What a bunch of ugly-looking cameras! :-)
Interesting brand name: XiStera. If you pronounce it "existera" it will sound like the Swedish verb existera, which means "(to) exist". For that reason I thought the guy behind the gadget was Swedish--in fact, I was sure of it, until I found out his name was Joe Adams and that he was an American. I wonder what the brand name is meant to suggest--if anything--to native English speakers.
rrr_hhh: "The negatives in the so-called 'Mexican suitcase' were from Capa's coverage of the Spanish Civil War. He travelled to Spain in 1936 and shot hundreds of rolls of film during the conflict, which these days is relatively little-known outside Spain."What !? Relatively little-known ? This can only be true for the Americans who were brainwashed by years of anti-communist propaganda and whose government cared for good relationships with fascist Franco government.
This tragedy is well known in the EU, where official government kept quiet while the progressists and democrates were massacrated. The controversy is still raging in Spain, where the history of those crimes need to be revisited.
Indeed, and not only did British writer Orwell write about the Spanish Civil War, but also Hemingway, who is of course American--in his celebrated novel "For Whom the Bell Tolls", which also made it into a well-known film featuring Gary Cooper and Ingrid Bergman:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0035896/?ref_=sr_1
Even before I read the text I could tell that the images were the result of HDR processing. Although they are by no means the worst examples of HDR I've seen--far from it!--they're still not good. They simply look wrong and artificial, as so many (most?) HDR images do, to different extents. Still, it should be possible to create a subtly handled HDR image without the telltale signs, but what's worrying is that the article author apparently is a "professional" and still didn't pull it off. Maybe you lose your bearings a little when tweaking your composite picture--I can understand that--and someone else should take a look at the result before publishing.
JonB1975: After seeing the price of the Canon 24-70 II, I am interested.
I prefer IS capability (image stabilization) to high ISO settings anytime! People seem to forget that it's not just noise that gets worse with increasing ISO--dynamic range (DR) gets narrower, colour depth and rendition deteriorates, contrast decreases, etc. Check out the DR/ISO diagram of Nikon D800 at DXO Mark--it's quite a slope! High ISO is always a compromise. With image stabilization and a modest ISO setting, none of this happens and you're getting the best out of your sensor.
Very, very interesting camera! What a pity, though, that Sony dispensed with its in-camera image stabilization, especially since many NEX-users will be using various adapted lenses that do not feature (functional) optical image stabilization.
Pasha001: 85% viewfinder coverage? You get what you pay for.
Yeah, 85% viewfinder coverage--what a let-down for such a serious-looking camera! Should have been 100%, or very close to that. If you compose your picture using this viewfinder you'll disregard about 2 Mpixels-worth of image content in the sensor.