kwojdyna: Yes - we're just envy because our pictures did not win. So after I admited that, let's ask some envy questions:
1. What does the picture showing two black people making out have to do with the topic of the contest?2. What does the picture with two white people sitting on a bridge have to do with the topic of the contest?3. What does the picture with two shades making out in Paris have to do with the topic of the contest?4. What does the statule have to do with the topic of the contest?5. What do the gossiping girls connect?6. What is a person looking at the sun connected with?
My immagination is not much limited, but after looking at those pictures I would guess a picture showing anything could win.
Kids on a playground is a great picture and so is the pyramid of workers - these are GREAT, best fitting the topic.
Simple hand-holds were just so obvious that I knew that would be a major theme, but never thought it could be winning. Especialy after similar entry won Sony contest.
By the way - the pictures that won Sony Contest 2012 are mostly great and fitting the topic. Thank you MrPetkus for the link, I really enjoyed some entries and recommend everyone look at them, especially 06, 04 and 12 but 03, 08, 09, 10, 11, 13 also.
But I was just envy for those $5K, so do not pay any attention to what I wrote.
Yes - we're just envy because our pictures did not win. So after I admited that, let's ask some envy questions:
No matter what they say about me, just let them say my name all the time correctly. Or so, whatever the original quote was.
I just realized that they got a great marketing noise FREE just because of us making this news one of the most discussed on this site ever.
Now they've made a first mistake so far - they started to respond to the criticism with excuses. A big mistake!.
They just planed to sell several pieces of this pimped NEX7 overpriced enough to make profit on a small series. They would sell it no matter what general public think. Now they are trying to excuse themselves - this is what may cause pimp-taste-millionaires cancel their pre-orders...
kwojdyna: I do not agree with all the criticism here. In business you do not want to produce the best products but to make money.
If owners of Leica brand buy cheap crap from Panasonic, put their red dot Leica logo on it and find rich idiots who pay couple times more for it - why wouldn't they do that?
If owners of Zeiss brand put their logo on cellphones' and computer cameras' crappy PEEPHOLE and still find customers for premium lenses in the same time in spite of self-depreciating the brand to make some more money - they do that.
Leica and Zeiss are no longer valuable brands objectively, but on the market they are doing fine selling the rights of putting logos on crap. Hasselblad just wants to take their chance too. Too bad though...
P.S. Of course, I do not mean NEX as crap untill it's priced 10 times that what you can easily get it for...
Thank you all for the posts.
I can see there is some misunderstanding - I mentioned specified series of Leica (C,D,V-Lux) which are just cheap, tiny sensor plastic Panasonic Lumix toys with only 2 differences (logo and "unique feeling at a cash register").
I truly regard M9 as one of the best landscape cameras ever made though. It is overpriced too, but at least it is top quality.
Now - imagine that you bought this M-9 for $ 5000 or more. You recommend it for it's quality. A friend of yours who just wants a good camera for home use trusts you and looks for the brand you use. He or she gets V-Lux and pays the money that would get a real camera for. The picture quality turns out toyish.
Isn't it ruining down the reputation (theirs and yours) for a few dollars in a short time? Because in longer period market will not consider these brands to be more exceptional in any ways that Samsung, in my opinion of course...
Allright then, if I got lost. Which model of Leica series I mentioned gave you the style and unique shooting experience - D-Lux, C-Lux or maybe V-Lux?
I am sorry, but Leicas are also all those V-Lux, D-Lux, C-Lux etc they are just Panasonic Lumixes with their tiny sensors - just toys more expensive that most real cameras.
Zeiss logo is carried by all my ridiculously tiny sensors cellphones and Logitech "camera" from a dollar store.
"No longer valuable brands" means a value for a customer - if you get products with those logos you cannot be sure to get any of good products anymore. In most cases you are getting a way overpriced toys or just cheap toys now...
Do they have a dimmed windows option too?
Let me notice, that is FOURTH (4th) Sony flash mount so far. We had mounts for:1. advanced compacts and bridge cameras,2. Minolta contacts,3. NEX contacts,4. And this new standard.
If you wonder what other reasons besides marketing make people buy Nikon or Canon - this is one of them. They buy a camera with accessories and they get a newer camera later still having a chance to enjoy flashes, optics etc.
