dan1e: While I have no love for Google, and I think they are wrong, I also think it's a bit rich of Getty Images to talk about a monopoly.
Why do you think it is called a "monopoly"?
Getty is just like any other corporate leach out there - take all they can get any way they can get it - while pointing their finger at everyone else daring to keep them from doing so.
My granny told me something a long time ago that manufacturers world-wide seem to ignore: Don't put all your eggs in one basket (especially when it comes to having all your manufacturing capacity located in a hazard prone area subject to things like earthquakes, floods, and the like).
A nice camera, but ....
A big camera needs a big grip, and a number of DPR staffers weren't thrilled with the one on the GX8. It's not as deep as we would've liked
It seems the trend continues toward smaller and smaller products regardless of whether they are so small their usability is compromised. This one is no different.
I've always been a fan of "larger" bodied cameras simply because they aren't as difficult to hold, operate, etc. as the "itty-bitty" ones - regardless of how many features can be packed into them.
... disorganized mess ....
Obviously a technical marvel, but can it be used?
I'll never be able to afford one of these, but the challenges of such a tiny body (compared with my old Canon 20D), and particularly the controls are not favorable.
And their refusal to dedicate enough space for a real battery is a persistent weakness.
Sigh, if only....
The drone issue is like everything else - a few bad apples will manage to spoil it for everyone. Enough reports of abuse already prove some can and will use them for reasons not appreciated by all.
But this is a relatively new phenomenon, and sales are likely to take off now that almost everybody can afford one.
Registration is likely no longer a question of "if" but "when". The big issue may become what kind, size, how many rotors, etc. should be exempt - if any.
I'll respond to that with a question - how many, what kind, size, horsepower, number of tires, and on and on - what automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, and buses are exempt from motor vehicle registration laws? None the last I heard.
I propose the same applies to drones, or whatever the experts call them.
Register all at the point of sale. Anybody that doesn't want to comply can sit on the sidelines and watch his buddies enjoy the use of theirs when they've followed directions; the show is free.
Code9: Drone owners have been expecting this. But the NDA (National Drone Association) will be fighting it. We feel it's our right to own drones and they'll have to pry mine from my cold dead hands. Of course there's the drone show loophole: if you buy your drone at a drone show no registration is required. I suppose some form of psychological testing will be next. It's such a shame: when drones are outlawed only outlaws will have drones. Drones don't take down planes, people take down planes. But when you consider the number of deaths from drones - 32,000 last year - something really does need to be done. :)
Gates, if you truly think the only person prosecuted when a thug flies a drone too close to something or somebody will be the one who shot the infernal thing down, you should think twice about dropping out of law school, even if it was "the school of hard knocks" as my grandpap called it.
Does it require an 18-wheeler to haul the memory chips required to handle all of that recording capability?
An ordinary housefly has lenses all over its eye, and I don't think it can truly see 360-degree coverage.
Summarizing many comments herein, clearly ease of use overrides all but the demand for the highest of quality photos.
Convenience wins out over complexity 90% of the time.
When was the last time you missed "that shot" because selecting a setting took longer than for your grandchild to take his first steps?
theolein: I think both referenced articles are right: Smartphone cameras are getting very, very good, and mirrorless and DSLRs are all still far too complex (at first sight).
This is made worse in some respects by almost all cameras being designed in Japan, which has a legacy of terrible and unintuitive user interfaces, and smartphones now even offering things like RAW (LG G4 et al). Almost all smartphones offer easily as many pixels as most cameras.
BUT, the single most obvious thing is that people have their smartphones with them all the time. Only enthusiasts have their cameras with them often. The camera market is in for a restructuring, make no mistake.
That said, there is lots of room for camera makers to improve on usability, automation and intuitiveness.
But there will always be a market for more advanced cameras, just smaller than it currently is.
....almost all cameras being designed in Japan, which has a legacy of terrible and unintuitive user interfaces....
Another subject, but the same principle applies through many other products from the land of the rising sun as well, especially the logic controlling how their products work.
Trevor Simpson: 1.The best camera is the one you have with you.2. If you have more than one with you, choose the best one for the job.3. If you don't know which is best for the job, sell all but the cheapest or easiest to use and go to 1.
My version of "1" is: The best camera is the one you have with you and know how to use, or is it the other way around?
Now who doubts that any person can be proven to be at the scene of the crime with enough manipulation behind the scenes?
And which were they holding - the gun, knife, or poison?
An excellent example of what can be done with enough effort. Well done.
Minimum focusing distance?
If this ever-widening trend continues, someday the photographer will have to hide his/her ears to keep them from becoming part of the picture.
spikey27: Very interesting.
Thanks for showcasing anything that is an improvement, as this does wrt reducing cost, adaptation of new uses of "off the shelf" equipment, and simplifying the system for underwater photography.
Although I don't get into water any deeper than my shower, I appreciate the beautiful photography, as well as expansion of knowledge of the world around us.
Followup: Although a go-pro was used herein, as several others pointed out there are several good alternatives, with each having its supporters.
I think the jist of this article shows that while many cameras are suitable, the folks at Monterrey Bay chose this for their basis. When you build something, it is best to stick with existing solutions wherever possible, otherwise costs will eat you up.
Unquestionably there will be "better" cameras down the pike, and there will be choices to be made.
But, for this instance, they chose to use the go-pro, and certain types of enclosures. It worked for them, and I consider their solution to be successful.
Who knows - maybe someone will develop a transparent gel, grease, or other material the camera can be enclosed in and dispense with any housing.
Please revisit this article sometime, say a year or two down the road, and let us know what else has sprung from this project.
Most people can afford one of these, or other models.
But I wonder how many of them have the good sense to use them properly and not to pester other people - such as has been reported by numerous real pilots when those glorified gnats interfere with commercial air space.
It's no wonder the FAA is cracking down on them. If they don't, statistically they will cause a crash someday, somewhere. Who wants to be on that flight?
So, before somebody complains about their first amendment rights, remember they can be held accountable for injuries and deaths caused by these things.
forpetessake: "12-45mm f/3.5-6.3" -- really? Making such a dim lens with such a small sensor makes no sense. It's f/12.6 FF equivalent! Even the old film days P&S Olympus soap boxes were brighter. This Chinese company is nuttier than a fruitcake.
Discussing the difference in usefulness of numerically high f/stops for anything except bright daylight shooting somehow reminds me of the 10-stop chart in the doctor's office that he points to and asks "What is your pain level?"
BTW, there's an excellent article elsewhere on this site regarding equivalent EVERYTHING.
Whew, you had me worried there for a moment.
At first I thought "Has Kodak - the into digital photography company with a great portfolio of useful patents that sold off everything and became NOT in the same business - now become an 'into' again?"
Because if they had reentered that market, and were likely paying for the use of what used to be their own patents, woe be unto them. And to anyone buying their cameras because of the uncertainty over whether they would go away again because of incompetence and mismanagement at the highest level.
Perhaps the greatest challenge the new guys will face is casting off the taint of the corporation's past.
Best wishes to them.
Screw WM. They don't own everything, but just like all big outfits, they think they are the only ones that matter.