The "pocket" appellative merits clarification. The camera is small, but not pocketable, but is suitable mainly for pros with lots of money and batteries in their pockets. The camera body is only a fraction of what one must buy to make proper use. People without time or incentive to edit h.264 MOV or AVCHD video won't need ProRes or CinemaDNG any more than a kid on the lap of Kris Kringle (or Edmund Gwenn) will need a real locomotive or a B-29.
It is possible to admire this camera, as one might admire an RJ Corman GG10B, without having any impulse to buy one.
Folks anxious to capture or edit CinemaDNG, and who have the requisite equipment, time, and fine eye to take advantage, may be disappointed when the fruits of their labors fail to register in the 3mbps 480p version most people actually see, or the absence of any incremental pricing they'll be able to pass on to clients to cover the costs.
AndreyT: At first one wonders what was the point of reposting these images again, after we have seen them hundreds of times already (they were making rounds around the Net for a few years now). But then one notices that there's an obvious political bias in the selection of these images: out of all those well-known Lego photo recreation pictures only the ones were cherry picked that fit certain propaganda-censorship agenda. And then a few "neutral" pictures were added to masquerade the original intent. Apparently someone at "dpreview staff" saw this veiled trolling opportunity and took it.
The artist shows a sinister bias against the Boston Red Socks. Otherwise, I see nothing that would offend an over-65 arch conservative US male with a 24x7 penchant for Lego.
DaveE1: Mercifully, the brand of camera used was not mentioned here. Otherwise, at least 70% of comments would have slated them as technically flawed.
These are fun, and the concept might also be a great way to get children interested in photography.
Canon "are." Nikon "sell." At least in the UK.
But "The United States" is. How? No consistency.
Rupert Bottomsworth: Most kids grow out of lego by the age of 10.
Most people close up shop mentally after age 20 or so, according to Edward Bernays. After that, they are slaves of convention and PR. Creativity peaks early, around the stage that Legos appeal, then fades.
whawha: Loves Lego. Loves photography. Has plenty of time at hand to carry out twee and very silly projects.Dangerous combination! :)
Mike, dear. Please come and help fold the laundry. Just pretend the socks and undies are Legos. But don't hide any blocks in them. Oh, and then there is some Lego dishes to wash, leaky Lego loos to fix, and Lego errands to run. Don't forget the Lego 'Lectric bills to be paid, either.
mister_roboto: So would this be used for the "prosumer" 4K user, or when compactness is needed for what ever is being shot? I had always thought people would use portable hard drives to capture the data.
Until recently, tape or hard drives were the optimum storage medium. Nothing beats flash media for light weight, speed, or durability. The biggest obstacle to 4k video will not be storage, but image stability, focus, and the scarcity of high cost of means to edit or share. Not many people can stream or display 240mbps video, and what one sees compressed to 5mbps won't look any better than stuff shot with a phone.
erotavlas: 4k? why don't they skip 4k and just go directly to 6k
Blu-Ray hasn't even embraced 1920x1080 60p. Sony, which has a stake in Blu-ray and 4k, has instead offered a digital 4k player that doesn't even work.
It will take years to create 4k remasters of existing movie stock, some of which hasn't even been mastered to HD, and most of which will probably look no better for the trouble. So expect years of "upscaling" devices, or plan to watch a 4k "Hobbit" over and over and over.
Jun2: I don't run movie production company, 4K is overkill.
Overkill, unless you are a manufacturer scrambling to make up for sales lost to smart phones and faced with declining demand for 1920x1080 displays.
Still photos over 6mp are, arguably, also overkill. But a 6mp camera will invariably lose a sales contest with one claiming double or 10X that resolution, no matter the sensor size.
stormwatch888: Wooow! SD card approved for 4k recording and brand new Nikon Df doesn't even have video recording option at all!!!
USB-3 and Thunderbolt slots will appear on shoes before they do on cameras.
stevens37y: 4K will be good also for 1080p. In the post processing you can crop/zoom or stabilize without warping or loosing resolution.
This is a brilliant hope. But do any existing computer or software combinations do this as well as one might wish? I'd fear artifacts, or (worse) that the added time, money, and trouble would be barely perceptible on a 60" screen, or not perceptible at all on a tablet screen at 5mbps (a typical display mode, these days).
