Sonyshine: Sony needs to cut the price if they don't want to lose significant sales to the Panasonic.
Half? Ummm. Keep on dreaming. Best Buy has the RX10 for $999 ($100 more than the Panny). There is less than 0.01% chance they will drop the price to $500 to compete with a $900 camera.
Really like the colors on the Panny videos more than the colors on the Sony video. Both are competent cameras, but at $899, the Panny just seems like the best value.
AngryCorgi: That fieldscope is gauranteed to be poop in terms of IQ. Like a $50 ebay "telephoto lens".
6x4s?? Low standard there. Yeah, probably....same standard we hold entry-level P&S super-zooms to.
That fieldscope is gauranteed to be poop in terms of IQ. Like a $50 ebay "telephoto lens".
Expensive but nice!
gregbartgis: I really do wish you'd also include shooting results with 4/3 sensors. They're becoming ubiquitous and there are quite a few of us who would love to have such a lens for use on our Oly's and Panny's. If there are compatibility problems, please explain. If the lens is just too unsharp to be used on anything smaller than APS-C, please inform. I love the idea of having a zoom with the reach of one the equivalent of 300 - 1200mm on FF. There are presently no supertelephoto lenses of very appreciable focal length being made for small sensor cameras. This one would be a treat.
Yeah, Brendon is right. Why would the parent companies make an adapter that allows you to purchase OTHER PEOPLE's LENSES??
This lens is not offered in MFT mount. They couldn't test it there without using an adapter of some sort, which could skew the performance and be unfair to the product.
ThePhilips: "[...] the company responsible for such iconic products as the Box Brownie and Kodachrome [...]"
On a slow news day, DPR actually can actually review some of the classical cameras like Brownie or Leica or Contax. Having them in the studio comparator would be interesting.
P.S. I hope one still can buy film?
P.P.S. That reminds. We are obsessing about the IQ of sensors. But before that people were obsessing about the IQ of films. Review of the films is a long overdue.
I agree. Film reviews would be great, as would slide scanner reviews. I'm not holding my breath, because it could be deemed to be falling to far outside the lines of "digital photography", but getting it hear DOES have a digital process, so it could be seen as relevent.
tkbslc: I might finally cave.
That's about 5 years of $10 a month to add up to the retail cost of buying the software retail before.
This is the price I argued that PS-CC alone should have been. The inclusion of LR-CC is just a bonus. I paid $650 way back whenever for CS2, so I figured that amount over 4-5 years made sense, but that amount over 2 was absurd. Now the price point takes 5 years and 5 months to equal what I paid for CS2, so I'm happy. I think if Adobe had the good sense to offer it at that price from the word "go", there would have been considerably less backlash to the subscription model they invoked.
AngryCorgi: They already did offer this...I signed up for it months ago at 9.99 a month (with a one year commitment)
When I signed up in April, no prior product registry was required. They gave "upgrade-esque" offers for users with recent versions of CS, but my CS2 invalidated me from that offer.
Seems to work really well. Very nice.
They already did offer this...I signed up for it months ago at 9.99 a month (with a one year commitment)
It'll be $599 in 6-8 months.
Expat Nomad: Having seen a non-working demo (recent photo show) and held it in my hands, the grip works surprisingly well. The control points are easily reached from your right hand.
The screen and non-grip portion of the camera are thin. The battery compartment is significantly bigger and well away from the tripod mount.
On the 30mm version, the actual lens diameter is noticeably bigger than the DP2.
I'm interested in what software is released for raw files and only then will judge the output. Still, at least we now have an idea. No D4s.
No D4s? Uh...No Canon S120 either. I mean, the samples at ISO100 show disgusting chroma noise, just like the OLD generation foveon sensors. It's time to call this technology what it is - a dead end. It simply isn't getting better. Higher resolution, still a noisy noisy camera.
I guess some things never change...samples show purple and green noise in shadows/blacks at ISO100. *sigh*
I can't wait to see how this new sensor design performs. I really hope its better than the old ones in terms of SNR.
The raw images are considerably better than what the JPG engine produces on this camera. I wouldn't even shoot JPG with this beast.
Wowzers. If this MOS sensor performs like it should, this will undercut Sony on price and offer nearly twice the focal range. Pretty freaking awesome!
He was fun to read now and then. Long Live FCW!