AP7: Nikon, Sony, Pentax ... all have affordable, newer built 35mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.8, etc prime lenses for non-professional folks.
Canon should also update their enthusiastic prime lenses and offer at affordable price point. All the new lenses that Canon updated recently are way more expensive. Seems they forgot their enthusiastic market.
Also, really surprised, being one of the major camera manufacturer, Canon took so long to realize the importance of center-pinch cap design. Why Canon cannot take initiative/lead and be innovative? So far, what I see is, Canon is always forced to update their product by other manufacturer. What a shame for Canon !
but there's one area I wish Nikon would FOLLOW Canon - and that is firmware development.I don't remember if Nikon EVER added any new feature in a firmware update. Even trivial *fixes* like a minimum shutter speed for AutoISO on the Nikon 1 cameras.Canon does it all the time.
Mssimo: I wish canon made these in F mount.
why on earth ?Those 1500 eur get us 24-70mm f2.8 Nikon !And the 28mm f1.8 Nikon lens (with Nano coat) goes for 650 eur.
carlgt1: the problem I've found with these cards is they're pretty damn slow, so transferring 16GB would probably take at best close to an hour? I mean say you can get 50 mbps (6.25megaBYTES per second) out of the fastest '.11n' network, that's 2560 seconds for 16MB (and typically you'd probably get 1MB/sec rates not 6+).
unfortunatelly, you get AT MOST 1MB/s - and that's when you have your card next to your router.So transferring 16GB of pictures would take about 5 hours. Make sure your camera is on DC power ;)
forsakenbliss: Perfect camera for paris hilton
only if it comes in pink
Polyfem: LOL - no sir, a Hasselblad is far from "just a camera". It's just like watching a Rolls Royce when you only imagine a bicycle. In the old film days I hired a couple of prof. photographers who used Hasselblad. Just handling the camera is like handling an object from another world. The price - who cares? - it's likely to be insane by standards not only set by amateurs.
Flawed car analogy. A Rolls Royce can be used as a general purpose car.A medium format camera - is useless everywhere except for heavily controlled environments (hint: ISO, AF, speed, workflow etc)Or did I miss something ?
nah, I'll get a new car instead..
I'm calling bullsh1t on the OIS ad.
That's pretty much impossible on a hand held phone. Heck even the OM-D can't manage that.
absolutely possible - though not using optical stabilization, but software processing instead
abi170845: Can anybody please make a camera that WORKS! Where to start X10, X100, D800/e LCD, D7000, 5dmk3 light spill, and now this? No wonder here in Jakarta, Indonesia the d90, supposedly discontinued, are still selling like hot cakes and a brand new d90 price keeps going up, right now is at US800! unbelievable!
what's wrong with the D7000 ? oh, you mean the noobs who expect to use 1/30s shutter speeds...
carefull with the comments - Nokia has beaten a micro 4/3 camera in a blind test:
peevee1: The new megapixel race is on.
Actually high resolution displays were available 10 years ago. It's just that consumers were dumbed to think the lame "FullHD" resolution is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Another thing that most people didn't get is that the only reason why every display manufacturer moved from 4:3 to 16:9 was cost cutting - the screens got SMALLER, yet consumers were tricked to believe it was better.
altis: Thank goodness real customers have more diverse tastes than reviewers.
and you seriously think those 3 customers will pay for the R&D and manufacturing costs to make this product profitable for Pentax ?
I suppose a firmware update won't take care of the fugly design...
thx1138: With a rumoured price of €1100 or about the same as a current Canon 24-70L, this is way overpriced. Typical of m4/3, they like to make you believe you are really getting a FF lens and price it accordingly. If they come to there senses and price is say $600-700 it'll be a great addition to the line-up. Making Sony NEX's system look lamer all the time.
@DarkShift - the previous Canon 24-70 version costs 1200€, and very few people complain about it. The brand new version II is just a tiny bit better at the long end wide open. But not 1000€ better.
dannyboy5400: Let me get this right. They are going to charge similar prices for an equivalent 24-70mm 2.8 when it uses LESS OPTICAL GLASS. Oh, but you pay more for less but it is lighter. Yeah, a lighter wallet.
It will cost $1200 at least. And that's way too much for a MFT lens imho.
wlad: If you need to record more than 30 minutes in one shot, you're probably doing something wrong :P
so the take a 30 minutes long shot from the same boring angle...
If you need to record more than 30 minutes in one shot, you're probably doing something wrong :P
Waterengineer: Seems expensive.
@millsart why on earth would anyone do that anyway ?
John P.: Does it fix the light leak issue?
a strap of black electrical tape should do it
wlad: I doubt any Nikon shooter will buy this, when the Nikon version costs just $500 more.It would be competitive with 1/3 to 1/2 the price of the Nikon lens. Not so with 2/3s of the Nikon's price tag.
...make it half the MSRP price
@ryansholl - because it's a Tamron.And it's not even $500, it's only $400. Makes the "cheap" 3rd party alternative not cheap at all. And I doubt it's gonna be as sharp with the AF as fast and accurate as the Nikon's original.
I doubt any Nikon shooter will buy this, when the Nikon version costs just $500 more.It would be competitive with 1/3 to 1/2 the price of the Nikon lens. Not so with 2/3s of the Nikon's price tag.