Suckers that think they are "buying a product yet to be built" when they give money on kickstarter deserve to have their money lost from them.
Hopefully they learned a bit of the lesson from the activity, and the money wasn't completely wasted.
Zapirian: With more and more devices supporting Wi-FI direct and other wireless transfer methods surely this is a dying market?
Yes and no. The Panasonic P&S I just got has wifi direct, but for some incredibly short-sighted reason, it will not allow you to transfer raw files.
As long as OEMs are half-arsed with their implementations, products like these will still have value.
I like the novel placement of the zoom toggle (for cameras that don't have manual zoom rings) and the idea of the "temporary zoom out" button is quite clever too.
The rest of it sounds like garbage.
Papi61: This is a slippery slope. One could argue that simply sharpening a photo is already a manipulation...
And BTW, what's the difference between removing something from a photo and not putting it in the frame in the first place?
Finally, this is really rich, coming from the American mainstream media, the phoniest of the phonies in the world, people who censor and distort the news every day. "Journalists" without an inch of integrity who lie and self-aggrandize themselves all the time. Oh yeah, it's not just the couple of schmucks who recently got caught...
Meh. The only thing the are differentiating is that "traditional" editing techniques (lens focal length, aperture size, composition, etc.) are acceptable. Where as "new" editing techniques has been deemed unacceptable.
But yeah, saying, "Excuse me, could you please move out of the way?" before pressing the shutter is completely different than editing something out after the fact.
Obviously, there is a market for higher res sensors... though, a small one.
I would be interested to see just how well I could shoot, hand held, with a 750mm equivalent P&S pocket camera.
I think I would appreciate the zoom toggle on the thumb area (as shown here) more than around the shutter button.
"Is that the new 200 f2 I read about a while ago?... ...What? It's a wide angle?"
Move on with your life photog. You're 20+ years too late to strike a claim here.
gusmahler: Disagree with the analysis of the 50 mm lens. It's a great purchase for crop cameras. On Nikon it's the equivalent of 75 mm. On Canon, it's equivalent to 80 mm. Both are decent portrait focal lengths. IOW, 50 mm is a great portrait lens for crop cameras that is still usable as a walkaround lens for a FF camera.
The "will I upgrade to FF" question really comes into play at 35mm, though. Especially with Nikon. Because Nikon makes two 35 mm lenses, an inexpensive ($200), but crop-only lens. And a $500 lens that can be used on both crop and FF bodies.
Odd comment about lens costs. I decided to buy FF lenses to save money.
First, I got a used Nikkor 35-70 2.8D lens for $200 to put on my APS-C camera for full body children and waist up adult studio shooting. But then it becomes a useful walk-around lens when put on a FF body. My 70-200vr is a great head and shoulders studio lens on FF, but then becomes a great sports and field lens when mounted on the D300.
I suppose I could have bought a (new at the time as there were no used ones available) Nikkor 17-55 for 7x the cost, which wouldn't have really done what I wanted it to do, and then bought a new lens to put on a FF camera at a later date.
Same for the 70-200vr. I guess I could have waited a couple of years for a 3rd party lens maker (Sigma 50-150) to release a lens that wouldn't have done what I wanted it to do on a crop body, then bought another one for FF duties. Seems wasteful though.
But according to you, I didn't make much sense when I bought those lenses...
RMGoodLight: I Agree with this article. Fullframe is not suitable for everyone.
I tried the sony Alpha FF cameras myself and from my experience I miss 1 critical point in most of this discussions: useful aperture and equivalence. With mFT and APSC I'm used to F1.8 and F1.4 lenses. After using this terrific Zeiss 55mm F1.8 wide open at a Sony A7R I had to commit I had to rethink which apertures to use. At F1.8 FF optics have a very thin DOF. Misfocus is more critical then with F1.8 at APSC or mFT.
After some trial-and-error I think that F2.0 or better F2.4 gives much more usable DOF at FF cameras. That explains why there are so many FF lenses starting at F2.0 or F2.8. F1.8 gives very nice image results at FF cameras but you need a good AF or a steady hand to get good use of it. And thats the tricky part of the quote from above "with the same shutter speed and f-number, a larger sensor ... allows better image quality." You will not use FF with the same ISO and F-number as APSC or mFT.
Hear Hear b0k3h! Right on the money.
People's obsession with razor thin dof usually points to their otherwise lack of photographic capability.
"Oh noes... I need to make this snapshot of this person standing awkwardly in the middle of nothing special in mid-day sun to look 'professional' what to do? I know, I load it up with tones of blur!"
I think this article made some sense with point 1, but then it just got silly with point 2.
I'd be more concerned with the drive overheating with all that rubber around it.
maxnimo: carpeted concrete floor?
I've seen carpets with a lush, soft, 6 inch thick pile.
Half a foot of pile? You'd lose a shoe in 3 steps...
Flashback: Pop-up flash yet again. ugh...
Is it just me, or does anybody else think the over hanging flash, just completely spoils the look of a fine camera?
It's just you.
Nobody buys these consumer slrs for the looks.
Suntan: Bitorrent Sync and half a brain will get you all of that and more for no dollars a year.
I don't have this need. So I don't know how to make everything so extremely "SEAMLESS" that it would satisfy you. Sounds like you should call Apple.
I would have to think that anyone who has that pressing of a desire to look at pictures on a big screen (aside from just handing their cell phone to a person and saying "see!") already has some form of system set up to access their images/videos.
I fail to see a market for this device that hasn't already scratched this itch.
Sorry, I don't. I don't really do much of anything with Apple products.
But what you describe is pretty easy to do on an android tablet/home computer. I'm sure Apple has similar options. I would assume bitorrent sync has an apple app. If you can transfer your pictures from your camera to your tablet, then you can transfer them on to your home computer with that.
As for selecting/editing/ranking, you can do it on your apple tablet if you have an app for it. Or you can transfer all of the pictures to your home computer first, then play with them by directly accessing the remote computer on your tablet via Splashtop or some lesser VNC application.
Vlad S: I can't see how light source less than 1 inch wide could possibly be discussed in terms of softness. Without a modifier, you'd have to keep it just 1 inch from the subject. What's the point?
He meant, "... and won't be the right one for MOST every thing."
Mal69: I miss the days when people just took photographs, now its all about who can do the best job using Photoshop applications, it feels a little like cheating to me as i never know if the photograph is natural or heavily changed using the computer.
Meh. I appreciate the final result. I don't care if it takes effort to get there.
These aren't forensic shots submitted at trial here. They can differ from reality.