Mariano Pacifico: By looking at pictures in real world scenario, can they tell which pictures were taken by LX100, RX100 M3 from RX100 M4 ?
Valid question. Can you really tell the difference between real-world photos from all cameras using the Sony 24MP APS-C sensor? If not, does that mean that all those cameras are equal?
MikeFairbanks: Holy smokes, that's expensive. Does it really need to be a thousand dollars to make a decent profit?
The price is double or triple what other nice compacts cost, so is the image quality two or three times as good?
I'm a semi-pro photographer, and L-glass + full frame has me spoiled.
But, of course, it produces quite a bulge in my shirt pocket. 😏
I use my iPhone for a lot of fun shots, but it's limited in most situations.
I don't know how much it's worth to get the size so small compared to the cost (with the Sony).
A thousand bucks. Wow.
"Which then makes it so much easier to shoot certain types of photography on it compared to a DSLR that it frankly feels like cheating."Funny how things go from "Cheap&Toy" to "Cheating" to "Easy&Natural". And features "Not for real photographers" over time becomes natural and what was natural becomes akward and cumbersome. Of course it applies to a lot more fields that cameras, much more to the time it takes to change peoples perception.
Francis Carver: Wow, Canon, you had done it again! You had released yet another legacy 1080p video camera body -- smack in midst of the UHD and 4K resolution era.
But wait -- what's that price? $300? $3,000? $30,000? Tell you what, Canon -- make it an even $300,000, and I'll sign us up for three.
Or mostly 720p ...
Donnie G: The ME20F-SH is a good example of how Canon plays to its strengths by creating entirely new imaging tools that present real solutions to longstanding problems encountered by imaging industry professionals instead of simply imitating what's being done by others. This camera is the only product available that addresses a longstanding need, (30 years or more), in the broadcast and surveillance industries for high quality color video capture in total darkness. At $30,000 a pop, you and I won't be buying one, but Canon will sell boatloads of these cameras to those who need them. Also, expect to see that new locking EF cinema mount on all future Cinema EOS camera bodies. Good job Canon!
And Donnie, that's why I asked what the next obvious gap is ...Or are you worried that you may say something that then gets filled by someone else?
Otherwise, always claiming "It fills a gap" just may look like and afterthought.
Francis Carver: This "camera" serves no identifiable purpose.
If you place a sensor inside a totally black and light-sealed box, even with 400 billion ISO sensor it would record only, yeah, you've guessed it, black.
Take it outside and use it in a very low light environment. Sure, this Canon camera brain would work, but why spend $30,000 for that, when you got something quite similar out there for a fraction of that price.
Even looking at real cameras, not a mere camera brain like this one, some of the Sony A7 series models can do similar work for a price point ranging from around $1600 to $2600. Full frame, high sensitivity low-lux shooting, and so on. And yeah, they come with full-size SD card slots, not the Micro SD like this Canon-brain-head camera that cannot even record what its sensor reads. For $30 THOUSAND doaalrs? C'mon, good people.
I'm pretty sure that what the human eye sees as black, may not be totally without light...
And I don't see green men in the dark, I see them when I drink the stuff that my uncle makes...
'Black' is a subjective term ....
ZoranHR: It is not Sony?! No comments then.
So close to making it ...
Mssimo: I would like to see this compared to the Sony A7s. I would not be surprised to see the Sony be much better.
With binning the difference is not that big at all. Rishi often states that the difference between D810 and A7s is very little when both images is scaled down to same MP. It will be interesting to see how this one compares to both D810 and a7s (and more).
Most recent releases from Canon have gotten this praise from you:"It fills the need of the professional photographer."
Which I guess means that there was an apparent empty slot in the market.
So tell us, what is the next empty slot that Caon will fill in?
Eleson: What is the intended usage and audience for this camera?
Thanks Redfox, I didn't think of video ...
Yes, Nature@night. I can see that. Atleast if someone can tell me how to aim the camera in total darkness. I mean , with a monitor you will have light, and scare some animals away, so pls explain ...
