An EOS M with fast AF? :-)
photo perzon: For the same money and weight and size, the APS-C Fuji X-A1 and the perfect 27mm pancake produce immaculate samples.
It sure is apples to oranges: XA-1 has a 16MP APS-C 1.5 FOV sensor and LX100 has a 12.7MP crippled almost-4/3 sensor...
Absolutely, and it is cheaper...
JPEG only? What's the point?
RStyga: The sooner we accept that m4/3 is not designed for very shallow DoF the sooner we will be able to enjoy shooting using this system without obsessing about its limitations. Stop squeezing it; no more DoF juice will come out... it is what it is. You want to maximise DoF control, shoot large format (if you can) and be merry.
In addition, shallow DoF requires the approrpiate technique to make good use of it in a photograph.
The sooner we accept that m4/3 is not designed for very shallow DoF the sooner we will be able to enjoy shooting using this system without obsessing about its limitations. Stop squeezing it; no more DoF juice will come out... it is what it is. You want to maximise DoF control, shoot large format (if you can) and be merry.
Bruce McL: I have a question. Are there any options for saving files, such as TIFF or maxJPEG? I like to get the most resolution possible from my iPhone images, and I do see a difference with TIFF or JPEG at 100 percent compared to Apple's standard camera app files.
That's what 645 Pro states. Take it up with them... I have seen a very big difference between 645 pro and the iphone camera app at 100% crop.
I never use any of these controls myself; it simply takes better shots because of the lossless sensor output.
Use 645 Pro.
Oh my, are we expecting a law suit from Leica, now, to Canon for special-edition trademark violation... :-)
RStyga: I wonder HOW many versions of the model X will take to replace that unacceptable 230K LCD with a normal resolution screen!! Or is this another "feature" of the X series, like the retarded aperture dial? Leica is a dinosaur hiding behind an expiring name. I remember handling the first X1 model I was appalled of the non-resopnsiveness of the AF. I'm expecting that XE as well as the "flagship" (only in size, I'm afraid) X are the slowest AF compacts on the market. Leica, wake your engineers up!!!
Exactly, "a bit" more sense, not full sense. It's still expensive and provocative...
marco1974: OK, so now we finally will have a 35/1.4... but it'll be the same size as the 24-240 superzoom! So much for the mirrorless advantage in terms of size and weight.But oh, wait: we also have the more compact 35/2.8, don't we? But then the DOF and the total light-gathering ability is the same as that of a 23/2 on APS-c (which could obviously be much more compact to begin with). So much for the FF advantage in terms of DOF and ISO.Mmmh, it seems that in spite of marketing claims, one just can't beat the laws of physics. Bummer.
That's not entirely correct. There are APSC lenses like the sigma 30/2.8, 60/2.8, and sony 20/2.8 that give almost FF coverage. It's very possible to build small FF primes.
Peiasdf: Don't make that 35 f/1.4 a Zeiss. I don't want to pay $1500 for normal prime. The $800 XF 23mm F1.4 R is about as much as I can afford to pay for a prime.
Toyota has low build quality??? Oh my, someone was defrosted from the 70s....
RStyga: 645Pro is the best RAW-output camera app for the iPhone that I've seen; it does not offer manual control, however, it offers AEL so you can point to a darker/brighter point and then AEL so that you force the camera to the exposure settings of your liking. Direct ISO control, though, is still not possible.
Again: It's RAW enough.
645Pro is the best RAW-output camera app for the iPhone that I've seen; it does not offer manual control, however, it offers AEL so you can point to a darker/brighter point and then AEL so that you force the camera to the exposure settings of your liking. Direct ISO control, though, is still not possible.
The A7 series is very well priced and compact; I can't say that the FE lenses are as financially accessible, though (or compact). Let's see whether the 28/2 will be one, at least...
lcf80: Almost every single camera provides RAW images using 12 or 14 bits per color, free tools like GIMP and RawTherapee support it. And Photoshop Elements still useless, in 2014? Open your eyes, Adobe.
That's reassuring, Lee Jay, but, still, what Adobe does is not commendable.
It is true that certain tools are available without downgrading to 8 bit and that during RAW conversion there are options to stretch DR-related parameters without, again, affecting the colour depth. However, it is still very restrictive once you are past the RAW conversion. Adobe is intentionally crippling Elements to force people to upgrade once they are pass the snapshot shooting style. However, although not surprising, this reflects poorly on the company and leave many amateur photographers (Elements' target group) disappointed.
Please, enlighten us.
I'm afraid it's marketing again, pushing consumers to purchase the other much more expensive products they sell. No wonder some people resort to S/W piracy...