Wow, a 3 Kg lens for portrait work. Amazingly not practical. Maybe it can be used in the studio with a tripod, but then why do you need f:1.4? Basically, no one will buy this lens, so why did Mitakon make it?
The point everyone is missing is that now Mitakon has all of us talking about Mitakon. They have made this amazingly interesting, impractical lens and they are showing everyone what they can do. We all talk about it and think about Mitakon and when Mitakon comes up with other lenses, all of a sudden, Mitakon is a brand we recognize and we buy their other lenses. I think this is Mitakon's main purpose behind making this lens and I think they have done the right thing.
I bought a Samsung NX100 a few years ago and it came with a kit zoom. I want to upgrade to a better body, but if I do buy a body that I want, I have to buy it with another kit zoom. I mean they are all bundled with a kit zoom. There is only one body sold without a kit zoom. This is unique in all exchangeable lens cameras, all brands offer options of buying body only, except Samsung.
Maybe someone can find an example where there is one or two bodies sold separately, or can find a body being sold on ebay, but that isn't interesting for me. If I can't choose the exact new body that I want, without a kit zoom, then I think there is a problem.
Kodachrome200: I shoot 4x5. this honestly sucks all the joy out of working 4x5. I dont need that much resolution I like camera control and the slow process. also all those shots while sharp looks hazy like there is no contrast. Is he using a crappy lens? or is it something to do with the camera design. also how is he focusing it? is he just guessing? because hyperfocal photography in 4x5 takes ALOT of light so this isnt just an easy camera to walk around and shoot with unless its really bright sunny day or you use high iso film or most likely both
isn't he using a pinhole lens? I thought that's what it says in the text.
I don't understand how it has the same megapixels as the D4 and the same processor as the D4, but half the shots per second (5.5 vs 9 to 11).
And the worst thing in my opinion is that it is so expensive. Surely a camera for artists should be dirt cheap?
How difficult would it be to make 4/3 lenses work on a mirrorless body? What are the hurdles exactly? Do other manufacturers have the technology patented?
I have 4/3 lenses, but I am not wedded to the idea of a mirror like other users. Don't get me wrong, I like mirrors, but the EVFs are better for many things (although never as pleasant to use). Anyway, I'd like fast autofocus back, that's all. I'd settle for an OM-D type camera with phase detect autofocus implemented in some way.
one of the first converters that came out when the m4/3's first came out was the 4/3 to m4/3. I am sure you can find one if you look for it.
rurikw: Seems to me that m43 might be the best strategy adopted so far in the business. I am probably buying into it one of these years. Three wishes: 1. dump that stupid faux slr retro design, both oly and pana! 2. Issue m43 versions of zuiko 12-60mm and other +++ glass. 3. Fully articulated screen on omd successor (along with new design) and most other models both oly and pana.
just go buy something and stop hoping to find the perfect product on the market
I think he is playing with us, I think the 7DII or something like it is quite close.
Stephen_C: How many Rebels sell per 5dMkiii? APS-C is very popular and isn't going away any time soon. I think the 7D was taking sales from the more expensive full frame cameras, which is why they are shying away from a 7DMkii. That and they keep using the same 18MP APS-C sensor for the past several years.
I think the semi-professional APS-C cameras will always be popular with bird shooters and sports shooters and people who need the crop multiplication in their lenses. I have a 7D and a 5DII and use them both a lot for different things.
Multifot: If i want whole DP-system in my bag, why i should buy 3 camera bodies with lenses?!
but it would cost the same as buying three cameras
I bought an NX100 a couple of years ago. It came with the standard kit zoom and I have been thinking of buying some lenses for it, but every new body that comes out is sold with a kit zoom. It means I cannot upgrade from my NX100 without having to own an additional kit zoom which I do not need. And if I want to upgrade yet again, I will have another kit zoom which I do not need. It probably seems strange that I do not buy a new lens because I am unwilling to upgrade the body, but the reason is that the whole system is not attractive to me because they force their kit zooms on me at every body upgrade. Because I am unhappy with the whole system I don't buy a new lens and keep using my main body (Canon) when I need to take pictures that need specialized lenses.
back by popular demand and only 50 entries!!!! - missed it again.
Martin Datzinger: Creative piece of accounting!
this is exactly right, if you do the sums, the photographer has to live on below the poverty line... very sad really.. but what it really looks like is a cat fight
(unknown member): Olympus has been hip to the whole "lower" megapixel thing before it was ever cool... Nice to see that Canon is learning a thing or two.
That ISO 200,000 will really come in handy too... if you want to take a natural light picture of bat dung in a pitch black cave.
about taking pictures in almost complete darkness... the problem will be focusing on any subject, I mean if you intend not to use a flash to take the picture, then you will also not use a flash for focus assistance. I was thinking about this earlier, for focusing in near dark, I think a kind of 'sonar' would be useful. Interesting how you wrote about the bat cave. All the lenses would have to be calibrated of course. I have never heard of such a thing, i wonder if it actually exists in any form.