photofan1986: Well, I am a bit torn about this one. As a technical achievement, it's quite something. And history will certainly recall Sony for being the first non-Leica manufacturer that made this possible, ie a full frame in a compact camera.But from a purely practical point of view, I'm not sure. A camera with no viewfinder (the overpriced optical external thing showing no info is a joke, sorry), few manual controls, and a fixed 35mm lens...all this for 2800$ seems like craze to me!Also, I don't really see the point of a 24x36mm sensor in a compact camera like this. The new APS-C sized sensor give excellent image quality even at high ISO (6400 on a Fuji X-Pro 1 looks terrific). Also, with a lens like the Fuji 35 1.4, depth of field control is quite easy already. The full frame sensor will give approximately one stop advantage in noise compared to a APC-S, but at the expense of a much bigger lens and a much, much more expensive sensor to produce. Really, what's the point?
Jokica: Anyone remembers Canon EOS M now? Nikon 1?
I do. This christmas I'm getting a J1 for my daughter. In pink.
Digital Suicide: 1/2000s in a, as they say: ..."advanced, unique combination of size and performance that’s never before been realized in the world of digital cameras..."Even LX5 ages ago had 1/4000s
For a leaf shutter, if you know what it is, yes, 1/2000 it's very advanced.
Becoming the Story
CameraLabTester: The Hong Kong holiday is a pinch of salt to the enormous humongous gazillion pictures buffet feast Wiki is gonna amass as a windfall...
Talk about disparity to the extremes...
Yet like zombies, contestants all go like lemmings over the cliff.
This lemming is more than happy to contribute with a little of his humble work to a site that has changed his life for better.
photofan1986: And what's this thing exactly for?
So when Honda unveils a new car you also ask what is it for just because there were already more cars in the market? LOL!
Peiasdf: Tiny sensor with a big screen. I think this is an instagram preloaded cellphone with integrated digital photo display without the phone capability. Calling it a camera is insulting.
It's a camera.
mpgxsvcd: "Samsung has announced the Galaxy Camera, a 16MP BSI CMOS compact superzoom/Android smartphone hybrid"
That statement makes it sound like this is a phone as well which I don't believe it is.
EDIT: it has a SIM slot, but you are right it seems you cant make calls, which is quite odd. If that's the case then I'll pass.
Michael S.: Actually it does look like as
a) almost all posters here are too young to remember or
b) have already forgotten what Olympus claimed as the introduced the 4/3 system long time ago.
I have been there - as Olympus EUROPE introduced, marketed the at that time new and 100% digital 4/3 system with the upcoming E1.
The two sentences that fell and have always been repeated by the presenters have been:
1) "5 Megapixels are enough..."2) "We will have smaller, lighter and cheaper lenses than our competitors".
Without a doubt - both clamis have failed.
If you want a fair comparison you need to compare all aspects and not only those that benefit your agenda. A 300mm f2.8 in m4/3 gives you EXACTLY the same results that a 600mm f5.6 in FF and there is no weight savings. Period. Now, you can come with the f2.8 is f2.8 mantra (that shows that you know nothing about the law of physics), but then please then don't forget that 300mm is 300mm also.
Hey Camediadude, I like your metacomment, that's it, a comment about your own comment. Because it's clear who is a fanboy (even your nick proves it). I am a happy m43 owner and user, but I find just silly comparing a 300mm with a 600mm when simply knowing basic numbers tells you it is completely wrong. of course a 300mm is smaller, because, well... it's a 300mm and not a 600mm. Some just don't want to get it.
Promit: If you think that the Oly 12-35 f/2 should weigh and cost the same as a full frame 24-70 f/4 because the depth of field is the same, you don't even deserve to own a camera.
Said the guy who decides who deserves a camera and who doesn't.
@ Mjankor : Sure, a 300m is smaller than a 600mm... just like a motorcycle is smaller than a car.
Antonio Rojilla: I'll buy one just because this phone will be a legend in two years when finally Microsoft kill the company.
BTW, here's an a fun side-by-side: http://www.quesabesde.com/noticias/nokia-808-pureview-pentax-645-comparativa-40-mp,1_8958
@JesseAu Yes, it would sell more if it had Windows, but that wouldn't stop Nokia from dying. Now if this camera were in a iOS or Android device...
I'll buy one just because this phone will be a legend in two years when finally Microsoft kill the company.
acid592: Some members wrote as if f value is related to sensor size (if i understand right). I think f 1.4 always gets in more light than f 1.8 independent of the sensor size. Right?
LX7 -> F(4.7)/1.4=3.357RX100 -> F(10.4)/1.8=5.7
peevee1: ALERT!!!The specifications are deceptive. The weight of 294g is WITHOUT battery (and SD card I presume):http://www.samsung.com/us/news/newsRead.do?news_seq=20206The depth of 29mm is just a lie (probably is measured in the thinnest point and not at thickest as required and reported by other manufacturers).I would not be surprised if they report width without the protruding lugs etc.They think if they are not a Japanese company they can avoid following CIPA standards? But it is just a fraud. Buyer beware!
THANK YOU!!! A last someone thinks of the children!
Rooru S: "that split second moment is there to be captured and you need a camera you can rely on"
Yeah, curious what kind of lenses he will be using that will provide the speed required for these kind of events...and wondering if CDAF can keep up with the action. If he manages to get several good keepers, it will be a good thing. If not, then...then he spent the Olympics with the wrong equipment.
Yes, because when cameras and lenses were completely manual photographers didn't bother to attend sport events. Newspapers where filled with sketches instead.
Greynerd: Is this the photographic equivalent of McDonalds doing all the catering?
Yes, but I doubt you would spot the difference. In either case.
chiane: Am I the only one that doesn't want a camera that looks like it's from the '70's?
This site absolutely needs the option to DISLIKE some comments.
Bill1969: Nikon and Canon switched places, Nikon fanboys used to brag about low res sensors which gives better high ISO photos, now, Nikon d800 has significantly higher pixel density, i bet 5d mk3 will have better high iso images...
Its funny now Nikon fanboys are bragging about high mp...
For those that NOW think that less pixels is better... may I remember you that they still sell the D700? And at $2200... Let's see how the MKIII compares to it at high ISOs. Will it be $1300 better?