Jon Stern: My grandma didn't have glass balls. Not sure about my grandpa though.
He did. Then, due to Grandma, he didn't.
D 503: There is no need to compare sizes. You get the results you get no matter how big or small it is.
...said your very supportive significant other.
Dester Wallaboo: My biggest complaint with the Sony cams is that they are mirrorless.... yes.... I know the advantages, but the disadvantages outweigh the advantages in my book. Being at the mercy of a monitor to know what is coming through the lens is a not what I would call a great method for shooting. Yes, I use ML so I can get full histograms while shooting using a monitor. But at the end of the day the only real way to see what is coming through that lens, outside of long-exposure photography, is to look through the lens itself with your eye. Unless Sony has recently put in screens that can display full RAW dynamic range, which I'm certain they haven't, you are at the mercy of a monitor that cannot even display full sRGB, let alone ProPhotoRGB, and certainly not RAW.
If you've got the luxury of time and a still subject why does it matter either way? A camera with no viewfinder at all (read: mirrorless with manual focus assist) would be at least as suitable (I'd say more) to those circumstances as an optical viewfinder.
But turn that around and take away the luxury of a still subject and ample time and you're SOL if you completely miss exposure early.
Peter K Burian: Man it seems like a lot of work went into this test merely to show that a camera with ultra high ISO options is better than a camera without those options .....**IF you ever need to shoot at insanely high ISO.** Or am I misunderstanding what this is all about, Rishi?
I cannot recall *ever* needing to use an ISO higher than 6400. What the heck are people shooting at ISO 100,000? What needs are actually met by ISO 400,000+? Why not use a tripod or set the camera on something solid in night photography? (Or do people often shoot soccer/football night games at a 1/1500sec. shutter speed? How many people do so?)
(I'm sure a dozen guys will now attack me and say that they need ISO 100,000+ daily and that I know nothing about anything.)
A lot of work went into reaching this conclusion: ..So the bottom line is that the a7s is average at ISO 6400. (At more moderately high ISOs (6400 and below) ........... A7S will be similar to that of full-frame cameras of its generation.)..
No, it's not useful to my current photography, but then having the option would open up entirely new facets of photography to me. I can't take my Nex7 outside at a quarter moon and so much as hope to get photos of wildlife unless they're asleep. Sure I can use a flash and get 1 chance at a photo, not counting the subsequent photos of animal anuses as they head for the hills, or I can go ultra high ISO and completely silent shutter and take lots.
Dimly lit events? Concerts? No more need to push in PP to salvage a useable shutter speed. No need for an obtrusive flash.
Pretending that the option of shooting at extremely high ISO is useless to all only speaks to the ongoing trend of placing technical image quality over content and, if this site's comments are true, evidently over getting an image at all.
Give me a break. Anyone that had this capability on hand will absolutely find a way to use it.
KeeChiuPeng: How does this compare with Nikon DF, D4s, 1Dx, 6D?
jimofcan: If Walmart doesn't Ante up and offer a fair price, and I owned the copyright, I would shred the negs in front of them. If they aren't of value to them, they are of less than zero value to me
I wouldn't sell to the Waltons for any amount, nor would I shred anything. I'd sell to some guy that wants to post the photos to the internet with the sole purpose of purely humiliating photoshops.
mwan: Just as the Oculus founder says, "Virtual reality's biggest enemy is bad virtual reality", I would say, "Light field camera's biggest enemy is bad Light field camera". And Lytro isn't good enough to be a consumer product, no matter in the hardware camera resolution or the software use cases.
"Much faster workflow"
That's arguable. Did you use one of the earliest? I own a Minolta RD-175. One hour photography + a car would have been quicker. Ridiculously bulky connections, external hard drives, no wireless to speak of anywhere, slow connection bandwidth in all but the luckiest of cases.
kbel: well i was not affected and could work normally in lightroom 5 and ps cc, i cannot understand all that negative critiques against adobe about the cloud model i think for independent photographer likes i am is ok to rent the software and anyway for professionals there is no alternative and to stay with ps6 forever will not be a good decision.
the only thing i am not happy about adobe ist that you can only pay with credit card, i had a problem with my payment last month and there is no alternative that should be alternatives for instances to pay by wirement or at least not to get blocked if once a problem about the credit card occcurs my account was cancelled so i had to redo a new subscriötion but had a good point they offered me now again 1 year for the special price .......
