and monitored team ... the paying public are mostly suckers buying the same thing over and over again, convinced by marketing that it's "newer and edgier" than last years "newest and edgiest" recycled thing.
Much of what you say is true, but she does write her own music and the show is definitely entertaining. So people who go are hardly "suckers" ... a less bitter way of looking at it is that management companies are stomping over anyone they can to make more money, which is true of anyone involved in the corporate hegemony. So there really is nothing new here ...
Stollen1234: on paper i looks like a very good camera.Panasonic is a very good company..but for a compact camera it is too big..and for a DSLR its too small especially if you use big lenses..
to really test the sensor you need to take some photos of kids running arround insidethe home at night in low light condition..
And how would that test the camera? Stabilization does not in any way shape or form stop subject motion lol ...
You would have a tough time with a FF dSLR indoors at night trying to capture running kids. Most would probably fail in most peoples' hands.
Panasonic does it again ... releases two new cameras very close together and takes the opportunity to completely screw the more ergonomic but lower priced G line ... and then they wonder why it does not sell as well as it should lol ...
Is there anyone on the planet (and in his or her right mind) that would have refused to pay a few hundred more for the G7 with this new technology in it? The G6 is already more camera than many need and remains the budget choice for superb ergonomics and excellent images and video. So the G7 / GX8 could have been a matched pair at the high end with little to differentiate them cost-wise. The ergonomic differences are legion and that should have been the plan IMO.
Dpreviewmember: Fuji doesn't understand the market for bridge cams !
After shotting a lot with my Fuji HS20 and HS50 bridge cams, only in 8MP mode, (16MP EXR 1/2" sensor) I wouldn't expect anything but awful IQ for the S1's 16MP 1/2.3" even at 50% crops as is definitely confirmed by these samples. Unless you are an impressionist artist and enjoy mushy pictures ;-)
Why camera manufacturers don't realize that 16MP is a lot for a sensor of this size, 8MP would give better IQ specially in low light, faster processing of files and would be perfect for small to medium size prints as well as showing on 2MP fullHD and 4K TVs/monitors, which is what most buyers of this kind of cam actually do. So why insisting on MP counts ?
Well, you would be wrong then ... I did a multi-part review of the S1 versus the HS50EXR (Fuji sent me both to facilitate this) and the S1 outclassed the HS50EXR easily.
But ... I would shoot it only in RAW and I would be very careful in contrsaty light. Tiny sensors like this are DR limited and you need to respect that.
onlooker: So does anyone know for sure which generation sensor this is? Is it the same as GX7?
Yes. The video calls out the GX7/GF7 sensor, which is a very good thing. The GM1/GM5 also share this sensor. This is IMO the peak of m4/3 image quality so far, and the new Venus engine manages to squeeze 4k and DFD onto it. I think this is likely to be a real winner ... and about time.
Boss of Sony: I hope this has better build quality than the FZ1000, because when I tried the FZ1000 in the shop, it felt like it was going to fall apart in my hands. $1000 doesn't seem to buy very good build quality nowadays.
I tried it in the shop and it is very solid. The G6 felt a tad plasticky at first, but it is no longer noticeable at all. It just works and works well. This new body looks even better.
Searching: Yuk, made in China.
What a nonsense comment. Do you hate Apple products too?
I've looked at the Nikon megazooms before ... the lack of raw formats is always a fatal flaw and this one suffers for it too. Panasonic and Fuji have had raw output on their tiny sensor megazooms for quite a while now, and it makes a real difference. Nikon ... wake up!
DaveE1: The Adobe marketing creeping into the site may backfire.
So, Photoshop has been around for 25 years?... an interesting fact, but also a reminder that there are better software for most photographers these days. The audio CD has been around since 1985, but that doesn't make it the best way to listen to music.
The comments under the recent article on the Photoshop 25th anniversary made it clear that many people are developing a dislike for Adobe and its products.
Despite what the carefully crafted Adobe press release would want you to think, Photoshop is increasingly becoming less relevant. Eventually, even the "power" users will move away when the newer alternatives get traction.
Sorry Adobe, but your money and size doesn't buy my opinion ;-)
"but also a reminder that there are better software for most photographers these days"
"Photoshop is increasingly becoming less relevant"
That, of course, is utter nonsense. It cannot possibly be more relevant for anyone who has embraced more than just the snapshot. Add video and the way the Adobe suite works together will pretty much blow your mind.
