Snikt228: It's stupid, but at least it might have had a chance if it was more vendor neutral. Only lightning connector, and only Apple?
Makes even less sense in Europe, they use iPhones considerably less than we do in the US.
France - 19%Germany - 18%USA - 36%
And those are IOS users, how many of those IOS users are on the latest lightning connector phones?
If we assume that iPhone 3G and 3Gs aren't in much use anymore but all iPhone 4 and later still are, about 60% of all iPhones have a lightning connector or about 400 million units. And among the iPhone users willing to pay $600 for this, I expect that number to be significantly higher. I'd say 400 million is not a number to sneeze at.
Sales numbers taken from: http://www.asymco.com/2015/05/21/schillers-law/
techjedi: Looks fragile and awkward to me. I don't know how this is an improvement over a good quality P&S that is in your other pocket. I guess instanct sharing over data connections might be useful, but a lot of P&S can tether to your phone anyway. I doubt the average user cares about the quality this is supposed to provide and I doubt a pro sees this as good enough to leave their other equipment behind.
I already use both hands for every photo in landscape orientation on my smartphone (because holding the phone and reaching the shutter button(s) isn't really possible). And with any compact I also use two hands (in both orientations). So, the two-handedness is not an issue for me.
What's an issue is the price. It costs as much as a Sony RX100 II. A plus is the instant syncing to the phone (that's the major downside of a RX100 instead of this, even with Eye-Fi cards).
brownie314: Wonder how long it will take CaNikon to realize there is a market for this type of camera. With cell phones destroying the bottom end of the market, it should be obvious that they should be looking for more high end markets to get into. This is an obvious one. But, not products yet.
Given how long it took them to react to the Sony RX1, I wouldn't hold my breath.
IvanM: IMO this is definitely a beautifully designed camera...got to give it to Leica, they buck the trend and when it works it works well!
Fortunately for us lesser mortals there is Canon 5ds/r, Nikon 810 and Sony A7r2 which all will come close to (if not exceed) the image quality the 007 can deliver..
but Its almost not really about image quality anymore, but rather how it fits into ones workflow, budget and the look one is after....there is something for everyone now.
Apart from colour errors like CA, I don't see how stopping down a lens could improve its colour. The colour is a function of the type(s) of glass used.
Retzius: I'll wait for the Endangered Species edition with white rhino hide covering and crystallized Panda tear LCD cover
I cannot remember a special edition of the Leica S (or maybe there was a single one). It's the M that gets special editions all the time thought there are also special edition X models.
BobYIL: Typical Leica: 30 x 45mm sensor with 1 (one) AF point for $16.900? Hi Seal and Medvedev! How are you guys?
All MF cameras except the Pentax also only have one AF point (thought the new Phase One body offers to switch between a larger and a smaller central AF area). Pentax really profits from being able to put an AF system with a much larger number of AF points (27) from their APS-C DSLRs into their MF body.
The MF market alone is simply too small (< 50'000 units/yr) to support the development of such AF systems.
Alan Mermelstein: Can you comment on how the camera handled shutter shock with the mechanical shutter? I'm a wedding photographer that often uses fill flash or is in high motion scenarios where I can't use the electronic shutter.
I've read Ming Thein's comments on the A7r II in the mean time. He praises the electronic front curtain but strongly recommends to stay away from the fully electronic shutter because it [adds noise that] reduces dynamic range by a stop due to the faster readout.
This not only pretty much implies that the electronic front curtain doesn't have any (or only very minor) detrimental effects but also provides the reasoning why the electronic front curtain alone doesn't add any noise really as it is only a resetting of the sensor compared to a read-out when using a fully electronic shutter.
danieljcox: AF Targeting Pad has been in the Lumix lineup since the GH3 and yes it is the fastest way to change AF position of any system out there. Now Olympus has it too. It's about time Olympus starts using touch screen technology. The Lumix cameras are superb in their use of this very handy feature of touching the screen to make things happen.
