myosotis: Hi Saleem,
Love it! Could you tell me how you get the green background - very effective
This isn't a single shot but a comp of 2 shots. Look at the base of the vase; there isn't a shadow – a tell tale sign.
Nice image, but obviously a comp.
mmcfine: Who cares? really.companies come and go, so do people and money.
And cameras :)
evshrug2: The breadth of µ4/3rd's system, born from having two companies developing first-party products (and a few accessories manufacturers making µ4/3rd's mount stuff), is one of the greatest strengths over the other mirrorless systems. I can't tell what this will result in... it might've been cheaper for Panasonic to just buy Oly's photography assets, and probably the investment would not have been enough money to buy out the medical imaging department.
Why would panasonic expand into that industry anyway? Their market is consumer electronics. They might as well go into the ATM Banking market as much as they would go into medical imaging.
Most likely they invested because of their common link, they want to keep Oly alive because "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Could this be some sort of sentimental move to keep µ4/3rds interesting?
Why shouldn't Panasonic expand in to other industries? If medical imaging is profitable, it would be a wise move by them to do so. They should also ditch their loss making TV division. By the way, Nokia started out as a paper manufacturing company. Look at their business now. My point being businesses shouldn't necessarily limited themselves to one specific industry.
Boerseuntjie: Rupert it might be a Sony creation, but unlike you they are not biased about the camera that takes the winning pictures, it's about art not what camera brand is the best
Why do you think I'm biased? What a bizarre thing to say.
Is WPO an independent organisation or is it a Sony creation?
I wish they would get a native english speaker to proofread their website.
Why did some people enter photos of children? The title was "The beautiful eyes of a WOMAN". It's not rocket science.
mahonj: Why don't camera companies make the occasional monochrome camera - no bayer filter, no quarter wave plate, just very sensitive, very sharp images.
It would be very specialist and would sell in small-medium numbers, but if you can build an astro version, you should be able to build a mono version.
Apart from the different software/firmware, can anyone think of a reason ?
Canon sell so many 60Ds and 600Ds, they should be able to run a few mono versions.
Probably because it wouldn't be profitable.
I'm curious as to who buys lens baby products, because all I've seen from them are cheap gimmicks that have no photographic value at all. These kinds of gimmicky effects can be done in photoshop anyway, so why would you waste your money buying this junk?
Rupert Bottomsworth: Bad move Ricoh. Now all your cameras will look like abominations à la K-01.
philo123, I see you are one of those people who thinks: plastic = bad and metal = good, which is quite ignorant.By the way Pentax also make "plastic junk" too in the form of the K-r, Kx & K-m.Canon, Nikon and Sony cameras from the midrange (e.g. Canon 7D) up have magnesium alloy bodies too.
spacelounge: it doesn't mean that PENTAX will be designing the new Ricohs.. it simply means that the two camera division have been amalgamated into one, larger and specifically dedicated to creating cameras.
Notice how it will receive resources from the main Ricoh company, which might mean they will both come out stronger from this.
I think the missunderstanding comes from the fact that the new unit is named Pentax Ricoh.. but it doesn't mean Pentax takes preference over Ricoh. It's just an aesthetic choice.
Read point 3 again. It clearly says PRI (Pentax) will be in charge of consumer businesses such as digital cameras for the B2C market. PMMC (Ricoh) will be in charge of B2B including security system business, and imaging solutions business.
Bad move Ricoh. Now all your cameras will look like abominations à la K-01.
Mr Fartleberry: Nikon announces 36MP. Canon pro users stuck with their new "magic pixels" for several more years.
What does that have to do with this lens from Tamron?
DioCanon: f6.3!!!!!!!!!!!!rubbish!thank god I've got my Canon fast lenses f1.2 and 2.8!
You have a canon 300mm f1.2?
That is possibly the ugliest camera I've even seen.Do they really expect people to be seen outdoors with it?
Nice shot. Shame about the oversharpening in PP.
Rupert Bottomsworth: What a load of rubbish.
I don't need one :D