tesch: I love to see people complain about too many mega pixels.....shows their ignorance.
Their sensor tech is good, but they show over and over again that competitors do much better with their sensors than sony can.
keeponkeepingon: Bravo sony!
An S95 with a larger sensor and faster AF? What's not to like?
The insane number of MP?
This part is kind of a bummer:"The Open Competition offers 10 diverse categories for you to enter, ranging from Action to Travel. As a Basic Member, you can enter up to 3 photographs for free, submitted into one category or spread across multiple categories.
Increase your chances by upgrading to Advanced Membership (enter up to 8 images) or Premium Membership (enter up to 20 images). Find out more about upgrading your membership here. "
Copy Mentor: As a former owner of a Leica IIIc, I have to say:1. The X-2 with OVF is gorgeous. It would look stunning hanging from my wrinkly old neck on an elegant leather strap, just like my IIIc did. 2. F/2.8 is faster than the f/3.5 with which I took hundreds of good photos, including many in dim light, at ISO of only 400.3. I assume the X-2 lens extends electrically, whereas my old Elmar had to be withdrawn and locked in place by hand.4. My IIIc had to be focused manually, but the X-2 has automatic focusing. 5. The accessory OVF looks much bigger and brighter than the squinty peep-hole in my IIIc.These improvements, in a body about the same size, shape and beauty as my old IIIc, would make this camera much better than the IIIc. I call that tasteful progress, and I say, "Bravo, Leica!" I won't buy one, though, as I have not yet worn out my 6-year-old, 8-megapixel Canon 30D.
Low standards. So you give irrelevant feedback based on being outdated.
On in the Leica world.
Has DPR found the same circular banding problem in the NX20 that users have reported on the Samsung forum to have found on the NX200?
Jackwindinhair: Nooooo! why BIGGER !?? It doesn't NEED to be bigger. Why not smaller, more compact -like a Canon s-100- but w/ a full-frame sensor? Yeah! A Leica/Canon-killer. Also, did they fix the horrible lag and auto-focus present in the x-100?
This is not a "pro" camera. It's just the name designed to entice spec sheet shooters and compact owners with money into buying. A real pro knows what they need to shoot with and it doesn 't come from the name. More than likely, it comes from shelling out for a rental and seeing what peers are using.
Grant David Stovel: Having used mine for 3 weeks I feel like Fuji is using me and many others like lab rats. There are so many great attributes to the camera but several are just not up to a $2500 purchase [incl taxes] Battery life is the worst I have seen in any camera, the focusing [and no I do not shoot like I had my 5DII in my hands] is finicky, the RAW processing software, as many have said, is just not worth the effort.Again it seems they launched this camera based on market timing and put it on the market thinking it was good enough. What I think happened is this...a far more sophisticated purchaser bucked up for this new toy to compliment their photographic interests. Thus the expectations are high ....VALUE is where performance exceeds expectations.For me this Fuji is worth having...but not really giving me value other than fairly good quality shots, great build quality and may I say it...a conversation piece on the street.
Stop early adopting, in that case. You act surprised, but Fuji has a record of this and it's spreading across the industry because of early adopters like yourself.
No wonder Fuji didn't care about AF performance and set the pricing so high.
It's almost as if 4/3 and u4/3 is a scam for the lenses.
The lenses are much slower than they advertise, but then the push with mirrorless is to make ever-slower lenses, particularly zooms, but make them look a bit expensive and now people froth all over them and pay ridiculous prices.
And no lens hood at the prices they charge? Really?
Casio's compacts have traditionally been quite underrated and high on performance compared to many others. I just wished they'd stop stuffing MP on tiny sensors, just like everyone else.
Perhaps return to using larger sensors, like they did in the past.
People, many of Pentax's DA lenses have been tested by users on 35mm/FF equivalent and they work. Don't get hung up on that. The crop or "digital" designation is only meant to denote a new generation of lens designed around the crops. They might not be as fast as the FA line, but very sharp and well-mannered and many-most will work on FF perfectly, should Pentax ever make one.
sir_bazz: I don't think Pentax have ever had a K-mount 50mm f1.8 so I assume it's an all new design. The rounded aperture blades are also a nice touch for a beginner prime.
