arubin: So not compatible with either of my micro 4/3 lenses. Somewhat underwhelming.
"Not compatible" with those lenses means the in-body IS shuts off with them and only in-lens IS is used like with any other Lumix body...
It is compatible - it uses in-lens IS and in-body IS together.
JEROME NOLAS: GR is an excellent camera but yuppies want more bells and whistles... all it needs any kind of IS!!
It doesn't heve a viewfinder, proper grip, interchangeable lenses, built in image stabilization, PDAF and a tilting touchscreen. No buy for me and a shame on Ricoh!!!
My new camera... few years from now:D(humble a7 will do in the meantime:)
Made in China, asdsembled in Germany:-(Fair price should be around $200 for a simple triplet in manual focus shell. See Mitakon lenses for reference (and Mitakon might be the real manufacturer of this piece of ....)Loving manual focus lenses, loving interesting bokeh... hate robbery. And this is fraud on customers.
coasterguy: All of this bashing is pretty childish. I am by no means a pro but, I have had some sessions that have lead to some incredible photos. I have SOLD approx 20 framed prints for damn good money all the way up to 60" wide from a rebel t2. I'm currently in the market for a new camera and can't decide. Mirrorless aren't exactly perfect either at this point. I'm on the hunt and keeping my options open. The rebel line makes a damn good photo for the money. Just sayi'n' :)
All DSLR cameras from the last 10 years are more capable than most photographers:-)I made some of my favorite shots with Olympus E-1. And I do not hesitate to grab it instead of my A7 when I go camping or something.
Zigadiboom: There are still a few key areas ILCs trail in comparison to entry level DSLRs. They are:
- Low light AF and low light AF tracking- Battery life- Size: Canon 100d and D3300 are in reality not that much bigger than mirrorless options.- Lens selection: Still cannot ignore the fact that Canon and Nikon have a wide and extensive range of good lenses to choose from both proprietary and third party. Olympus and Panasonic have a good range but Sony, Fuji and Samsung do not in comparison. - Color rendition. I find a vast amount of photographers still prefer the colors Canon and Nikon produce. For landscape shots I know what I will be choosing.
APS-C Nikon D3300 is 'not that much bigger' than FF Sony A7 :-)...and since almost all Nikon lenses are FF compatible, you do not get smaller APS-C lenses either. The dedicated DX lenses are not large, but they sit on a large mirrorbox prolonging them far from camera (on the other hand, Pentax has some tiny APS-C lenses for APS-C).Colors can (and have to) be adjusted to taste if you shoot RAW, which is what landscape photographers do.Other points are valid, though.
Artak Hambarian: Well the 24 megapixels is the yesterdays story. Give us more please... especially at that price...
How it is a fixed focus O.O
Pandimonium: But the SLT is dead yes?
Not yet but close:-)
electrophoto: If only they would have added a 35mm lens ;)Well I'm glad they didn't - otherwise I'd find myself tempted.Never been a big fan of 28mm in a fixed lens camera....I've used some - and always found my X100 23mm (=35mm) lens far more useful on a fixed.
nice camera so... especially throwing in some modern...I'm not much a leica shooter (used to shoot some film Leicas years ago, but the price tag never was my range... ) but I can see why the Q is an interesting product.
If the two lenses have a same optical distortion, it will look the same.If the distortion of one of them will be more pronounced (probably the 28mm) you could possibly see it even after cropping. But keep in mind that optical distortions can be corrected by software quite easily.Another thing - if you use the same aperture, the cropped image wil have more DoF than 'real' 35mm lens.
If you shoot a person with 28mm and 85mm lenses from the SAME WORKING DISTANCE and then crop the 28mm lens to match the 85mm field of view, you will not see a difference in perspective.If you had a large format camera, where the 85mm lens will have the same FoV as 28mm on fullframe, you will again see the same perspective deformation you are used to see on your FF 28mm images.
Perspective changes with working distance and you go much closer with wide angle:-)Another thing is optical distortion.A distortion is not a perspective thing, but an optical error - and tends to be more pronounced with wider angle lenses (and sometimes can be stlill visible after cropping).
"the perspective is not that of a real 35mm lens"...the perspective will be the same - the DoF will be different from 35mm F1.7 lens on FF.PERSPECTIVE IS NOT DETERMINED BY PHYSICAL FOCAL LENGTH BUT BY AN EFFECTIVE ANGLE OF VIEW:-)
supeyugin1: Why do they need FF after thay converted all their lenses to APS-C? Pentax should stay APS-C, instead of going FF. It's more compact and lighter.
supeyugin1: Sony a99 is not gone, just still not at the end of it's life cycle. And their FF mirrorless cams are bought by lots of people - me included.
My camera has "low" megapixel count of 24... and alongside it I use another camera with 14, another with 10 and ...gasp... one with 5MPx!I can tell that anything over, say, 15MPx is quite unimportant: with bigger prints the viewing distance increases - and the human eye's ability to see details decreases.But I agree, it's nice to have more (cropping etc.), but it's not a reason to bash such a camera, camera which is not aimed at hi-res landscape lovers or cropping-telephoto-shots audience:-)
Why? Do you feel your photos lack crispness when you try to blow them on billboard size in 300DPI and then investigate them with magnifying glass?:-)
D135ima: T 0.95 - I dont belive. How it possible ?
F0.9 and good coating?
TORN: "So, no, as good as most DSLRs are at shooting black and white this just isn't the same. It is something entirely different, and far better."
I would like to see "far better" than D810.
Making BW photo directly makes more sense then interpolating colours and then waste the effort by converting. It's better....the question is price (are you willing to pai far a "Leica experience"?) and resolution of 24Mpx direct sensor vs 36Mpx Bayer. I suspect the 24Mpx will have same or more true resolution...
fatdeeman: Judging by the reflection at the top of dgb-ISO-100-IMG_6865.acr the edges sure seem usable sharp at F/1.8 even at the edge of a full frame sensor, that's pretty impressive!
The overall image quality doesn't seem all that different, the bokeh is still harsh (despite several people arguing that the extra aperture blades would somehow make a difference wide open!) but the edges do seem a little better. My copy of the mkII was always decent in the centre but I don't think the edges are this good even on APS-C!
The only lenses that SHOULD show their aperture blades wide open are constant aperture zooms when zoomed out. Some primes or variable aperture zooms show their aperture blades a bit wide open, but that's not a feature, it's basically a slight misfunction:-)