Archiver: This bodes well for the rumoured Panasonic GH4K, the prosumer/indie m43 camera with all the bells and whistles of a flagship mirrorless camera, along with 4K video. But that camera is another topic altogether.
Rumors slated to appear in April, 2014, with formal announcement to occur in early October. Price for the body a sure thing: $4,000.
GodSpeaks: 30MB/s isn't fast enough.
The BMPCC camera shoots 1080P30 at just under 30MB/s, and 4K is 4 times larger.
You are going to need 100+MB/s sustained write speeds for 4K, unless it is massively compressed, in which case, what's the point.
If 30MB/s equates to 240 mbps, that is enough for 4k in MP4 formats. Cameras that shoot higher bitrates will not be hand-held, operate over 15 seconds without heat problems, or yield humongous files you'd need a mega-server to store.
The linked PDN article overlooks the $4,500 Sony FDR-AX1, which may be the most accessible or reliable prosumer 4k device to date.
Camera manufacturers need to unload existing models before, some time in 2014, unveiling more stuff that makes 4k video a reason to buy 4k screens. Some people will buy into the 4k wave, but don't envy their plight.
Key ingredients missing: affordable monitors that display 60p 4k video at 240mbps, or affordable computers with graphics cards and software to edit and render meaningful volumes of 4k video in faster than 1 frame / lifetime. These missing essentials will keep the bleeding edge very bloody.
Real reviews of existing 4k gear are scarce, or nearly impossible, for precisely those reasons.
JEROME NOLAS: Excellent pics! #5 my favourite.
Hmm. How about a Kick-Start venture called "Hooter," based on a gadget that lures night raptors to a camera. It could be assembled from an infra-red motion detector, camera flash trigger, and a pungent morsel of deceased rodent. Vulture capital would surely be available, provided it included a daytime mode too.
Eskilsson: Top notch photos overall. Most repect to the photographers. Let`s see how many comments this will bring. Comments on "why GX7 only gets silver award" is now a couple of hundreds. Really hope this is bringing in more, so there will be some hope about that pictures are more important than gear...
Wrong. To comment on such photos is about as plausible as adult discussion about holy shrines, miracles, or the paranormal. One can politely venerate, or maybe envy, but only by standing a minimum distance from the altar or ceremonial stage. No polite coughs allowed. Amen.
Robot shots from Mars are also miraculous, in a way, but deal with stones, dunes, or ravines which don't defy the mind.
Comments about cameras, even if ill-informed or biased, at least deal with tangible objects any mortal with a little money can buy and test. The spectacular animal shots, on the other hand, boast attainments that vastly exceed what you or I will ever see or photograph in person. All required either exceptional amounts of travel, time, patience, and (here or their) dexterity with a mouse. Occasionally, by virtue of sheer number, amateur phone camera shots may also capture extraordinary natural events or animal behavior, but these will invariably cause gear hounds to howl.
CameraLabTester: "Wildlife Photos"
It certainly is a wild way of spending your life.
Waiting for that right moment.
Maybe we can strap a dead rat beside this camera trigger for the owl to swoop on it... sure cuts the waiting time...
"Eh, sure, why not?" Moe, the bartender.
J'accuse: that owl picture certainly employed red-eye suppression!
How do you know the owl wasn't enticed by the camera and, after discovering the brand, decided it wasn't worth a hoot.
jacketpotato: 8 little crocs on mum made me laugh
8 fanboys perched atop Mamanikon or Papacanon, the two senior river deities of ancient lore.
mcshan: Nice shot of the extremely rare blue elephant.
All pink elephants turn blue when morning comes.
Most of the shots require a talent for prestidigitation that would surpass Houdini. How in blazes be in such-and-such a position at uncanny moments and capture any image at all, much less one that displays finesse on par with a studio portrait.
James Randi has debunked the paranormal, UFOlogy, and other assorter quackery. Photography is, almost by nature, an art of illusion. Perhaps the practitioners should be called illusionists, just like other conjurers of the impossible.
Anyway, my measly animal pictures are unlikely to win any attention whatsoever, unless they happen to depict the contest judges' pets.
A parochial note: millions of photo prints perished in the tidal surge. Salt water turned them to muck. Some were missed dearly. Most weren't.
Digitalized replicas were not "safe" unless the drives or discs were kept on upper floors. Insurance claims differentiate, surely. Yes, quite.