Zeisschen: The biggest problem I see:
DPreview has to extend it's award range to "Platinum" now.
I don't think platinum is good enough. How about Unobtanium, just to discuraged competition from even trying.
I'll take Ricoh GR any day over this… what ever this is…
Plus its hard to keep your phone lasting a whole day without battery dying on you, and this thing will probably drain your battery uber fast.
AbrasiveReducer: On the one hand, its an excellent, no frills wide angle camera. On the other, perhaps Ricoh took note of the fate of the Coolpix A (which expert Steve Huff said was a great buy at $1098.) and decided not to put a lot more into the GR.
a) Ricoh GR digital has been out for 10 years with excellent results and before that GR film has been a cult camera for over a decade, so no, it has nothing to do with Coolpix-A, if anything GR killed it.
b) don't listen to Steve, he always Huffs and Puffs, he lately reminds me of Ken Rockwell.
I've been using GRD since 2005, even before it was officially released in US. I loved that little camera a lot and took close to 30k pictures with it, literally until that camera fall apart and flash burned down. It was by far my most used camera, and I had so many of them (perhaps E1 was close second).
Yes I'd agree this is very small upgrade, However, whats important that they still support this model and looks like have all of the intentions to keep it going. What makes this camera special over anything else is - Fit, Form and Function. Keep it up Ricoh, and hopefully in 2 years we will see FF GR with backlit sensor.
Vadimka: Let's take a minute of silence now, to remember our fallen comrades mr Canon & mr Nikon.
@Chris Weller, of course as of today Mirrorless can't replace SLRs 100%, but they real close. Won't you agree that 95% of people who use SLRs today could easily replace them with Mirrorless and get everything they ever needed from SLR plus a lot more. Its only those few % of hard core pros that perhaps are still better off with SLRs and thats ok. We need to remember that Canikon will not survive on those few pros. If they won't adapt real soon they will be out of business in a hurry.
Let's take a minute of silence now, to remember our fallen comrades mr Canon & mr Nikon.
where is A7S-II
PHtorino: This is a terribly lame effort from Olympus. I own OMD-EM1 and EM-5 and a few of the Olympus pro lenses. But there is no way, It would ever replace my Nikon FX DSLRs. I think in the mirror-less world, Fujifilm and Sony has a better future ahead than m4/3. So, making crap videos with fake long arm will bring no good.
I disagree, I think its good video. All this video saying is that Olympus mirror less is lighter and smaller. No need to panic, no one taking your DSL-Arm from you.
JacquesBalthazar: Tempting. Curious about tests of course. The 25mm in particular: optical design uses less elements than the 25mm f2 ZF2/ZE, focuses closer and is much lighter. If same or better performance, that would send yet another signal to the DSLR vs mirrorless FF debate. The 85 is not that much lighter than the 85mm f1.4 ZF2 despite the latter's old school build. The OLED idea is ingenious. The overall design is nicely contemporary. These and the Loxia make the Sony a7 range very tempting. But I still do not like the design of that Sony camera range: bland, semi-retro cues, annoying user interface, etc. Probably not for me yet, but keeping an eye on them. That system is now moving fast, and in the right direction.
joel, unfortunately that short flange is only good on paper for wide angle lenses. Yes you can theoretically make them smaller, but practically because the digital sensor requires light hitting it at relatively straight angle (compare to film) you still need a retrofocal design to have a good image quality. Lots of Leica wide angles don't work well with A7 precisely because they are not retrofocal. BTW, that Batis 25mm is a Retrofocal lens. Once they start making sensors that perform closer to a film, we will start seeing more Biogon design wide angles.
7D mark 3, no way.
Really nice camera, but with additional Visoflex EVF you pushing $3000 mark and thats a bit crazy. But price aside, only 1/2000 shutter speed and I would also like wifi on p&s camera. (still good job Leica, especially the design)
We have a "live feed" from the Nikon booth at the show: "what is it Jimmy?" "you can hear a pin drop!?" Excellent news, well done Nikon.
MSRP is $1195, not too bad, only $300 difference from Panasonic model.Resale value will be better on Leica, while grip comfort will be better on Pana.
BarnET2: Why on earth does Zeiss want $949,- on a simple 1920 based designhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-Gauss_lens#mediaviewer/File:DoubleGauss1text.svg
The OPIC from taylor and obson from 1920 looks very similar.So no R&D in lens design nor in mechanics since it has no AF nor IS.
I just can't fathom where the money has gone too here.
@Barn,just because Zeiss is capable shoving 15 elements inside a lens, doesn't mean they should do it for every lens they make. You are looking for a problem to your solution.50mm f2 is perfectly fine with DG design 6 elements. If you want to add speed, then sure add few more elements, if you want to add more angle, sure add more elements to deal with distortions, etc…Zeiss has Schott glass in their lenses, its pretty much what Leica also uses or has been using. (colors, tonality, micro contrast are all better)
Gesture: Wished they had gone one step further and had a small LCD display where you go review the images and folders.
those devices called Epson Multimidia Storage Viewer, I bought one of those 10 years ago and it still works just fine and has an amazing display.
BarnET2,There are different glass manufacturers, and some are better than others, like Schott glass from Germany.So that, plus tighter tolerances, possible slightly better mechanics/materials will be a welcome feature for some. For some people even slight advantage in any of those features are good enough reason to spend more $$$. To me for example, if this lenses will match optical performance of ZM line, plus electronic contacts, plus click less aperture, makes for a good buy. (but me 8 years ago will probably agree with you)
Well, there is nothing strange about it.Double Gauss is one of the best lens designs ever made and some of the worlds most expensive lenses are based on this design. (as well as the worlds cheapest lenses).Most of the Canon and Nikon long tele, that cost $2-3K are based on even older Triplet design (modified triplet). Many still use modified Sonnar, Ernostar etc… (btw, that Opic lens you are talking about will cost you around $3000 today)
Most of my lenses are DG design. Many use DG today, so the price is not about the design, the price is about Glass formula, materials and tolerances.
P.S. the bicycle is also very old design, but you still pay $5000 for a very nice specimen, don't you?
no one gives a duck about taking pictures, give us new camera…
vivanchenko: And speaking about propaganda, numbers of people killed and contribution made by different nations one must remember that the USSR and Russia are not the same thing. For instance, Ukraine had to sacrifice more people than the US and the UK put together. Unlike Russia and most other nations excluding Germany almost all of Ukraine and Belarus lay in ruins back then.
It is amazing how western intellectuals avoid influence of sophisticated western propaganda and how easily they fall pray to the very primitive propaganda coming from Moscow. The Russians term them rather aptly as "useful fools" and useful fulls they are.
I agree with your statement. Do yo know why people believe Moscow and don't believe US? Its quiet simple. Almost anything America does is transparent and wide open for anyone to see. And even when its not its eventually out, due to the democracy. Its really easy to judge country that has no secrets and you can easily spin any actions US takes as negative. US often being accused of double standards, true, its easy, imagine you being watch 24/7 by the world, everything you do and say will be analyzed by everyone. And to complicate things US has Liberal and Uber Conservative TV, so its really easy for US enemies to present US as evil. If I was watched 24/7, I'm sure 80% of the world would hate me.
And on the other side we have Russia, almost dictatorship, no accountability, no transparency, almost all media is state run. Full corruption and no opposition. You can watch russian channels for month and never once you will hear a joke about Putin. So you have illusion of greatness.
vivanchenko: By the way, one of the two guys who raised the real thing, when fighting was not over yet, was Georgian.