itsastickup: And the in-bad-faith 3rd party battery issue?
I was wondering the same.
Sigma and Nikon seem locked in an arms war, with Nikon's camera firmware updates crippling Sigma lenses' AF, and Sigma's lens firmware updates undoing the sabotage.
See here if this is news to you:http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/11/19/sigma-issues-advisory-on-lens-compatibility-with-nikon-d5300
The Nikon updates have also blocked use of 3rd-party batteries. Pure hostility toward the end user.
I respect Nikon's heritage and technical prowess, but their recent contempt for their own paying customers is despicable.
Peter Gregg: What a difference a day makes. The new images are representative of what I expect - and was hoping for - from this lens. It is pro level and the results certainly look like it. It seems on par in quality with the 85L II by eyeballing these images. Having both lenses in hand would confirm it, or show the deficiencies. The advantage of the 4/3 system is equal light as full frame with a little deeper range in depth of field. For most folks this is an advantage making full frame a disadvantage because of the razor thin depth of field. For most purposes this is a big plus, except for those that are looking for an ultra thin range in their DOF envelope.
"what do you think Canon built the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 for then?"
To sell to people with more money than sense.
Blur has its place, no doubt, but a solid flash or three is a better investment.
But flashes require knowledge, experience, experimentation and creativity to use well, so they scare people.
jon404: As a Pentax owner, I tend to look on Nikons as ugly and not very ergonomic. Practically, the collapsible lens sounds like a mess for quick shooting, since you have to push yet another button to expand it.
But -- maybe of great benefit for beginning photographers -- 24 MP, cheap! You'll be able to crop like mad and rescue a lot of images. Hmmnn. I wonder if Nikon owns an external hard drive company? It's terabyte time, new users!
Also, regarding your fourth point, I suspect the target demographic for this model would be soccer mums. And I don't think they share your enthusiasm for the subtleties of perspective.
Moot point. Interesting, but moot.
Dammit nicolaiecostel, you were off to a good start!
Then you went and said this:
"I don't have the time to make a test and show you a side by side comparison"
That means you forfeit the argument.
That means you lose.
Tonio Loewald: Samsung is like the (1990s) Microsoft of hardware — in a good way. They produce a shoddy imitation v1 and then iterate until they get it right. With the new premium zoom they're actually making their rivals look stupid. Interesting times.
Define "better mount" please. I don't know what that means.
Combatmedic870: Wow, nice lenses! Gotta give it to them they have a decent lens line up!They were the first to release a mirrorless apsc. Now the first to release a fast standard zoom. The F2-2.8 may make people to take them alittle serious.
Samsung were ABSOLUTELY NOT the first to release a digital mirrorless APS-C camera.
Epson R-D1, announced 11th March 2004Ricoh GXR, announced 10th November 2009
Although it's not strictly APS-C, we may also consider:Leica M8, announced 14th September 2006
A nitpick, to be sure, but I won't let it pass.
Karl Summers: What's with the red ring? We supposed to think it's a Canon L?
"Still, it has a red ring. I will buy this for my Canon camera."
What exactly is the most condescending comment I can post here that remains within the bounds of acceptability on these boards?
electrophoto: Why? JUST WHY?
Continued customer demand.
CarVac: I want a small 28mm equiv for aps-c dslrs.
Not some huge semi-fast prime (77mm filter threads!).
Not some huger, faster (!) zoom.
I'll even take f/4 if it's small.
Either way, more options are better.
What you want is a Pentax DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited pancake!
It's 31mm equiv. in FoV. Don't want to comment on DoF.
garyknrd: By today's standards these cameras are extremely cheap. I see new ones going for 780-900 dollars. Which makes it a good deal if AF was fixed. I had the old K-5 and it was awful. And that is being kind. I would plop down that much money in a heart beat if I thought it was a big improvement to the original. But everyone I have talked to said save my money? For the kind of photography I like anyway. As a consequence I am selling all my Pentax gear. Just a shame to wast such good Sigma glass on a poor performing camera.
Sorry to hear about your troubles with the K-5.
Fortunately---and let's keep this quiet because it's still unofficial---I have it from reliable sources that Pentax is working on what is basically a revised K-5 with an updated autofocus module. Rumour is that they're thinking of naming it the K-5 II, although this isn't set in stone just yet.
Hopefully, when it arrives on the market, it'll address whatever AF issues you are experiencing.
Mirko123: Great review, as always!However the timing has made it somewhat redundant.
Redundant how? It's a current model, is it not?
Not everyone buys their cameras in the first few weeks after launch. Personally I like to track firmware updates and after-sale support for a few months (at least) before I throw my money at something. Hence, I held off buying any Fuji X-Trans cameras until the supporting tech had matured and third-party RAW support was well and truly settled.
SeeRoy: Yet another viewfinder-less box (without even an optional over-priced EVF) for people who like to stand around waving a camera at arms' length. It can't be long, surely, before phones have completely displaced these things in this market sector.
Bend your elbows.
The camera is no longer at arms' length.
AngryCorgi: It's available in pink. That pretty much says it all.
AngryCorgi, improving the product in fundamental ways is a fine endeavour. But that wasn't your complaint. It was the pink outside that got your panties in a knot.
Must all cameras be black?
NIK11: Good to see more choice, but where's the built-in EVF?
NIK11, I don't disagree, but I doubt it'll materialise on the budget NX-thousands line (NX1000, NX1100, NX2000).
Perhaps in future offerings in the NX-hundreds line (NX200, NX210, NX300), which is also pretty compact.
Samsung is free to produce different lines of products at different price points and boasting different features and capabilities.
You are free to choose the best one for you. As Andy says, the NX10/11/20 line is the built-in EVF offering.
Assuming you want APS-C or larger and an EVF, built-in or available as an attachment, you're looking at:
- Samsung's NX20 (or an older model) - Sony NEX6/7 - Sony's α range (inc. FF α99!) - Sony RX1 - Fuji X100, X100S, X-Pro1, X-E1 - Ricoh GXR w/ APS-C module - the new Leica M
Choice indeed! Now please ease off the snark.
(No doubt I've missed one, feel free to jump in if you think of something.)
Awww, why so serious?
Samsung cordially invites you to lighten up.
Heleno Costa: Please can someone explain what causes the photos technically different sensors of different cameras LUMIX ? Not interested in video.But in practical terms what differentiates these cameras in photography?
Self-correction: The G6 does not have multi-aspect. The GH2 does.
Damn. Would have been a nice selling point.
I think Heleno might be referring to the multi-aspect sensor of the GH2, and now the G6.
It's a larger sensor, but no single photo uses the entire surface. So a square format photo, for example, can be larger (taller) than one simply cropped from a 4:3 rectangle.
DarylK: Not a big deal, but as the owner of a K-5, I'd be interested to see if the image quality is much different/improved between an old K-5 and the new K-5II.
Stepping away from tripods and studio scenes, I read that when Pentax removed the AA filter, they actually removes it. By contrast, Nikon merely substituted a compensating one in the D800E.
One net result is that the sensor assembly in the K-5IIs has less mass than that in the K-5II. As a delightful little bonus, this reduced mass makes the on-sensor shake reduction more effective. From what I've heard, about 1 stop's worth of performance better.
I'd love to see that tested.
PaulSnowcat: Looks like SOONY NEX... Why buy something like NEX, when I can buy NEX itself? :)
NX predates NEX, but the early NX bodies---NX10, NX5, NX11---all bore the mini-DSLR form factor. The first rectangular-bodied NX was the NX100, and the NEX3 and NEX5 did indeed beat it to market.
Ricoh's GXR predated both.