justin23: assuming of course it comes to your device... I love my android phone but OS updates take forever to reach the phone after android has been released.
The reason why we have the most up to date ROM's is due to, once the OEM skin is applied, its in most cases released to the public(ROM developers). They make an updated rom.
In most cases, if you have a verizon phone and its a year old. Dont expect an update for it. Verizon will receive the update but will not release it because they want you to WANT upgrade phones.With phone hardware plateauing, we are going to have to put ALOT of pressure on the phone companies to release the updates.
As of right now the LG G2 will receive 4.4 in november. The Note 3 shortly after. The moto X in the middle somewhere. and the one in january. After that its no longer the OEM's. The skins have been applied and the carries need to release the updates to all phones.
its not a platform issue. Have you noticed that all of the pure NEXUS devices now have 4.4 kit kit.Thats because the updates come directly from google. Just like apple. BUT with Phones besides the nexuses...you have to wait for the OEM to skin it(sense, touchwiz, blur) THEN you have to wait for the carries to add their bloat, THEN you have to wait for the carrier to release the update! In many cases(verizon), they receive the update and all is ready to go. It just never gets pushed. So for alot of devices, verizon just doesnt release the update! OR they take 6 month to release it. How is this known? Because ill be running that update for 6 months before verizon finally releases it via a leak. It has nothing to do with android. its strictly the OEM's and MAINLY the phones carriers, verizon being the worst.
Menneisyys: Absolutely great. Love the 4K, the double-shot, the 8M capture during video shooting, the 720p120 / 1080p60 and the stunning panorama. I'll definitely get the Note 3.
The US version DOES have 4k video.
From the looks of it, the sensor size increase did not help at all.
OMG, i didnt see this coming at all......who knew...
I think the QX10 is great, the QX100 is to large.
Ken Aisin: This is what the P7700 should have been.
I agree. This is a very nice camera. I want this camera, but with a 24-200 zoom. Im tried of having to choose between reach or 24mm.
Soon enough someone will make a camera with everything. Even a fast, sharp 24-120 zoom would do. Im hopeful of the XZ-3 or LX6 if there is one.
They are getting closer though!
Im going to get this phone. Screw an Iphone 5S! Blah!
ThaPeastenator: No thanks, I'd rather buy a Nikon D600.
This! With lens!
highwave: popcorn... soda ...
*pop* may the equivalency wars BEGIN!
Well atleast its constant...should be a short war that will equal 5.6. there...done and done....
NowHearThis: The Zeiss looks fantastic.
I agree! Something I would love to have! Ive wanted a zoom like this since I had a A300 with the 16-80ZA for a short period
I dont like how they named it a Tessar though....
Man....the GX7 is completely on par with the NEX6 at all iso's and a TAD bit ahead of the EP-5 at 6400 and 12800.
Thats pretty dam impressive!
marleni: The important question for many: has Canon improved also the OPTICAL quality of the new EF-S 55-250mm version ?? The older version is sadly not a very sharp lens, I knew some who turned to this lens as their first tele, but were quite disappointed and gave it back...
white shadow, $1000 vs a 350 lens is not a fair comparison. Also some people never will "upgrade" to full frame.
Jim: The Nikon V1/J1 series doesn't pass the test of obviousness. Interchangable lenses with a small sensor just don't go well together. If you're going to change lenses you might as well have a larger sensor without much of a penalty in size. This camera, like the Pentax Q7, just makes no sense. When the price point is factored in, it just lame. It's almost as if Nikon didn't do any target marketing before releasing this product line.
Cannibalizing your own sales, is better then someone else doing it.
gp2003gt: I just saw from another review site and I only see a slight improovement in high ISO (6400 ISO) over the 60D.
Looks like I will have to wait and save more money and get an entry level full frame camera.
White shadow.....*sighs* Im often at 6400/12800 at house parties shooting at 1.4/2.0, still barely stops motion (1/125). Your low light is not the same as everyone elses.
When I used to shoot dance i would have to use fast primes over a 2.8 zooms @6400 because i couldnt stop motion with it. F2 or faster. Full frames do allow the use of high ISO, but the DOF gets so thin it becomes the same really. But it does allow the use of 2.8 zooms @ 2.8
Menneisyys: Unless Google subsidizes its price (as they did with the Nexus 4), this phone will be a flop.
No sane people would pay $200 on / $600 off contract for a mid-specced device. That's the price of the significantly(!!!!) better Samsung GS4.
Now, for $300 off contract (as is the Nexus 4), this thing would fly off the shelves...
The rumors said it would be $300 for 16gb and $349 for the 32gb. But....that didnt happen.
There is no reason why ANY phone should cost $600Tablets dont even cost that much with similar specs any longer. The screen is the most expensive thing in a phone!
Mikhail Tal: DPR You do not have a great track record recently of reviewing mirrorless cameras. The GF5, G5, E-PL5, NEX-5R and NX 20 seem to have been skipped completely, and the GF6, G6 and NEX-3N have been available for a few months with still no review. I'm not even counting the E-PL6 but you haven't reviewed that yet either. In contrast you've reviewed literally every DSLR released so far except the newish K-50, as far as I can tell, and almost every premium compact and even some cheap compacts.
So with that all being said, I strongly request that you give the GX7 review VERY HIGH priority. On paper it is the best mirrorless camera to date, and one of the best if not the best consumer-level cameras of any variety to date. It deserves your quick attention, a whole lot more than, say, the Canon T5i did.
how was the touch screen?