technic: nice idea, but the LED lighting looks like a weak point. High quality LED lighting (with good color and sufficient brightness) is expensive, and having a heavy duty battery or power supply will make it no longer 'portable'.
If you just need a softbox / photo tent there are plenty to chose from on Ebay around this price level; including larger and more practical sizes.
It's only "weak" when compared to pro level equipment.To the average smart phone user it's going to be a revelation ...
Suntan: Couldn't a guy just grab one of those folded up doughnut boxes from the pastry section?
that's probably what they did until their friends starting asking how they got their cool shots and they saw the possibility of earning a bit of money ...
Island Golfer: $27 for folded paper?! I wonder how much they want for the shipping? What are these guys smoking? And, they put the entire design on their site. Anyone can simply make it themselves out of cheap white poster board and contact cement.
a lot of this kind of stuff is "easy" if you've got the time and skill to build it.It's been proven over and over that people will pay for convenience.Heck ... just consider the fact that a lot of people prefer to use P-mode or a smarter equivalent instead of fiddling with aperture and shutter speed.
OldArrow: There are so many people unable to snap off a sensible street photo even with the latest tech available, and here we see what can be done with old glass and a bit of duct tape. One can rarely see a better example of the basic truth in photography: it was, it is, and alway will be 90% author and 10% equipment.
and another basic truth : ductape fixes everything
Owen: I think the one that wasn't done, that stands out in my mind, is a still taken from the Kennedy assassination where his wife Jackie is reaching back to help the Secret Service to get onboard the Limo.
Lego is as much fun for grown ups as it is for kidsThey even have a series of architecture (plus matching prices) that definitely puts the boxes out of range of mere kids.
Kids pretend a lot of stuff that isn't "fun" when you start to think about it.*bang* you're dead ...
justin23: assuming of course it comes to your device... I love my android phone but OS updates take forever to reach the phone after android has been released.
Except that app is native to 4.4Meaning : it may not be possible to install it in earlier versions. It will depend on the minimum Android version requirement for that app. I seriously doubt Android 2.x systems will get it.//--The fact that Google allows that much tweaking of their OS makes it a platform issue.If Google enforced and enabled faster updates we would have less fragmentation and a more stable environment.Of course that would mean that hardware companies would have nothing left to compete.
vladimir vanek: gopro killer? :D you must be kidding, guys. at least you're very funny in your conclusions. :)and "...the aerodynamic iON camera line features a number of significant industry firsts, including Wi-Fi connectivity..." - well, I'm not sure what industry do you mean. is your date set correctly? hello, it's 2013! :)
yeah, the Garmin Virb Elite also has Wifithey even have a built-in screen and GPS.Contour has similar features to the iOn and some kind of wireless interface.It's pretty much standard on a decent action cam.
Bob Janes: ..but isn't it just fantastic that this sort of stuff is even possible?
If there's a flaw, we'll find it.call it crap, tell them where to shove itflame, flame, baby;)
chiumeister: puzzling why folks continue to use $10 filters on expensive lenses.
As if a high price tag automagically makes them better ...
designdef: Ultra-thin, ultra-cheap filters existed long before this lens was designed. So why didn't Canon design for the 'worst case' scenario'?
one really has to wonder indeed.It surely must be possible to add enough spacing between lens and filter to prevent issues with all but the most weird filters?
Then again ... they do insist on different diameter filters with no recognizable 'standard' either.Why can I switch lenses, but not filters on the same bloody thing?
hiro_pro: i am always surprised at the negativity in the comments section of these reviews. i am guessing that no one here post processes their DSLR images? really?
these are quick and dirty cheap tools for cheap cameras (cell phones). they allow us to take a picture, adjust it to capture the feeling of the scene and post it without having to go home and down load the image to our computer.
to those of you who think this stuff looks like cr*p you should go back and scan some of your old film images. you will be a little humbler about how far cellphone photography has come.
the only difference between these filters and the ones used in Photoshop is that the latter cost more.So obviously those must be better, right ? ;)
UnderDriven: The key issue here is that this was a photo of a work of art, not some buildings on a street. The artist deserves to be compensated if someone else is making a profit from his work. This also applies to photographers who are the creators of the art work (not taking a photo of someone else's art).
As to whether the government should own the rights to monuments, if the contract was written in their favor they would own the rights. However, if the government makes contracts which does not give them the rights, too bad. In any case, had the government negotiated with the correct copyright holder up front they would have had to pay a lot less--again, they blew it and they have to pay.