Other than that , yes NSA perhaps. Wut more?
What is the intended usage and audience for this camera?
Nick8: ISO logarithmic scale is realy necessary.
Yes, please being back DIN !
Wurzle: Just think what this camera can do in a aurora borialis situation. Live video of it in action without any noise at all. Live feed to a monitor so you can see it start without going out doors. I would buy one in an instant. I cannot wait for the technology to get to reasonable price. Mega pixels have allways been over rated. I just wish nikon would do what sony has done and produce a 12-18 mega camera that can film and take pictures in the dark.
Or just stay outside, lay down on a reindeer skin or two and wait for it and enjoy! Why stay inside ...?
Forza5: No viewfinder - no sale
It is hard when the irony doesn't get thru ...
Average User: So stupid me. Headline spec above (1" type) sensor. I thought it meant the camera has a one inch sensor. 1" sensor is also the stated size in specifications, followed by the following parenthetica; (13.2 x 8.8 mm). I didn't even stop to look at the parenthetical. One inch is one inch. Right. So I bought the camera. Oh oh. Not so fast. I should have. One inch is 26 mm. So I'm trying to figure one inch. Well multiplying the length by height, it's actually .18. less than 20% of a square inch. Ok the diagonal...oh oh. That's just 16mm or about 60% of a lineal inch. Wait. If I add the two dimensions I get 22 mm; hmm not even. OK Risbi this is too hard of a problem for me. Why is it ok to call 18% of a square inch a one inch sensor? Serious. Sony is making an outstanding camera here. Why do they have to lie about the sensor size?
@dpreview, some camera examples could use a refresh :)
technocamper: Does it have the blue LED problem?
Interesting, does it relate to Sony cameras or Sony sensors no matter what camera they are in?
munro harrap: And as aforementioned in MANY complaints, SHUTTER LAG figures, accurate ones please.
Since all the pinpoint eye-focus (if not wearing sunglasses, spectacles or patterned clothing etc), accuracy in the whole world, even in a perfect system is of NO use outside of studio and your test conditions, if, when you then press the shutter, your £2,600 Sony body then takes a sixth of a second before it releases the shutter after you press it, as did the A7R.
@rishi ... I need to bring my Arduino stuff to life ...
Tom Goodman: I cannot comment on the astrophotographic correctness of these images but I can say they are utterly fungible with thousands of other similar pictures and, thus, are eminently forgettable. As far as I am concerned they fail the three major tests for memorable work:
1. Did I wish I took the picture?2. Do I wish I owned the picture?3. Did I go out into the world after seeing the picture and see the world as the photographer did?
No on all three counts.
One of the reason there is a lot of shots like this on the internet is that people appreciate them. So seeing something unusual doesn't mean better. Refreshing perhaps.
As to "Did I go out into the world after seeing the picture and see the world as the photographer did?"I can only say, Sorry for you! .I've lived 10 years above the artic circle, and another 20 just south of it, and the world looks like this at its best.
My original response "Point out examples that stand out and elaborate on why" was to put the OP into perspective. If Tom gets his kicks from 'realistic' b/w pictures of drog using sex workers in less than glamorous environments, then ok, I'll understand why these shots doesn't make his clock tick.
I think it is fair to ask what pictures actually touch someone, if someone just said that these do nothing for him, and I'm still hoping to get that insight.
Please enlighten us with some examples that stand out and elaborate on why.
Tim C.: I enjoyed reading the short article on the D810a's capabilities. It's nice to see how camera features can be applied in real world shooting.
On a side note, I'm puzzled at the some of the negative comments I'm reading. I don't feel they add anything to promote a positive dialogue.
+1Seriously, people and cameras are not the same.About cameras we may point out the faults so it can be corrected in the next iteration.
But people aren't cameras! Learn to comment god dammit...
"I don't like them" doesn't help anyone. Tell more about what you like, so you promote that, then the stuff you don't like go away. And if you are absolutely sure you can add value with constructive feedback (and be REALLY sure) be specific about the issue and about a solution to it. Geez ...