As an owner of an old Pentax MZ-S, I'd like to know how this lens performs on 135 format.
Pentax had an F/FA 1.7 forever. I just bought the F version used. Maybe this is a takeoff on that, but with an extra aperture blade.
And also, just because they say it's APS-c, doesn't mean it really is. People are testing the DA lenses on 35mm and finding some of them work perfectly. Just google for whatever DA lens you're looking for and "full frame" and you'll find the info.
For "digital" or APS, it just means this is a newer generation of lenses. Maybe not as fast as the FA level counterparts, but sharper in several cases (DA21, 40, 70).
nicolaiecostel: This is a crop lens, meaning no future FF model from pentax. At least they cleared that one up. This lens has small optical elements because it only covers a crop sensor, it hasn't got aperture controlled by a ring so it will not work on the majority of film cameras, (except the MZ-S ?), and has a plastic mount, and a screw driven AF. So in all honesty, apart from it's nice design and aperture blades, this should be even cheaper than the Nikon 50 1.8D. I hope it will be a nice lens but it sounds more like a rip-off, at least at this price.
I'm in agreement. Pentax lenses are a ripoff. I've got two primes. Not insanely expensive used, but used they cost more than what competitors charge for new.
I disagree about how it ONLY covers a crop. In all likeliness, as has been proven with several of the DA line already, it will cover FF.
Tabaplar: Spec wise this looks like a great update. But aesthetically, I find this design incredibly awkward and kind of baffling.
As the semi-professional model, the design of the K-5 is logical, functional, restrained....completely fit for purpose, and I think that it looks (and works) great. As a consumer model, the K-01 has a somewhat whimsical, design forward aesthetic, but to me it also looks great....it's an indulgent design, but it is cohesive and it has a clear concept.
This on the other had, seems completely out of left field to me....it's design DNA seems to have little relation to any of Pentax's current interchangeable lens cameras. It looks "styled" not "designed". To me it looks like a decade old street bike, or a pair of basketball shoes.
The K-5 and K-01 are cameras that I would buy, at least partially, because of their design. This is a camera that I would never buy because of it's design. I REALLY hope that the K-5 successor doesn't look anything like this.
coroander: Great to see it has a metal body, manual zoom ring, and weather sealing.
Read page two.
supeyugin1: $350 for a converter? They are crazy! I've bought my Samsung NX100 with 20-50 and 20/2.8 (30mm equiv.) and a flash for $450 brand new. I later sold the flash for $70, so that's $380 for the camera with 2 lenses. And those jerks from Fuji are charging $350 just for one bloody converter?!
Typical post from the Samsung forum. They have an action in place now in a thread there to put up fake positive reviews:
In the past, they've had an action to seed as many threads as possible with Samsung content.
The NX100 and X100 have little in common and between them, it's clear, even with a fixed lens, the latter is the superior camera.
Dougbm_2: Seems pointless. Might as well buy an X-Pro-1. Only 28mm?? Fuji got this one wrong. It should either be 24mm or a 3 x tele or preferably a 28-112mm.Anyway the whole point of the original camera appears to have been forgotten - by it's creators. A simple and light weight form with fixed lens that is the digital equivalent of film rangefinder style cameras (with the added bonuses newer technology brings). Won't be buying this for my X100.
"it's"= "it is" ("is" is a verb of "to be")"its"=denotes possession
waxwaine: I guess it´s similar technology that will come with Pentax Q for DOF effect
No, the Q will have the same miniature effect that cams have had for years now.
Marty4650: It seems obvious that the London Police Department has done a good job of training and educating their officers. They seem to be a lot more aware of the law than they were in similar videos done a year ago.
Security guards are a different matter, and their training is highly variable. Some didn't seem to understand the difference between "the law" and "what my boss told me to do."
In the USA we call them "rent-a-cops" and they are usually not that well trained. I suppose the same can be said for other countries as well.
In the US, if security guards call the cops for nonsense like this, they would be chastised and the management informed by the police department. That rent a cop wouldn't have a job because then this would cause them to have lower priority status de facto because they call about nonsense.
Stephenbw: Very interesting; thanks for that link.
I don't think I've ever seen that many ill-informed jobsworths in one place before...