Just a Photographer: Why should we still use Eye-Fi cards now in most places we can use a 4G network?
Next to that in todays world not only your phone has wifi already, but most (consumer) camera's have wifi too.
Few years ago these cards came in handy, but nowadays aren't these eye-fi card mostly redundant? Its only a matter of time before Eye-fi will be out of business.
these cards were pretty much useless even back then..Most people don't have a studio, so they don't need to review low-res images on a tablet/PC after each shot.And these cards are useless for transferring full resolution pictures, not to mention RAWs. The abysmal maximum transfer speeds of 1.5MB/s make this just a toy, really.
RichRMA: Ferrari licensed their name to a number of companies, including William Optics a Taiwanese telescope company. I would like to know exactly what changes Hasselblad made to the 99.
did Ferrari sell a rebadged KIA ?
Zoron: I am planning to get one....anybody else in dpreview?
no, you're alone
sebastian huvenaars: Imagine the new CEO of Ferrari opting to buy up some Toyota's, fit them with seat made of cherry wood and a ferrari badge and sell them for lunar amounts of money...
This is what happened to Hassy passed period lol, it would be comical if it wasn't so sad.
Ah well, no more of that :)
In case of Aston-Martin, they were just mocking the bureaucrats in Brussels:"The Aston Martin Cygnet is a 3-door hatchback marketed by Aston Martin beginning with model year 2011 as a rebadged variant of the Toyota iQ. The Cygnet enables Aston Martin to comply with the European Union–imposed fleet average emissions regulations taking effect in 2012"
Joachim Gerstl: the lunatic left!
you surely meant "ruining the company"
Carlos Ocando: If LR runs slow on a Mac or a PC, then I wonder how will it run on a tablet?, and why would anyone do color correction in such a small screen that has a color space smaller than sRGB?
it's not going to have all the features of the big LR obviously.. maybe it won't even handle RAW :)
David Hull: The typical price for a high quality APP in the iPad is $10-$15 period. Adobe wants to charge 10-12 times that in perpetuity? I think that if Adobe really wants to increase their profitability, they should start packaging and selling whatever it is that they are smoking.
maybe you get a free iPad with that Adobe subscription...
BarnET: I have an challenge for everyone mocked this canon n100Find an compact that was released this CES that has better image quality.And the x100s is excluded for just being an fancy makeover.
the point was - there have been better cameras already on the market 2-3 years ago
wlad: Is there some sort of competition between Nikon and Canon in who can come up with the most ridiculous product that sells the least units ?If Cannon & Nikon really want to lose market share and become irrelevant, they both are doing a great job.
Seriously - what were the last exciting products these two have released ?You know it's bad, when Sigma makes more exciting lenses (Art), and Sony makes more exciting cameras (A7/R, RX100 etc).
No, this illustrates that DSLRs did not grow either.But nothing has fallen as hard, as P&S by 48% in 2013:
justmeMN: Compact camera sales are rapidly declining, so Canon decided to try to increase sales with a unique feature. The camera may, or may not, be a sales success, but at least Canon is trying new things.
It wasn't a hyperbole - this camera is without any exaggeration EXACTLY as useful for the preservation of a product in the market, as that telegraph receiver with added LED diodes.But please, if Canon pays you for astroturfing like Sdaniella, get back to us in 1 year with sales figures for this ridiculous camera.
oh, and btw, one of the definitions of sarcasm:1: a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain
question: does it have significantly better image quality than a similar P&S camera released during CES 3 years ago ?
it's called sarcasm, but I'm not surprised that a Canon fanboy/employee did not get it...
"(Reuters) - Japan's Canon Corp (7751.T) cut its operating profit outlook for the second quarter in a row, below analysts' estimates, warning that sales of its signature high-end cameras will fall this year for the first time since their launch in 2003.
The world's largest camera maker said it now sees global economic gloom squeezing sales of its digital interchangeable-lens cameras to 8 million through December from 8.2 million last year. Demand from camera buffs will stay weak in Europe, and fail to recover as quickly in China as Canon had expected."
"Electrical telegraph receiver sales are rapidly declining, so the manufacturer decided to add blinking LED diodes. It may or may not be a succes, but at least they are trying new things."
Since P&S is a dead end, Canon & Nikon might want to focus on future products and markets, instead of taking yet another shot at the dying market.Canon & Nikon failed miserably to establish themselves on the ILC market, because they didn't have the balls to create a system that might compete with their entry level DSLRs. Micro 4/3 would have never taken off if it wasn't for Canon's and Nikon's ignorance. The sad part is, they keep on ignoring the market even today - when it's obvious that the last days of the mirror box are near.Ridiculous products like a 2 sided camera or a waterproof system camera just prove how desperate these companies are.
Exciting to those, whom Canon & Nikon target with their DSRL product lines. You see they are not only losing the P&S market to cell phones - they face a stiff competition in the enthusiast market as well.And it seems they haven't done anything about it for the last 5 years.
FoolyCooly: Is it just me or does this cost 2x more than it should? The 35mm f1.8 DX is just $200...this doesn't look 3x more expensive.
2.25x bigger sensor
I wonder why the 32mm f1.2 lens for N1 doesn't cost approximately $215, since it covers just 1/7th of the FX format.
semorg: No Nano coating? I guess Nikon doesn't want to cannibalize their 35/1.4 lens.
Not when you assume your customers are brainless zombies ready to pay $600 for an unimpressive, cheaply built lens that should cost around $300.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: Inane. If this is all Canon can come up with to counter smartphones' rising sales, I fear for the future of their camera division...
I think Sony competes with phone cameras quite well. They figured out they need to use a larger sensor, not add ridiculous bells and whistles. The 1" sensor cameras are doing just fine.
JEROME NOLAS: The new year starts pretty badly...
with this howardroark bloke around, it seems Canon puts more effort in trying to win online discussions, rather than actual market share.