Jonath: 20, 24, 35, 50...
interesting they chose the 20mm before 85 or even 135 as many have speculated over the past few months. Certainly pretty unique, especially with it being so bright, I wonder if that was the driver to do it rather than the more obvious 85mm? Sigma's 85mm is already a very good lens, so maybe that was part of the decision too?
Either way, likely to be an excellent lens if it follows the quality of the others so far released.
Probably fewer legal hurdles going with a unique design.In my previous industry we would joke about telescope oculars being designed by lawyers instead of optical engineers.
Jim in AZ: The lens looks like a wide field eye piece.
it kind of does. Hope it has good relief. Most wide field's do. Wonder if it will do prime focus, or is the lens fixed? I can't tell from the images if it is through lens or not.
Having worked for at a major "orange" telescope co. at the corporate level, I can say this is a good idea. The critics on this site are wearing their ignorance as a badge of honor. Anyone know if the interface is 0.96, 1.25, or 2 inch. 1.25 is the most common. Maybe they will sell adapters, or is it already using standard threads (t40? 42? been so many years I do not remember). Wonder if it uses Astro stack or if it is able to use the four k video and stack the best shots? What about cooling? Lots of non consumer cameras need to be cooled because it increases light sensivity on film and digital. Wonder if that will make its way to the consumer market?
There are lots of things this could have that would not work on today's smart phones. Trolls, please close your mouths and learn the product before criticizing.
I took my old film camera to a Galaxy game (sorry Seattle) and they would not let me bring my "pro" camera because it was too big.
Got me thinking what if I snuck a mono pod in. SECURITY!Why not create a selfie stick disguised as a walker's cane, that doubles as a mono pod? Could even fill it with the alcoholic Bev of choice. Now THAT's original. Alcohol may effect image quality a bit.
Artist Creates Real Friend by Asking Someone to take picture for her, and they start a conversation...
MustyMarie: The Exposure Latitude test, which I guess tells us some things, but it really 'smacks' of how well 'a terrifically POORLY exposure can be processed - to death' when a 'decent' photographer would have taken a second MUCH better exposed shot or a 'better' photographer would have taken a MUCH better FIRST shot.
If you go look at High ISO exposures, the NX-1 behaves very nicely, which is what a 'decent' photographer would be using NOT +6 ev !!
Maybe fun to do test, but IMO very pathetic for anyone to actually USE this type of technique, at least once you know how lousy it works (for most cams!!!) !!
I think Musty was joking. I hope so anyway, especially the part about getting a second chance when sometimes you just are not that lucky.
Also reporters subjects do not always wait for good light. Sometimes you take what you can get.
tom1234567: If you don't buy the S/lens no point in buying the camera.the other lens which are not S/ don't get good reviews.
I have not read a good review on any of the cheaper Lens for the NX1 in other words there CRAP
I would buy the camera but the S/lens are far to expensive,have to wait 6mths until the price drops or Pentax brings out something better than K3
It is mirrorless. What about third party glass?
shademaster: for all the "arm-chair" pros out there complaining about lack of glass, I imagine the *real* pros are very happy with: i) fast standard zoom, ii) fast tele zoom, iii) fast portrait lens for 95% of their work. FWIW, as an amateur, the 30mm + 45mm + 85mm makes a great arsenal. I don't know what you "we need more glass…. it's all about the system" people want, really.
Those same people go to exhibits and say "your camera takes nice photos." (from the comic "What the Duck")
SomethingBeautiful: Not one thing is sharp in this picture.
Any time you shoot through that much atmosphere, that is to be expected.
Honey, did you remember to feed the trolls?
Tonkotsu Ramen: How do you not take even one low light shot in all of those samples?
The picture of the sky in low light doesn't count.. because it's a picture of the lit sky..
What's going on over at dpr?
Barny,I also thank you for your explanation.I also second other posters: I would like more low light photos; both at high iso and low iso (using tripod). Remember Fuji's X-10 and its superb low light performance? I am always eager for a camera that can approach that level of performance, and if all test photos took similar subjects in similar light, then comparing one camera to another would be more of an apples to apples (Washington apples of course) experience.Thanks for posting.
Hi Barney,Can you tell me why DPR seems to always gravitate towards bright light shots? I know they were all done in one day, but what about shooting golden hour?
I assume the answer is you intentionally take shots in less than ideal light to push the camera and see what it is capable of doing in less than ideal conditions. Is that a conscience decision? Take the elephant shot for example. Bright light and shadows in one shot?
rikyxxx: 1380 comments!!!Olympus products still grab people attention and that's what drives someone mad...
Google the youtube clip of William Shatner on Saturday Night Live. He is at a trekkie convention, and he tells all the trekkies that are idolizing him to go out and "GET A LIFE."Seeing all of these comments kind of reminds me of that clip. I guess that makes me one of the trekkies. Time for me to get away from my computer and go shoot some more photos.
Here is one version, but it is not the complete one. If I find the full version I will post:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaB_G1WNT70
Jun2: Seriously, I don't look at sports photos that much. I watch games or video summary of games, and read the articles. Photos is the last thing I care about the sports.
and yet you are on a photography website.I don't look at sports photography either, but I appreciate the well shot photos.
tkbslc: They should stick with their unique sensor types. That's what sets them apart.
I also don't get why they would target low end consumers with a cheap body when they only sell expensive lenses.
SHood,I would have to slightly disagree.That is a little like saying the average consumer does not have parents or grand parents (my 100mm ssc was a hand me down from my Dad), and don't even get me started on the quality glass available on the used market (source of my 50mm and 200mm SSC lenses).
I think a lot of people do not even realize the quality of glass at their disposal. It is a shame if it does not get put to good use. The legacy glass market is big business among micro four thirds users. In fact, I got my Olympus pen camera specifically so that I could use my old lenses.
I own a bunch of Canon SSC lenses, which was the predacessor to the L lenses. On my micro four thirds they are spectacular. Imagine what they could do on a Fuji APS-C sensor?
I think that is one demographich to which this camera will appeal to in a major way. That demographic being the user with some quality old glass that they can now dust off and use to its potential.
(unknown member): The problem with many forums today is that they are run and moderated by too many people that are politically correct lunatics that are biased, petty and immature. They like to portray themselves as liberal, fair and openminded but in fact they are the opposite of that. DPreview is guilty of that.
Nathebeach: I am curious if and how comments have contributed to improvements in dpreview and even in product manufacturing.
That is my point. Remember the Toyota Echo? That was the result of Toyata doing exhastive research to see what young people want. They did their survey's at schools and rock concerts and the result was the Echo. More retired people bought it than youts. It screwed up Toyota's target demographic (the idea being that young buyers become repeat buyers). BTW it was a good car, just not stylish.MAYBE more useful info can SOMETIMES be gleaned from comment boards than by conducting expensive market research.