Anastasiadis Lazaros Thessaloniki Wedding: I know most people here will dissagree but this kind of technology in my opinion is killing photography as an art and as a profession. There will be no pro photographers soon because everybody will be able to be an artist without really knowing much about art or photographic techiques. You will be able to achieve a near pro level outcome from your camera so 99% of people will like it sounds nice in the first place but in the future this will turn against humanity and a CPU will be programmed to mimic art while people will get dumb and lazy. Lazy to learn lazy to study photography, CPU will do everything for you even crop and synthesis a CPU can find the "best" and "weird" "low" angles based on the best algorythms. Humanity is on the path to lazyness and art is dying day by day. Mass produced art will never be appreceated and this is bad for humanity in the long run. What do you think about it?
Pros know composition -- I've not seen any automation in this area, and I don't expect it soon -- it takes years to learn.
fdfgdfgdgf: Endless pain from sony
I also have a Sony A57 ... one of the best cameras Sony has ever produced in low end DSLR area ... and I too continue to be apalled by the subsequent offerings ... I just shake my head and mutter "another example of 'Sony cheap' ".
(unknown member): The issue is that most people have no interest in photography as a hobby. All they want are memories and the smartphone fulfills that admirably. You could offer them the easiest and most fun to use camera product and they still wouldn't buy it because they already have a perfectly adequate camera in their phone.
@topstuff is also correct in the points he makes below. Added to which the negative image of the nerdy, middle aged photographer as exemplified on sites like this is so far from most younger users' idea of desirable that we also have to ask ourselves where the next crop of enthusiasts are going to come from to keep the camera companies in business?
The camera market has been two tiered (consumers & photographers) for many years ... My grandmother, using a Kodak box camera in the 1940s, was a consumer. Today, every member of the family is a consumer (using a smart phone) leaving just 'photographers' as targets for the traditional camera manufacturers. These manufacturers can grow their now dramatically smaller audience by targeting a now ever enlarging pool of consumers with products that the subset of them who want to become photographers can migrate to. These products likely will have to re-conceptualized cameras based on where their new audience is coming from.
Buttons252: I mostly disagree with the poster. Most every camera I have seen has an "Auto" setting, but the real reason people are not stepping up is because the smartphone is doing as well or better then the point and shoots so many people use to have. Not only does the smartphone handle their photography its something they ALWAYS have on them and it can instantly share the moment with everyone via social media.
The old saying is the best camera, is the one you have with you... that happens to be a smartphone more often then not.
Excellent analysis. It would seem that the now enlarging group of consumers using smartphone cameras will create a growing pool of potential photographers -- and those folk won't move to what's left of the point&shoots. While some manufacturers are trying to create entry point cameras for these folk (e.g., Olympus E-M10 as well as a number of Fuji models) but all these cameras are digital cousins of film cameras. This is where the manufacturers need to design cameras anew targeting people who started with smartphone cameras.
Impulses: $1,000 huh... Looks like the G7x, LX100, et al haven't provided quite enough competition to the RX100 line, Sony keeps bumping the price every year. Way to dash my hopes of picking up a cheaper V when the IV came out Sony... Tho the GM1 had diminished my lust for it to a certain extent already. Maybe they'll launch what I'd really like, a cheaper/slimmer stripped down RX90 (RX1000?) sans flip screen, EVF, hotshoe, etc.
Here is the data given at the Sony site mentioned by Rooru:Quality Priority: 240fps/250fps (1,824x1,026), 480fps/500fps (1,676x566), 960fps/1000fps (1,136x384)/Shoot Time Priority: 240fps/250fps (1,676x566), 480fps/500fps (1,136x384), 960fps/1000fps (800x270)
The above spec list says 'no' for GPS yet Nikon's press release and Dpreview's hands on article say it does have GPS. I believe the spec list needs to be corrected.
peevee1: "Max resolution 4240 x 3832"
Huh? 1.1:1 ratio, almost square? Are you sure DPR? And it does not look like 12mpix to me. :)
Sony site's spec pdf (cited by 'discbrake' above) says it's 4240 by 2832. dPreview's specs must have been a typo.
4240 x 2832 would get the 12 megapixels...typo?
David Stahl: It would be nice to know which camera is which amongst the six photos posted -- it appears we have some of each.
Ok,I figured it out; first three pix are the ZS-40, and last three pix are the ZS-35.
It would be nice to know which camera is which amongst the six photos posted -- it appears we have some of each.
At last, a bridge camera with a decent EVF!!! 1.44M dots!!! When you're shooting video of eagles, 200K won't do it.
peevee1: From the press-release: "the STYLUS SZ-16 iHS is optimized for moviemaking with 1080p Full HD video and Multi-Motion Movie Image Stabilization to record virtually blur-free videos even when the camera is moving. Its 16-megapixel CMOS sensor combined with the TruePic™ VI image processor"
From DPR text: "The SZ-16 iHS uses Olympus' previous-generation TruePic V processor"
DPR is probably wrong, and it IS the current-gen TruePic VI.
DPR specs don't match current Olympus site specs re CCD v. CMOS sensor, ISO, and digital zoom.
The above commentary for the Panasonic ZS 25 is not quite correct -- the right panel says it has a 25x zoom while the picture of the camera in the left panel shows 20x; the separate Dpreview specs for ZS 25 also indicate a 20x zoom.