@danieljcox You are really getting repetitive. One might be even able to create a bot that comes up with the same posts as yours based on feature lists alone.
danieljcox: Built in flash, another feature that has been part of the Lumix line for almost all of their MFT cameras since the start. I love having at least a small flash with me at all times. Good for Olympus for finally getting on this band wagon.
@danieljcox Thanks for confirming the obvious in regard to how serious we should take your criticism.
danieljcox: The on/off switch clear over on the left side of the camera that requires two hands on deck to get things started? Nice for a tribute to the old OM series but like Canon, why make a camera that takes two hands to turn on? Never have figured out why any camera company would not put the on/off switch on the right side, easy to reach with the main shooting hand like Panasonic is doing as well as Nikon has done for decades.
You anyway need your second hand on the camera before shooting. The traditional location with a ring around the shutter button cannot really be used here since that is already used for one of the control dials. It's a small camera and sometimes compromises have to be made.
danieljcox: Dials easily distinguished by touch? Ok... but what do dials and buttons do? Like other Olympus bodies, the OM-D E-M1, there is no indication of what these dials and buttons do. How does one know how to select White Balance, Exposure Compensation or change your ISO? Yes, you can spend hours with the manual but the Lumix GH4 has these three buttons specifically marked, front and center and easy to see. Another Olympus puzzle that makes all their cameras difficult to operate right out of the box.
@danieljcoxI don't understand why one has to study the manual for hours to find out what setting a given dial changes. Just pick up the camera and try it out.
I also don't understand why initial discovery is such a big deal. It is not like you would be trying out a new camera every week. If your evaluation of a camera is based on using it only a few hours, you are giving way too much weight to initial discovery issues that won't be relevant anymore once you've memorised what each dial does.
@HowaboutRAWIs the addition of electronic noise largely limited to using a fully electronic shutter or does it show up already in a significant way with only a first-curtain electronic shutter?
AshMills: Ok I know equivalence meh meh, but the Olympus 12-40 2.8 (24-80 5.6) AND the 40-150 2.8 (80-300 5.6) TOGETHER weigh about the same as the 24-70 2.8VR.
You don't have to carry a f/2.8 zoom with your FF lens either. The same way you don't have to carry a f/2 zoom with your m43 camera either. Your argument is like saying that you don't need to carry that Nikon 300 mm f/2.8 lens around if you shoot Canon and use a 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 lens.
Your implicit point is that your prefer to carry around the Olympus 12-40 mm f/2.8 + 40-150 mm f/2.8 over a Nikon 24-85 mm f/3.5-4.5 + 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 because the Olympus set somehow provides a better performance, a performance for which you would need to get the f/2.8 zooms if using a Nikon system.
(the Nikon combo is actually 135 g lighter).
Esquilo: Compare the MTF-charts of Tamron 150-600 with this new Nikon 200-500:
I'm no expert, but the Nikon sure looks better to me...
The 10 lp/mm lines look fairly similar (they largely tell us about the contrast of the lens). The 30 lp/mm lines show the Nikon to be better in the centre for the meridional lines (at edges they are similar) and better at the edges for the sagittal lines.
Still, these are calculated lines. I am particularly doubtful about the peak that is achieved only in a very small central area of the lens. I think the imperfections of assembling will mean things are not as perfectly aligned to actually achieve that.
Samuel Dilworth: Great to see Nikon do what it does best: innovative optics and mechanics.
However, I sold my AF-S 24-70 mm f/2.8G ED because it was like carrying around a millstone. My example weighed 915.9 g naked or 1035.8 g with caps and hood. In its case it was a staggering 1216 g.
This new lens supposedly weighs 1070 g naked, or a lot more in bag-ready form. Bonkers!
The new lens is also 154.5 mm long. The Canon is 113 mm long. Ah, but the Nikkor is a slim, easily packed torpedo! Not any more. They’re now the same width.