Having Sony, Samsung or even Pentax it is just impossible (Samsung DSLR vs. mirrorless, new Pentax flashes do not work with manual bodies etc.) or not comfortable to do (try to juggle with Sony adapters between cameras).
Now Nikon went to system 1 with it's new flash terminal. Good move?
Canon keeps the compatiblity between everything (look at their movie cameras) at the same time.
Now - IMHO Canon gives the poorerst rate of good shots out of these brands, but people like it best and buy most. Guess why now?
I do not agree with all the criticism here. In business you do not want to produce the best products but to make money.
kwojdyna: And one more thing - I am personally not a Canon lover - always had problems with frequent underexposing regardless if used film (EOS 50E, EOS 3) or digital camera (EOS 40D, EOS 5D) and that is why I switched to Pentax K-5 and to Nikon D700 later. But:
1. I could use my old analogue-era Canon flash with new digital DSLR's,2. The same with ALL lenses3. Now, If I'd like, I could use the same lenses with motion picture cameras,4. Flash works with compacts and with the introduction this large sensor compact Canon PowerShot G1X gives me bigger sensor than Panasonic/Olympus m4/3 in compact body and still can probably use my old flash!
Now look at the other systems - Nikons do not autofocus in basic bodies, do not measure lights through non-AI lenses, only new flashes work. Sony NEX3/5 do not accept Sony Alpha flash. The same with Samsung - my expensive Samsung GX flash is useless with NX. Others ?Fuji? also cannot say the have ANY system compared to Canon. This is why they are leaders.
Yes, but in few words only I could not describe the whole thing. When you take film and underexpose it, you take it to the lab to get prints and if they see it "milky" and "grainy", usually correct those, but as a side result the sky gets pale or white. Every watcher, not only photographer, easily points it out everytime I show my pictures to. It is only 1/3 - 1 EV difference now in digi-EOS, but was more than that in analogs. And you do not see it while try to measure in studio - then Canon, Nikon, Pentax etc. shows the same values. The difference starts when taken outside and try to shoot real world...
Maybe so - but Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Samsung etc. must have similar ideas how to measure, and Canon must have different. But I rather having sky blue than white as long I saw it blue through the viewfinder since I had my DDR-made Practica.
Pozdrawiam, gdzie dwóch Polaków, tam trzy zdania :) Dobranoc, kładę się...
I an really jealous now. As pictures show, EOS users (even film systems) can use their flashes with this - large sensor compact camera - which every "PRO" denies but would like to have in his pocket while cannot carry around his heavy gear.
This is why Canon sells so well - pro's can use even oldest lenses with newest EOS D's and so the flashes, now with first GOOD compact on the market.
I think it is going to stronger Canon's leadership regardless company's tendency to underexposure in all EOS series from the very (film) beginning. This is the only company that understand that people catch when they know they can expand their SYSTEM. Buy Sony, Samsung, Fuji or Olympus mirrorless - you cannnot even use same's brand SLR dedicated flash!!! Nikon and Pentax tries to sell tiny sensor mirrorless for $$$ No wonder people get Canon and will get more.
That is why I am jealous of Canon users (who I was) and mad on other companies of only pretending to build systems (shame on them!)
kwojdyna: Dear DPReview and readers,as I can see there's a strong accent to convince us that this camera is worth it's money because it is "cutting edge etc.". No - it is a way overpriced - as Leica, though it offers maybe something more that we do not know yet.
For that price I could get another D700, which gives so far the best results on the market (except of landscape photography). I've tried Pentax K-5, to which I switched from various EOSes I've owned. I've tried Sony's FF also - still D700 is unbeatable, (unless You take D3S). All these cameras are DSLRs with good or great functionality and so the picture quality though...
I do not doubt it maybe good - I am a Fuji lover myself. But with it's price... I bought less-than-$300 mirrorless kit Samsung NX100 for my wife and use it myself since then, it gives such great RAWs. How much better can this Fuji be to cost 8-10 times more with lens? Controls and looks is less important, I guess, than photos themselves, aren't they?
So You have to shop in Poland, because that's the price you can find (easily for $1800) D700 for here (NEW).
What concerns other posts - I just LOVE Fuji and LOVE this dial-design of cameras and have been missing it for years. But what I do is photographs - the prints or image files. Nice feeling of a camera, "experience of a camera" etc. are just additions to it. Some people think opposite - pictures are just the side-effects of "touching a camera". I do not mind - not my money -not my problem.