For those just plinking about, LR and CS were never relevant. For everyone else, they compete just fine. And for beginners who want to make better images, the number of tutorials from excellent photographers like Sue Bryce, Gavin Hoey and legions more makes Adobe products an amazing value at 10 bucks a month.
All of that in addition to Creative Live ...
Kim Letkeman: Some nice ones for sure ... but I would never have assumed that garden meant literally any place where a plant might choose to grow. How peculiar.
@wherearemyshots -- no, my point is not similar at all.
Some nice ones for sure ... but I would never have assumed that garden meant literally any place where a plant might choose to grow. How peculiar.
*sigh* .... I guess that means that Vegas and all its stable-mates are being tossed into the new subsidiary. I wonder how long it will be before I am forced to adopt some other video editing solution ...
Anyone who is running the latest versions of LR on a 32 bit machine it probably a masochist. Limited memory, limited bandwidth ... nothing is good about that combination. So Adobe is dead right to make 32 bit system obsolete. Heck, when was the last time you saw a 32 bit system for sale (that wasn't one of those crap brands created for suckers.)
ManuelVilardeMacedo: I tried Lightroom 5.7 last week. Adobe's website would only make the trial version available as part of CC, so I doubt new version 6 will be sold as a standalone application.Apparently Adobe succeded in dragging every Lr user to CC, despite it being outrageously expensive. You paid less for the standalone programme even if you updated it every year. I knew this would happen.As for the 5.7v I tried, it is exactly the same as Lr4, which I tried some three years ago, save for some presentation details. Lr6 will undoubtedly have some fancy features added, but I have no reason to believe it will bring any real improvement over previous versions.
The new price will remain stable (if Adobe wants to keep their customer base) and is in fact an excellent deal. Office remains a better deal, but Adobe finally got it right. 10 bucks for the latest Photoshop and Lightroom is cheap. And as others have mentioned, the price up upgrading even one of the apps every two years is as high ... and of course upgrading both tips you back to the rental as the cheapest way to go. Now, for those who don't want the latest versions, the costs will feel outrageous. But then, you probably have what you need so no need to complain.
mholdef: Really hope that the performance will be improved. I have a loaded iMac Retina and Lightroom is nowhere near it should be in expected performance. Photoshop on the other hand works quite well, even with heavy files.
Such is the difference between layers of bruised pixels and layers of non-destructive smart gestures. Photoshop does not have to rerender anything every time anything changes, but then to save your layers and smart layers, you need to store a massive file along side the original. Each has its strengths ... but of course, performance improvements will always be welcome. Note: The biggest single performance improvement is a fast scratch drive ... I use a cheap RAID 0 striped drive (2x1TB Caviar Black) and it is magnificent on an older 8 core AMD system with lots of RAM (the other key improvement.)
Kim Letkeman: The comments here seem to presume that this is a cheaper GM1, but I suspect that the GF6 sensor is present in the GF7 and that's why it is so cheap. It is also no GM1 based on that.
And why on God's green earth did Panasonic prioritize a GF7 to join the GM1, GM5 and LX100 in their small compact harem instead of the G7, which is part of a line that is unique in all of m4/3 for brilliant ergonomics?
Thanks, I'll check that out ...
The comments here seem to presume that this is a cheaper GM1, but I suspect that the GF6 sensor is present in the GF7 and that's why it is so cheap. It is also no GM1 based on that.
Peiasdf: A hump just for the flash and hinge. No wonder SONY is always perceived as the better brand.
False conclusion. Quite a few of us do not perceive Sony as the "better brand" ...
Spkeasy: I would buy (80%) the LX100 (or something like it) if it had at least a 16MP sensor. I need the occasional big enlargement and pixelation becomes an issue at the 12MP level. Add zoom to about 10x to that and I think I would be 100% likely to buy, especially if they shrunk the width a little so it would fit a pocket more easily. The slap-on little flash (or bigger option) on my EM5 works out fine since I rarely need flash with the low-light options I have with high speed sensor (they all seem to be getting these today) and great stabilization allowing me to use natural light for almost everything.
"I would buy (80%) the LX100 (or something like it) if it had at least a 16MP sensor. I need the occasional big enlargement and pixelation becomes an issue at the 12MP level."
Short answer: Both would produce at best a "good" print at that size. Not really worth getting bent over ...
Smart phones are great when you don't have a real camera in your hands. And since most people's standards are staggeringly low, are we to be surprised that Samsung and Apple are rapidly overtaking the real camera makers for mom, pop and the kids?
The real camera makers are heading back where they started, fighting over the enthusiast and professional markets.