Sam Santana: I thought it stood for Vibration Reduction... that's what it says right there on my Nikkor 500mm f4
Seriously!! People have been using "VR" to refer to virtual reality since the early 90s.
bubblyboo: But Nikon had VR first.
Actually this use of "VR" long predates Nikon's stabilized lenses.
TN Args: So, Nikon's application of the term 'VR' has been instantly usurped, even in photography circles?
Nope. "VR" had been used to refer to Virtual Reality even by the early 90s.
tom1234567: Good for Sigma getting on top of the problem right away10 out of 10 for serviceTom G
"unless a class act lawsuit comes and then they apologize and repair."
They actually apologized?
PaulDavis: They look like they were designed by Sony. If someone just saw the picture and not the title of the article they would think these are two new Sony brand lenses.
I just gave up all my FE Sony gear but it is still exciting to see new lenses coming out for it. I don't know why but I always find myself rooting for their success in this camera market.
"I'm allowed to print your trademark on my product without permission."
Are you sure? Sigma, Zeiss, etc. never printed things like "FX" or "F-Mount" of "EF mount" on their lenses and instead came up their own acronyms like ZF or DC.
The phrase "E-Mount" itself is a registered trademark of Sony, yet these lenses have it printed on there. Apparently Samyang has obtained a license of some sort from Sony.
Maybe the license includes a general physical appearance. Maybe Samyang has already been manufacturing E-mount lenses for Sony.
noflashplease: Samyang makes the plunge to autofocus.... for the full frame mirrorless Sony A7 series? It goes to show that Canon and Nikon are badly behind in the mirrorless market and full frame is the new normal. Kudos to South Korean Samyang for bringing real competition to the Japanese lens manufacturers.
"Sony has an open license for E-mount AF protocols,"
Where is the documentation concerning this open license? According to the wikipedia article for E-mount you must be approved by Sony, sign an NDA, etc...
Wow, this is beautiful...
electrophoto: Still iOS's greatest flaw: no direct access to these external storage devices by ANY app but the one supplied by Sandisk & Co.so a merry back and forth copying of files... when it could be so simple... when will apple redo their over-protective sandbox system... not everyone wants everything in the cloud.
"As an IT security specialist I can tell you that there is only three platforms safe to use for banking and other secure needs: iOS,"
I'd question that if that's iOS running on a device with cellular hardware. It has been discovered that on most smartphones the cell baseband software has full DMA access to the entire application processor's memory as well as access to peripherals. Not only is that baseband software 100% closed and under the control of the phone company, but vulnerabilities have been found in it:
The app sandboxing is great, but there is no reason why certain apps shouldn't be able to share a particular space in the filesystem, especially if the user wants it to be so. As was pointed out, the apps can already share the same data anyway by less convenient means.
Jonathan Mac: I don't get all the anti-Flickr negativity of the last couple of years. Flickr is a great site with a good mobile app. I think it'll survive just fine one way or the other.
"WTF IS all this crap on the page when you log in?"
Photos from other people you're following.
"It's hard to find your own content!"
It is? I see mine right up there in that big "YOU" menu at the top.
HowaboutRAW: The NX1 has gone down in price and then back up at B+H within the last few weeks and still lists at full price.
So how's that new EVF-equipped high end rangefinder body coming along and the other announcements you were proclaiming would occur at CES in January?
mgblack74: How did we get to the point of mixing fractions with decimals? 1 over 2.3? 1 over 1.7? How is that possible? It's like saying 1.3 miles. Its either 1.3 kilometres or 1 1/3 miles. Imperial is idiotic (don't get me started on Fahrenheit). Saying a sensor is 1/1.7 means what? It's 0.7" larger than 1? Or rather it's 7/10ths larger than an inch? It's bizarre that we have 1" or less measured in fractions of an inch. We even have view cameras measure in inches; 4x5, 8x10. But APS-C, full frame ("35mm format. Millimetre), crop frame medium format (44x33) and full frame medium format (60x45) are measured in millimetres. We have standard hotshoes. Standard film/sensor sensitivity. Standard focal length nomenclature. But come sensor size..... it's all over the map. mm is just more accurate too. Anyway. :-)
"Even though the Metric System is forced on our students in school, they always revert back to our own standards in their personal lives."
Probably because that's the standard of the country they live in. They don't really have much choice but to regress to imperial units.
"We will never give up our standards and use foreign ones."
Now that's hilariously ironic. We already have adopted a foreign standard - the imperial system is called the imperial system because it was the standard of the British Empire.
"Correctly used, A Megabyte is a measure of storage capacity or file size. The term "Megabits per second" or "Mbps" is the measure of transfer speed"
Total nonsense. Bytes per second has often been used to measure the bandwidth of any transmission medium which transfers many bits in parallel. The bandwidth of the PCI bus and ATA was typically stated in megabytes per second. On the other hand, serial methods (i.e. SATA, RS-232, etc) have been usually given in bits per second.
"(8 Megabits of signal flow needed to fill 1 Megabyte of storage space."
"signal flow"??? Perhaps you meant "bandwidth" as used in computer science...
Even worse, these stupid sensor size specs have nothing to do with the actual size of the sensor. A "1/1.7 inch sensor" does not measure 1/1.7~=0.588 inches in any dimension.
arhmatic: "forever"? ditch the focus by wire, typical, ALL lens makers. Do all mechanical. The only way to make them forever.
The reality is, -this wire thing might break anytime. Might not be supported in 2-3 decades...-compatibility is an issue. How can I use my Sony lens if suddenly I want to get a body from different maker? Adapters don't work. Make them all mechanical, so we can at least focus.
The reality is, my old, 1970s Nikkor works on my Fujifilm like a charm. All manual. Fujiflm on Nikon? Never. Not that I'd need that, but just a thought... Again, do all mechanical (manual or autofocus, your choice) then it's at least a step towards "forever".
Right - I'm saying there ought to be a similar standard for electronic camera lenses. There isn't one, but that doesn't mean a digital protocol can't have that kind of longevity.
A 100% manual M42 lens with a screw mount isn't useful if you want autofocus and an aperture that stops down automatically.
As I said, there already are protocols that have survived for many decades. If you need an even better example, take a look at RS-232. Introduced in 1962, still used today. You can plug something made back then into your smartphone if you like with a $10 USB adapter and talk to it. Equipment is still manufactured today that communicates with RS-232. 54 years of working fine is good enough for me to say it has survived.
All mechanical isn't necessary at all. There's nothing about a digital communication protocol that necessarily has to become unusable in 2-3 decades. Some of the protocols you're using to view this web page are 2-3 decades old (or more). What is needed for the long run is a simple, well designed, well documented open standard. Unfortunately the camera industry is apparently allergic to this concept. Everyone has to invent their own proprietary way of doing the exact same thing that someone else is doing.
Timbukto: I thought the first image was a fancy optical adjustment bench. But it's just hand sanitizer station. I think Chipotle needs some of those.
Also why on earth would anyone need to unbox a unit to QC vs just QC prior to boxing? Shady boxing workers? Or just nonsensical workflow?
Because then you can't detect boxing errors.
arhmatic: I would't call this "retro-styling". It's the "natural-styling" - because this is really the size and feel a camera should have. It happens to look retro, true. Well done, both Olympus and Fujifilm.
"this is really the size and feel a camera should have"
... in your opinion.