A very impressive lens on paper, but an awful lot of these will be eBayed after a year for size and weight reasons.
I'd say a 24-85 mm f/3.5-4.5 zoom is a good stand-in for a 24-70 mm f/4 zoom. Yes, it is a third of a stop slower at the long end but it is also a bit longer.
SimenO1: The Nikon 24/1,8 is just 250 $ short of the excellent Sigma 24-35/2,0. I guess Nikon will need to adjust the price to increase the sale of these.
You mean Sigma doesn't think they need a FF extreme WA zoom complement their fast FF moderate WA zoom because they already have APS-C extreme WA zooms?
See, that is the interesting part: Even though you know about equivalence, you still get blinded by some headline numbers. It's like a store which had any kind of special sales going. If it says something like '70% off', you are more impressed, than if it only says '30% off', even if the final price is still higher in the '70% off' store.
Just imagine a world where lens speed was denoted not by f-stop but by entrance pupil (physical aperture diameter as viewed from the front of the lens). And instead of ISO values, the saturation capacity of the whole sensor was used. Then nobody would make a comparison like yours because the entrance pupil of those lenses would be wildly different.
Lenses to compare the two f/2.8 m43 lenses with having the same entrance pupil would be the Nikon 28-80 mm f/3.5-5.6 (225 g) and the 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 (745 g). With the two m43 lens weighing 382 and 880 g.
Richard Murdey: The language of the post is so imprecise as to make it meaningless. Lars, did you really write that?
The module has a thickness of under 5 mm. The pixel "size" has been reduced from 1.12 micron to 1 micron. "The slimming is achieved by reducing the size of each individual pixel." Wha-------t?
Size is x-y dimensions, thickness is z. On the face of it the pixel density has absolutely no bearing on module thickness, which is more about the total thickness of lens, AA filter, packaging, sensor, substrate and electronics.
Yes, but keeping everything else equal (eg, number of pixels, angle of view, f-stop), shrinking the pixel size results in a smaller sensor, meaning for the same AOV a shorter focal length and for the same f-stop a smaller entrance pupil. Which overall means a shorter lens, and thus a less thick camera module.
Rishi Sanyal: Fun little thought experiment:
If we go by sensorgen, the 1D-X's pixels have a full-well capacity (FWC) of 90,000. Since the pixels on this sensor are 7.5x larger, we can extrapolate that given similar sensor capabilities, the pixels on this sensor can hold ~675,000 photoelectrons.
Now, since each doubling of ISO halves the FWC, ISO 4,000,000 will yield a FWC of roughly 675,000/40,000 = 16.875. Let's be generous and round that to 20. That means white is made from 20 photons.
If we generously place middle grey at 3 EV below clipping, that'd mean midtones are made from 20/8 = 2.5 photons, which itself yields a signal with SNR of 2.5/sqrt(2.5) = 1.6, which is already below most reasonable DR cutoffs. In other words, you'll have ~3 EV dynamic range at best, assuming no read noise whatsoever (bad assumption).
So, either my calculations are *way* off, or there's a limit to these insane ISOs. :)
Pixel sizes are generally reported using the pixel pitch (not the diagonal). A 6 micron pixel is a 6 x 6 micron pixel.
Donnie G: The ME20F-SH is a good example of how Canon plays to its strengths by creating entirely new imaging tools that present real solutions to longstanding problems encountered by imaging industry professionals instead of simply imitating what's being done by others. This camera is the only product available that addresses a longstanding need, (30 years or more), in the broadcast and surveillance industries for high quality color video capture in total darkness. At $30,000 a pop, you and I won't be buying one, but Canon will sell boatloads of these cameras to those who need them. Also, expect to see that new locking EF cinema mount on all future Cinema EOS camera bodies. Good job Canon!
It's really a pity that ignoring somebody doesn't also hide the his or her comments.