This is a great shame - in order to have effective competition in the camera market we need all the players we can get: the Uk decision sounds more extensive than the German one (ie not just the NX1 but everything).
Just to note - any of these cameras are great - not a lot between them in practical terms.
dr Ate: How can you recommend the Samsung NX1 in the light of recent rumors (unconfirmed) regarding the termination of production of digital cameras by Samsung?
Doesn't stop it being a great camera though, does it?
The RX1rII shots look rather soft in comparison to the A7rII - looking at the hairs on the brush...
Tungsten Nordstein: I like it. Contrived and uncontrived at the same time. Contrived in the sense of a re-enactament. A theatre that at the same time talks about the theatre of self-presentation. Uncontrived in the apparent artlessness of the staging and composition. But then even its artlessness looks paradoxically contrived which makes it doubly satisfying because there appears to be a lot of thought behind its 'banal' anti-photo-art stance.
Well done for looking for the positive..
Biowizard: Sony has always loved compression - look at the investment it put into MiniDisc all those years ago, when the rest of us were trying to get our hands on uncompressed recording solutions.
Performing any kind of lossy compression at the point of original capture is bone-headed beyond belief: once lost, the data can never be recovered.
Poor move, Sony.
..and now we listen to MP3 files, which have far more savage compression that the Atrack3 files used on Minidisk...
When I had the choice (on the a700) I still used cRAW, because I never could see and difference between that and the uncompressed version (I'm told you do have to push the RAW a long way).
I'm not worried about the compression now, but having the option of uncompressed RAW would at least silence the "Would never touch" brigade, and would make good sense for Sony as long as the buffer depth can cope...
Good to see, but the price seems high...
Good to hear this from them before lots of people reporting problems.
Just occasionally you get an outbreak of common sense from legislators!
Road Rocket: The EU is one massive bureaucratic nonsense. There are unelected wasters dreaming up what ever they can think of next. This proposal will cause huge problems to those who worry about such things. In my own case I shall ignore it completely if it becomes law and stick up two fingers to that edifice of greed and incompetence. There was an article in one our local newspapers where it stated the American Declaration of Independence came to around 7,400 words whereas the EU regulations about cabbages came to over 24,000 words.
Actually, these wasters are elected, and even where members of the commission are appointed, they are appointed by elected governments.
Vanitas Photo: You are misunderstanding this... Think it as someone making profit from a photo of your photo or a video of your video, or a video of your photo, etc.
The same here the people who designed those buildings hold copyrights and they should be able to perceive monetization if their work is used commercially (same if your photo or video is being used in another work, remember Obama's poster, not the same but similar)
They aren't going to forbid you to shoot a skyline for personal use, they are going to put limits on how you can exploit this commercially)
We can't expect for our copyright to be held strictly and not allowing other artists (painters, architects, sculptors, etc.)
They shouldn't be able to monetarize if I haven't got a choice of whether their building gets in my way or not. If this goes through it could seriously affect the ability of some new buildings to get planning permission.
DBE: This may be a 'niche' response, but I will stick with a DSLR / OVF for the foreseeable future since an EVF cannot be used when photographing night landscapes. With an OVF your eyes eventually adjust to the darkness and you can properly frame your shot by starlight. An EVF? Pure black - at least with my previous Sony SLT. The same goes for bright sunlight. The current crop of EVFs cannot and perhaps never will match the dynamic range of what your eye sees through an OVF, and the 'look' of a final print is what you remember from the viewfinder composition. But then again, I still create framed prints, which may also be going the way of the Dodo ...
If you shoot with effects on you get a reasonably good interpretation of what will end up on the pic - ie bright in comparison to an OVF viewfinder of a 20 second exposure.
skyfotos: I used film Leicas for many years but have never got used to the fatter feel of digital Leicas. I wish that they would slim the digital models down to the original film M3 size.
Not entirely. If you were willing to have the bayonet stick out a little relative to the body, you could get a thinner body, but it would still be the same dimensions from rear screen to bayonet flange as the current digital models (ie it would feel thinner in your hands, but would be just as deep overall) - it also might loose some of the look of a Leica M...
SteveY80: I can't really see why I'd buy one of these considering the excellent Sigma and Tamron macro lenses in the same price range. The older 90mm Tamron is actually a bit cheaper and lighter, with the advantage of automatic aperture, and also AF if it's needed (e.g. if using it as a dual purpose macro/portrait lens).
In my opinion, only having manual aperture is a significant disadvantage for macro, where you'll usually be stopped down to a narrow aperture. That's why I stopped using a manual lens on extension tubes and got a native macro lens.
The manual aperture does not matter so much to anyone using a mirrorless/evf system, but agree that the pricing is ambitious given some excellent AF optics being available at a lower price.
I'n surprised that the a7 and a7mII are not in the same category... is this the only way of explaining why the scores for the 7's RAW files is better than for the 7mII?
Kwick1: Canon needs to realize that the money is in the lenses, not the bodies. Doesn't matter if it's a DSLR or this lame attempt at a MILC. If you sell the blades, it doesn't matter whose razor it is.
I don't think that is the case any more - unlike the days of film each body has its own sensor, which gets surpassed by new technology plus we use our digital cameras more and actually wear them out... I think purchasers of a modern system are likely to buy as many bodies as lenses over a long term, as lenses do not wear out or get replaced by something that is markedly better.
Good luck to them!
Well done Nikon. The fix will be expensive, but easier to bear than damage to reputation. There is a real need for adequate product testing - trouble is that market pressures can lead to product releases before they are fully ready - this could well apply to other brands (who will be under the same sort of pressures) as well.