Jogger: We basically don't need any dedicated compact camera that doesnt have a large sensor, isnt a superzoom, or isnt ruggedised. Flagship phones are already using 1/2.3 sensor and some have even larger.
I still agree with the other points Jogger made.
I read the piece, and before even reading any of the comments I thought that this reads like something straight out, or heavily inspired by, Fuji's marketing department I'm not saying it is, but maybe writers should consider what the stuff they write may sound like, and maybe put their arguments forward in a different manner. Just saying.
Oh, and my personal take? No, we don't 'need' the X-30 and it adds far too little for a camera coming almost two years after its predecessor. At the very least an upgraded sensor, or a smaller size, or something more substantial than this.
RickBuddy: Pretty sad day when a photographer attempts to convert a photo taken by a monkey to his own copyright.
"No! I'm really as good as that monkey!'
Right about there, the guy's lost.
Pretty sad day when a photographer buys the equipment, travels thousands of miles to get to some monkey, sets the equipment up so that the monkey can get some meaningful results with it, PP the images, distributes them and yet he's denied copyright.
b craw: I was really hoping we were not going to revisit this monkey business upon ruling. But alas...
Sorry for those that are speaking opinions relating to fairness or some abstract spirit of fairness that should exist in this whole matter. Truth is, all laws are subject to degrees of interpretation, but the interpretive latitude was quite narrow in this case - outcome quite predictable. Defining moment of creation " selfie" resided in the activity of a natural force (animal) therefore copyright can not be held by photographer despite preparation, editing, or distribution. Animal cannot hold copyright, therefore no copyright of these images. Period. And, contrary to some opinion, this ruling should not make vulnerable copyrights granted to photographers setting wildlife photo traps. That action is entirely different, involving much more distinct authorship/production by the photographer.
Well, that is the US Office's interpretation. But it's wrong.
It's ridiculous, ffs. Wikimedia and the US Copyright office are taking a most cynical stance.
locke_fc: Sorry, but a 1/1.7" sensor is no longer acceptable. Might as well use your smartphone instead.
Felix E Klee - Of course it's an opinion. Unless you happen to be so anally retentive as to take it literally.
If you're going to sleep better at night thinking that I have a different opinion to yours because of my "deep lack of technical understanding", go ahead. I have no time for people who think that anyone who doesn't agree with them have to be ill-informed idiots..
Raist3d - It's not silly, as far as I'm concerned it is unacceptable and hardly better than a smartphone. Again, MY opinion, nobody has to agree.
Jacob - sassy, but nothing else.
Like I said, you guys go out and buy it. It's not for me!
This is dpr's final verdict on the Q7:
"The Pentax Q7 does well in everyday shooting, delivering image quality that's generally as good as the best enthusiast compacts. However, it under delivers for the entry-level ILC class in terms of resolution and high ISO performance. Though we had few serious complaints about its performance, it's hard to recommend among so many excellent fixed and interchangeable lens cameras that cost about the same."
Of course, there's the lenses that go with the puny sensor. IQ is still almost as good/bad as you can get with a decent smartphone, or a few dozen compact cameras costing half as much.
Seriously, I don't have an issue with those who like this and are willing to pay for it, but to me, in this day and age, it's unacceptable. And yes, I can be categorical because I speak for myself ;)
Sorry, but a 1/1.7" sensor is no longer acceptable. Might as well use your smartphone instead.
jamesm007: I started with Kodak Bridge Cameras. So I have a like for them. The Kodak P880 had superb color accuracy (Imaging Resource) and was an alternative to what was then dSLRs over $1000. So it did not have those punchy consumer colors.
Subjectively and Pro test (IR) showed saturation at about 6% over and hues were the most accurate measured at that time, at IR at around ~3.5%. That is equal or beats a lot of dSLRs. Another Kodak know how is WB.
Take a look at the WB of these pics. The reds, whites and other colors are near perfect or at least not pushed hard. Hues are excellent as well. Time may tell if I am right or wrong.
Not sure if everyone realizes color is as important as sharpness. Look at all the color profiles we have. No one knew the science of color better than Kodak.
I am going out out on a limb by saying this camera has the accurate Kodak colors. Not the punchy consumer Kodak colors. Which makes this a very good camera and or interesting camera!
I quite agree. There's something pleasing about those colours.
Looks pretty good, but I'm waiting for the rumoured Pana LX8 before making any decisions.Also, I think I will pop a fuse if I ever have to read again the "clickless front dial makes the shooting experience feel disconnected" comment from DPR. If only for that, I just hope Sony change that in the mk IV.
Charles Lau: Like other posters said, just plug the iPhone in with your USB cable. There are no transfer problems, Mac or PC. No software required either......
Again, no. It is precisely for photos only that you DON'T need iTunes, just drag and drop from the iphone directory.
shastings: As other posters have said, this item is redundant as you just plug your iPhone or ipad into your computer and transfer photos and video via USB.
Looks like this company didn't get the memo.
But look at all the automatic Apple bashing that happened in response to this article! Over a problem that doesn't exist.
You don't need iTunes at all to transfer your photos, just the USB cable. I don't get this.
Unless I get to see physical copies of this and are wowed by the results, I can't see the difference between making these images using an old process and making them using digital post-processing. I mean the end the result.
AngryCorgi: I'm starting to think Sony and the MFT duo are the only manufacturers listening to the consumer. Shame on Canon and Nikon for being complacent and failing to include real innovations.
Fuji are listening too.
chj: Does Sony not know how to make a touchscreen? Otherwise this looks to be an ideal street camera.
What do you mean? Street photography has done very well for a century without a touchscreen.
Ridethelight: Strange comments on this camera, complaints about the short zoom 70mm vs 100mm , this is nothing a half decent photographer would not easily adapt to.Lack of hot shoe ? really , how stupid would a flash gun twice the size of the camera look.It has a EVF , built in ND filter and faster lens, what's not to love here ? maybe the price.
It is one thing to adapt, but to make up for is a completely different thing.To me, 70 mm is seriously short for a compact (and I've used the Panny LX-3 for years, one of my favorite cameras ever). If the lens went up to, at least, 90-100 mm, I wouldn't give it a second thought before buying it. As it is, and at that price point, I'm not so sure.