Oops! I believe I misunderstood the subject ;-)
Rupert Bottomsworth: Interesting idea but ultimately, quite a boring video.
Just be glad that he chose the Danish postal service ... or the video might have been considerably longer.
sosmix: There is something wrong with people who enjoy killing animals. If you want to shoot animals, do it with a camera.
I for one will not be buying Nikon in the future and any wildlife photographer should consider Nikon's position on this issue very seriously.
I'm not a hunter - nor will I ever be one ... but while I have no Nikon gear, I certainly won't let their manufacturing of rifle scopes stand in the way of me buying, say, a Nikon D800E at some point in time.
If a pretty unknown company, and not necessarily primarily an optical company, can develop and manufacture an adapter that good, imagine what Canon, Nikon, Sony etc. could do!
So: Why don't they?!
I'd grab that new 70-400 if only because it isn't silver any more. But I'm reluctant to buy more lenses after Sony changed their hotshoe.
If they think they can persuade me to change with them, they may find that I change from them.
ZAnton: Please, correct the name"F4.5.6 G SSM" to "F4-5.6 G SSM"Concerning lenses: Sony sells non IS lenses at the price of Canon/Nikon IS/VR lenses. Inbody IS gives at best - 2 stop, usually 0,5-1 Stop, whereas optical IS - at least 3 stop. So I don't think it is wise to get Sony at least at current prices.
Dream on, ZAnton. And move on.
I wonder how Olympus fail to sell any significant number of SLRs, when the EM-5 is apparently the best camera of 2012.
I hope it means someone will start manufacturing rear mounted wideangle converters - apparently a Kodak patent that never resulted in any actual product.
It would enable the use of full frame lenses on APS-C cameras with no crop factor. In fact, with the proper converter, it would be possible to use full frame lenses on, say, the Nikon 1 series or other small sensor formats.
Contrary to teleconverters, it would actually gain one or more f-stops, light being concentrated over a smaller area.
Francis Carver: These greedy photographers have finally managed to shoot themselves in the foot. Who is going to be idiotic enough to commission a pro photographer, pay them a fee for taking some pix -- and then have to beg the person who took the photo to sell them a provisional right to use the photo taken?
Photographers must be from a different mold than some other visual artists. For instance, I never yet heard of a cinematographer hired to shoot a $100,000,000 budget movie claim that they actually own the copyright to the finished picture just because they were paid a hefty sum to shoot the film.What's next, I wonder? The sound guy who recorded the dialog on "The Hobbit" will also be having full copyright for the finished movie? And if not, why not?
In some countries, when a TV series is re-run, the actors get paid a certain percentage of the salary they could have earned if it was a new series being made. It's probably to compensate for their potential loss of income, and the same could be said for the photographers.
fenceSitter: I guess we have to be grateful that Sony pretends to be listening at last, but this update for the NEX-7 is disappointing nonetheless.
The bracketing is still useless because you can't combine it with delayed shutter or remote, so you can't use it with long exposure times on a tripod. Have these people never taken pictures themselves?
And why they didn't take the opportunity to let the user re-assign the movie button instead of merely disabling it?
I guess it would have been hard work. This update looks like a cheap and half-assed quick fix, the sort of thing that I'd come up with after one afternoon to pacify the customer "until the real thing comes along."
Having had to wait almost one year for this "update" doesn't elevate my opinion of Sony very much.
I'm sure you can combine bracketing with remote shutter release, just not with the supplied infrared remote. The old-fashioned cable release works independently of other settings.
Rooru S: This lens will be appreciated more by Sony or Pentax users. Canon and Nikon users now have more options.
I think it'll be appreciated by anyone who doesn't own a money tree, but would like a TS lens anyway.
Gary Dean Mercer Clark: Happy Days! Finally a TS lens for thr Sony Alpha line
Unless the price is exorbitant (> USD 1,500), I'm certainly getting one.
love_them_all: The Canon one is also +/- 12mm shift. I wonder if they could keep the current image circle size but make a higher range in shift movement - for APS-C sensors.
There's also the diameter of the mount itself to consider. If you look at the rear of an ordinary lens, there's never a lot of space to move around in.
Sad Joe: I think this is cool but having used multi-shot with film (via a Nikon in the 1980's) and via layers (etc) in Photoshop this is a great time saver. However I doubt that it will become main stream but I could see it as a fad for a few months until everyone gets bored of it.
I'm with Ken Rockwell - if I could magic one old idea up for my next Canon it would be Eye Control which was fantastic - NONE of the current DSLR range has this - dammed useful and much missed. You look, the camera focusing where you are looking - fantastic!
Yes, it's one of those things. Like HDR. "Wow, impressive!", then "I'm bored". It will, of course, be used in the future, but soon it wont turn any heads.
FartIng: my Konica Minolta 7d did this - (5MP and over 10 yrs old!)
I had a Dynax 7D, but I don't recall this function. Maybe you're thinking of multiflash, but that probably wouldn't work very well in a lit arena at the distances involved.
Debankur Mukherjee: Why do you require all these gimicks in Camera body when you have softwares with you including Photoshop......
Looking at the image quality, lens quality is hardly an issue for this feature.
Klipsen: Just add the duty and tell customers it's the price they must pay to have video in their SLRs - whether they want it or not.
In any case, how often do you really record more than 30 minutes in one take?
And if you do, wouldn't a dedicated camcorder be a better choice?
For a concert or a live performance, don't you think a camcorder is a better choice?
Just add the duty and tell customers it's the price they must pay to have video in their SLRs - whether they want it or not.
Edmond Leung: Although this is not a high-end model, Sony should also consider using the OLED viewfinder for this camera. The color tearing effect of the phase-sequential LCD viewfinder really makes the eyes very uncomfortable; compared that with their newly developed OLED viewfinder, the new one eliminates the uncomfortable to the eyes. Since Sony is focusing on electronic viewfinder, they should use the one which is good for the human eyes; and prevents any potential harmful to the eyes.
Yes. If they were only probing the market to assess the interest in EVFs, they could be forgiven for cutting corners, but since they've committed both themselves and their users to EVFs, they ought not to use obsolete technology.
RadPhoto: There is more Sony cameras than lenses.
There's a considerably larger number of current lenses than of current bodies.
The total number of lens designs also exceeds that of camera body designs by a wide margin.