But I really would like a camera like that and regret will not buy. A toy get's less unusual as you have it, pictures results uncomparable to D700's, but once paid money's gone (A LOT!)
I hope Fuji will not find many people who pay just for a "touch of THE camera" so people like me can buy it reasonably priced in a time... Regards to everybody (Fuji workers too), I am not here to argue but to express my opinion. And that is it.
I am talking about all kind of Canon shots, but indeed - flash pictures from EOS sucked. This is amazing, but regardless using a build-in or largest external (I had 2 pieces 550's) they shoots were bad too often. My wife had Nikon F80 film camera that time with build-in-flash only - all exposures perfect :)
But I meant non-flash too. The under-exposing was not big in Canon, but noticeable comparing to anything else (Nikon, Minolta, Sony, Pentax, Yashica!!!). The most bugging and noticeable is the look of sky - I used Practica followed by Yashica - tons of good exposures. Then switched to EOS - pale or white sky became a frequent guset on my slides. Then I thought digital would not have this problem - it is lesser indeed, but visible. Especially after I swithed to digital Pentax and Nikon lately. My wife has Samsung NX - absolutely Canon has (and always had) problems with frequent underexposing and even bigger with flash shots.
But the system-orientation of EOS is best (and so is AF)
And one more thing - I am personally not a Canon lover - always had problems with frequent underexposing regardless if used film (EOS 50E, EOS 3) or digital camera (EOS 40D, EOS 5D) and that is why I switched to Pentax K-5 and to Nikon D700 later. But:
Dear DPReview and readers,as I can see there's a strong accent to convince us that this camera is worth it's money because it is "cutting edge etc.". No - it is a way overpriced - as Leica, though it offers maybe something more that we do not know yet.
Please give us more hi-ISO pictures RAW's too to let us see how much better it is compared to other compact cameras. I like FujiFilm, I know F200EXR a lot (wife has it) but... for$600 I could have another 2 (TWO!) Samsung NX100 - interchangeable lens cameras wit APS-C DSLR size - not little as here - sensor.
The design's lovely, but for $600 I am expecting a great quality too. Does this one have it?
Stollen1234: nice) imagine if these were taken with a canon camera..the colors and the clarity would be unsurpassed.
You are kidding... aren't you?
kwojdyna: Great sensor what you can see in RAW mode. TERRIBLE processing in JPEG mode (look higher ISOs at coins or cotton balls...)
This great sensor had been put in a camera that is a major step back compared to NX100.
It's maybe phisically better made, but lacks "AE lock" and direct "Whie Balance" buttons present in NX100 (needless to say how USEFUL they WERE). Now we can see that also picture processing is MUCH WORSE than in it's predecessor.
NX100 was something - VERY ergonomic (except of the flash which was a bad mistake) with much better sensor than any m43, what gave great RAWs, and acceptable JPEGs.
NX200 has only some minor advantages compared to it when we talk about a chance of getting great everyday pictures (what it is designed for, I guess) -flash, 20MP RAWs and nice feel in hands - and GREAT DISADVANTAGES.
Just think - in everyday photography - you do not shot RAWs. You need good JPEGs and "WB" + "AE lock" funcs quickly accessible. This camera DOES NOT offer any of these!
It is a downgrade in all points I have mentioned.
And if some people do not shoot JPEGs at all - good for them - but id does not mean comparison of JPEGs is not important. I do not why some of you try to persuade everybody that if they shoot JPEGs, they must be not to smart in photography.
kwojdyna: To anybody that use this comparison tool - remember - shots taken by different cameras are taken with various lenses too. This means different DOF at each picture! So BEFORE you come to WRONG conclusion that any camera is not sharp, please look at the samples and think WHICH objects WERE IN FOCUS first. And then compare ONLY the objects that were focused by the camera.
The other important thing is when you CONCENTRATE on focused objects ONLY to wonder how image processing of a camera works (sharpening, anti-aliasing etc.) For example - JPEGs from this camera look very unnatural, just terrible. The higher ISO, the worse.
The good point is to replace small sensor Olympus in default choice with same size sensor as others Nikon D3100, which is probably a best candidate for reference APS format camera available in this comparison. I suggest to forget the lenses' DOF factor and conentrate only at focused areas. Compare colour strings, cottton balls, coins etc.at 4 cameras. Isn't it enough?