I also just hate the hell out of periods; sentences
InTheMist: I just got the old TC-14E II. I wonder if its worth upgrading.
Just a side note, the new price on the 400/2.8 is $3k more than before.
Is the $500 upgrade worth it?
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say "No".
Digital Photograph Rumors now?
Houseqatz: i jumped ship from an iphone to the lumia 1020, for the camera. however, if apple were to include OIS, and a high megapixel/large sensor, with their version of oversampling baked in, i'd be tempted to go back...
there are so many good ios apps that simply do not exist in the windows phone 8 ecosystem
and quite a few things it does worse.
Jogger: "...it shows that Apple is serious about camera technology in its devices." .. actually, no, not unless they put a larger sensor into their phone, which means some sort of hump, which goes against their design philosophy.
Not necessarily. They could build forward into the screen, giving a blank spot in the screen that serves as a button for the camera.
This is insane, of course, and you're exactly right, but I bet 10% of people thought "that's not a bad idea" as they read that first sentence.
beenthere: Canon/Nikon/Sony be afraid, be very afraid..
Meanwhile Nokia breathes easy as they just rid themselves of an hyper-ego'ed blowhard that contributed nothing, for all we know.
Three paragraphs on depreview and a tweet is worth exactly nothing in the real world.
John De Bord Photography: I really need to try the welding glass ND.....
It's really surprisingly sharp. Random photo someone posted to reddit the other day
Kiril Karaatanasov: DPREVIEW guys do you think many D4s users shoot JPEG? Can you compare RAW files e.g. d4 vs d4s? Also is 5d mk3 and A7 in same league at all? How about 1Dx? Best will be test against A7s which seems to be closest in terms of sensor to D4s
Well, congratulations on buying someone else's talent.
thx1138: New flash! Camera company announces camera that doesn't have world's fastest AF.
No one will buy it now.
Too bad the A7R didn't get this AF system, rather than the rubbish they dished out.
What?! You've got that backwards, sir. In no way would the SLT system fit under the e-mount, not even for APS-C e-mount.
Antisthenes: > The incredible craftsmanship that goes into hand making> a modern digital camera does not come cheap.
a) Japanese robotic high-precision NC machining station (Makino) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DehW94gLRKM
b) Probably Japanese CMOS imaging sensor (Sony ?)
c) Probably Japanese lens manufacturing (Panasonic’s wavefront interference optical surface checkers ?)
The Leica T will certainly be a fine camera, but the results of this kind of “craftsmanship” can probably be bought for much cheaper by buying a Japanese camera, methinks ;-)
NO! MY dick is bigger!
reginalddwight: 5 megapixel images? That is so retro for a forward-thinking product.
If nothing else, Lytro is finally making a product that resembles a photographic tool. The relatively high price point will likely prevent the Illum from gaining significant traction from a wider photographic community.
Ultimately, I see the company's technology bought out by a smartphone maker like Apple, Samsung, Nokia, etc.
I have to provide a dissenting opinion on 5mp not being enough. It's more than enough for an 8x10, and few people outside of photography enthusiasts (we're not a majority, people!) need to print any larger.
JATO: One more thing to waste money on... Does the brides family pick up the tab?
I presume, then, that you eat only homesown beans and grains and forego extravagances like heat above freezing and internet service?
Wasted money is in the eye of the beholder.
Zvonimir Tosic: 645D (and now same shaped Z) is unbelievably comfortable to use. Because of its unique ergonomics and weight distribution thanks to its elongated body, it is more comfortable to use it than any modern DSLR with a longer lens.
Because it pushes the centre of mass forward, towards the natural *resting position of human arms*. Modern DSLRs and mirrorless, being thinner, push the centre of mass further back, which induces extra stress on arm and shoulder muscles even when camera has a small lens on it.
It takes more stress on your muscles and shoulders to hold a DSLR or even mirrorless in front of your eyes with arms close to body than to hold a heavier 645D with arms in their natural resting position away from the body.
Try it yourself if you don't believe it.
Ummm... no. I don't want to fall in love with a $9000 camera.
I figure it's like IV heroin.