The photographer didn't do anything wrong. The real culprit was Mr. Lecky of Cooper-Lecky Architects who claimed to own the copyright. None of this would have happened if he had not falsely claimed ownership. He should be sued, but greed is probably not sufficient grounds, unfortunately...
I wonder what would happen the moment someone classified a building as 'art'.Would Google have to remove it from Google Maps and/or pay money to the architect ?
A cow isn't compensated despite the fact that both the farmer and restaurant profit from its product.So why should an artist be treated any different ?Let them milk artists. A true artist will simply create more art.
CameraCarl: At least it wasn't in the US where they would have used shotguns or AK47s to try to shoot the balloons out of the sky.
if it was in the USA (*) they'd have made it into a reality tv-show ...or they would have sued LG into bankruptcy because they allowed idiots to act like idiots.
CameraLabTester: Now, now...
Lets all be civilized in these things...
LG did the right thing by providing medical compensation, BUT there should be other things done as well:
1. Fire the AD company that came up with the idea and blacklist it in the industry.
2. Sentence the creative AD director who approved the scheme.
3. Charge the BB gun and spear users with cheating and endangering the public.
4. Fine LG for nuisance in a public place.
5. As an act of contrition, LG should give away 100 G2 phones to DPR comment posters for being silly enough to react and comment on their article at DPR.
why punish just the company when the people participating where a bunch of greedy idiots ?
Seriously. Using a gun or a spear just for a chance to get a mere gadget ?What kind of a moron thought that was a good idea to begin with ?
aris14: We need cheaper equipment of top quality.That said IMO right now is the 4/3 format that allows us to have top IQ and glasses with reasonable cost. I think that current technology suggests that today we can have at least equal with top 24 x 36 mm sensors a couple of years ago. The 24 x 36 sensors may remain for special projects and demands along with larger ones.In less than 5-6 years a sensor of let's say 12 x 18 should deliver the same IQ in every aspect with today's top guns...The rest is marketing...
It is down to marketing.'Better' technology has rarely won.
Better/Clever marketing combined with convenience wins practically all of the time.
It's why we've got iPods with crappy audio instead of bit perfect reproductions of music.It's why we've got mp3 instead of FLACIt's why the world has accepted jpegs as an image standard at all.
It's why many people rely on their mobile phones for pictures.
mathew crow: News of the obvious. Consumers in general are sheep; they'll buy whatever the marketing dept tells them too.
It's not like he was not going to say : "that thing we make is a bad choice ..."
vFunct: People need to STOP buying so much damn equipment.
All the "photographers" need to learn the art of photography before learning the technicals of photography.
Sell ALL of your camera gear, learn to take consistently beautiful shots on your cell phone, and THEN start to worry about your gear.
There is no excuse for anyone to care about gear, when they can't even take a beautiful shot on their cell phones.
completely ignoring your equipment is as stupid as obsessing about it.Yes, a smart phone can work.But if you find yourself cursing at the blasted thing then you might have hit the limit if your gear and should be looking for an upgrade.
taktak91: It's all about right camera for the right needs. If you don't absolutely require a DSLR, and you don't want to lug all that weight around, you'll be better off with a mirrorless. I take a DSLR with me only when I feel that I'll be taking once-in-a-lifetime shots. Anything less, I'll take a mirrorless.
It's also about understanding that every camera is a compromise ...
montoniphotography: It concerns me that there are mediocre photographers on the radar simply because of their marketing
And this is new how ?The world runs on mediocre talents with an eye for marketing.
The ones who are truly talented tend to lack skill in marketing.Ever wondered why most famous artists often were penniless when they were alive ?
Sessility: This doesn't make any sense to me1. I'm a maximiser, do my research, and pretty much always very happy with my purchases for years. I happily held on to my previous camera for 10(!) years. A year ago, after a lot of research again, I bought an X-Pro1, which was/is perfect for my requirements/needs - I couldn't be more happy with it (and that's even before applying the latest firmware updates! ;-)
There will be better cameras in the future, no doubt, but I bought the best for me *at the time*, and that's enough to make me happy with it for years to come (like with my last camera).
2. Most of these photos don't look like "street photography" to me, but perhaps I have a different understanding of the genre?
PS: The only thing that does make sense is the recommendation of the X100S.
There is a big difference between doing research for a reasonable target and a perfect one.
A maximizer goes above and beyond whatever is reasonable.
Besides, most of us have a little of both.I doubt anyone is at the extreme end of the scale.