R_U_Q_R_U: You already have the right to photograph police in the USA.
"When in public spaces where you are lawfully present you have the right to photograph anything that is in plain view. That includes pictures of federal buildings, transportation facilities, and police. Such photography is a form of public oversight over the government and is important in a free society."
"Police officers may not confiscate or demand to view your digital photographs or video without a warrant. The Supreme Court has ruled that police may not search your cell phone when they arrest you, unless they get a warrant. Although the court did not specifically rule on whether law enforcement may search other electronic devices such as a standalone camera, the ACLU believes that the constitution broadly prevents warrantless searches of your digital data..."
No. Various police departments and officers conveniently "forget" this law. After eleventy billion dollars' worth of settlements across the US already for trampling on the rights of citizens to record, there's no way that all of law enforcement doesn't already know that filming is in itself completely legal.
DaveClark: We don't need more laws, thank you very much. How about enforcing the ones we already have?
Completely incorrect. Just stop talking, seriously.
Paul B Jones: 15 feet doesn't cut it if you want to record police behaviour from inside your car after they have pulled you over.
Getting in the face of cops when they're trying to do their job is a crime in itself and the cops can haul that person away no questions asked. These laws have nothing to do with that. These are regarding filming and filming alone.
timely Sony a100 review to follow
James Booba: Sony FS7 ... 7.990Canon 1DC ... 7.990
Hard to decide lol ... Crap Canon.
I think it was very well played sarcasm.
MediaDigitalVideo: Caskback for those who payed the full price Canon ?
Lassoni: Doesn't the Sony A7s walk over this, and for much lower price?
I think that's safe to assume, since the discount alone is literally what you can buy two a7s bodies for today.
ryansholl: At what point does Nikon start shipping packaging to big box stores with postage already affixed for the return trip?
I've got the impression you're that guy everyone tries to sneak out of conversations with at parties.
My question was a joke. GFY.
At what point does Nikon start shipping packaging to big box stores with postage already affixed for the return trip?
Yeah, screw the a6000. Sony quit building APS-C mirrorless, right DPR?
Say what you will about the ridiculousness of it, but you've got to admit that when it comes to gold and fishskin covered cameras this one looks pretty good.
autochrome: I hope someone updates the standards, because it's going to be problematic setting your ISO soon. ISO 819200, 3276800, 26214400, ...
I really wish they'd just set ISO 200 to a standard of 1 and then go logarithmically from there. ISO 409600 becomes gain of 11, for instance, ISO 1600 a gain of 4, etc. Makes a hell of a lot more sense than dealing with the ridiculous numbers we're already dealing with.
mpgxsvcd: I used a 1.3 Megapixel camera in 1999 and loved it. I could definitely still do ok with a less than 2 megapixel camera today if it could see in the dark.
You don't need a 1.3mp sensor to see in the dark, the a7s is a credit card away :)
mpgxsvcd: According to Canon "They have a better sensor than this".
Yeah, and according to my uncle he's got a better mousetrap. Turns out he's full of it but it makes him sound great at the time.
bgbs: The question is when will it be in DSLR's?
Never. Have you been paying attention to Sony?!
rrccad: didn't canon have a high density sensor demo a few years ago?
That's not fair. They recently acquired a patent on something they call the "status quo".
graybalanced: That sensor is so sensitive, you have to be careful what you say around it.
I loved your post. a7s owner, that "blushing" is inherent to the sensor and your post rings of truth and humor. Well done, sir.
Stigg: no matter what they try it will never equal film
I hope so
spatz: The images are not awful, but they certainly don't show the camera in a good light. As has been identified previously, a compact camera (even one with a sensor as large as that in the G1X II) requires a different workflow compared to a large sensor camera. For landscape shots, compact cameras have greater DOF, but they are also diffraction limited at smaller apertures, with image quality degrading rapidly beyond f/8. The Canon sensor also has very limited dynamic range, meaning that RAW files don't have nearly as much headroom as those from more modern and / or larger sensors.
Ironically, using the same camera, a typical amateur who is experienced with these limits might have come up with better shots than a professional who is used to full frame or medium format cameras. The scenes and composition are indeed nice, but from a technical standpoint, most of the images are poor.
I find no fault in not being easily pleased.