 |
wlad
Lives in
United States
Joined on
Sep 16, 2010
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
wait, you have to put real lenses on it ? I thought you only have to fill the water tank.
so, these "new sensors" - will they make it only into new camera models ? Or new batches of the affected cameras ? Or will the current users get a replacement ?
..not that I have such a camera, I'm just wondering how will fujifilm deal with current owners...
omg, why did Canon even bother with ISO 102400, when ISO 25600 is already absolutely unusable ? pure marketing I guess
I really miss a vulture sitting on one of the trees :D
wlad: why on earth would somebody want to drag around a mirrorless camera of a size and proportion which more or less exactly fail to please the eye ?
no, really, this is as *huge*, as a DSLR... so there goes the only benefit of mirrorless cameras...
@88SAL - Im not bashing m43 at all.
In fact I'm considering a m43 camera for traveling light, but something more in the directions of the Panasonic GX1.
This OM-D E-M5 thing appears really monstrous to me.
NEX has crappy lenses that are too huge for that camera.
why on earth would somebody want to drag around a mirrorless camera of a size and proportion which more or less exactly fail to please the eye ?
no, really, this is as *huge*, as a DSLR... so there goes the only benefit of mirrorless cameras...
wlad: spending 400€ on a bulky P&S which takes shots that are not any better than those from a small 150€ P&S. Makes perfect sense.
@Rachotilko - yep, looks the same as the 200€ Powershot SX230 HS. And I guess there wont be any difference in IQ between the P7100 and the Coolpix S6300.
spending 400€ on a bulky P&S which takes shots that are not any better than those from a small 150€ P&S. Makes perfect sense.
Delacosta: Came across this old thread while doing a search:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=1106596&changemode=1
Kinda puts the whole debate in perspective doesn't it?
Apologies to anyone not yet born at the time ;-)
It's like traveling in time. Let's reply ! :P
Good news everyone !
Seriously, this is the one lens that I have been waiting for ever since I got my first Nikon DSLR. A f2.8 70/80-200 Nikon is too huge and heavy to carry around, not to mention far too expensive to justify the cost for all but pros.
my expectations are high, and I'll be happy to spend around $1000 for this lens if it lives up to them
topstuff: How can people say this is ugly while they let the Canon G1 X get away with being even uglier?
Are people completely blind? I thought photography was a visual craft?
Photographers who take pictures with an aesthetic perspective won't mind at all about the design of this camera. At least it HAS a design, while many others cameras do not seem to have been "designed" at all. They are just black plastic boxes.
Is this site full of old gearheads and test bed freaks, or photographers?
I don't really see the point of this camera when a K5 ( a really lovely camera) is almost the same size.
But criticism of the K-01 aesthetic sounds like the baa-ing of sheep to me.
beauty is subjective. You can't possibly expect everyone to have the same preferences as you do. And judging by the comments, most people find this camera looks like a toy - me included.
The G1 X looks neutral. It's nothing particulary hip or ugly - just another G-series powershot. It's a proven design - no need to fix something that's not broken.
If I was looking for a APS-C mirrorless, I would pick a NEX over this anytime. I would happily sacrifice some features for the sake of a decent design.
so, does it also squirt water when you push the shutter ?
pheonixfool: RRP: £469.99 / €554.00 versus $499
I was under the impression that the Euro was worth more than the Dollar!
Oh wait the launch date is 22nd March a lot could happen...
How exactly is health insurance FREE ??? You PAY for it YOURSELF! Every single month, hundreds of euros. Unless you are unemployed.
Don't confuse "Free" with "Mandatory".
an example of those "great" OOC skin tones of older Nikon CMOS sensors :D
wlad: looks like pictures from my P&S :(
no, my P&S does not produce such photos at ISO3200, but it produces equally sharp photos without any out of focus blur.
looks like pictures from my P&S :(
dgc4rter: Well, at least I have a reason to keep my D7000 now. Won't be cancelling the Sony NEX-7 pre-order either.
Casual P&S photographers will want something cheaper, enthusiasts will want something better.
Sorry Nikon.
why on earth would you want to get rid of your D7000 ? You've just bought it !
What I would want to complement my D7000, is a mirrorless compact camera with a large sensor (at least micro 4/3) and a 35mm equiv f2 prime usable wide open. f1.4 would be even better.
Jerodequin: So what is really the differences between these two - one has a larger LCD screen? What is it about the 8250 that means it produces ultimate quality vs. superior quality claimed for the 6250? They both seem to have the same dpi etc...
the 8250 comes with a 35mm film adapter, the 6250 does not.
I also compared the specs between 8250 and 8150, and the only difference I found, was in bundled software.
And the new 8250 "consumes" slightly more ink.