It could be worse, they might decide to build cameras without user replaceable batteries - like on my phone and laptop
CopCarSS: I'm kind of curious why they included Ektar when it's one of the few color film options still available. Wouldn't it be far easier to get the Ektar "look" by, you know, shooting a roll of Ektar?
Ektar is one of the hardest colour neg films to scan without bizarre colour casts creeping in.
I find the lens a remarkable and impressive technical achievement, but I agree with Richard's sentiment that this is a lens which I can't imagine owning myself. These days the only times the big and heavy DSLR comes out is when I'm taking photos for other people, in which case I have the luxury of optimising the lighting. (We all managed perfectly fine with medium format and its f/4-5.6 lenses back in the day.) When I'm taking photos of low light scenarios for clients it's usually situations like events and stage performances, in which case I'm looking for fast telephotos rather than wide angles. If I'm getting to the point where I need an f/1.8 at ISO6400 then most likely the lighting is going to look rubbish for the client regardless of what lens I use.
When it comes to personal photography I'm using more discreet pocket cameras - usually an X100 these days, or my iPhone. I am amazed at how versatile the X100 is and concur with DPReview's Gear Of The Year award for the X100S.
It looks like the impressive high ISO performance of the D4 is still there, but the Fuji X-Pro and XE-2 RAW samples are incredibly controlled for chroma noise and give an impression of being a generation ahead. Hard to draw definitive conclusions from a test chart though. What's amazing is the retained resolution in the Df from 6400 and upwards, where it excels.
I agree with previous comments regarding the D800's performance though - still impresses after all this time!
Thanks for the preview Andy. Is there AF micro-adjust in the Settings menu? I think this is critical as I've had to do some major backfocus corrections with all my older AF and AF-D lenses on my D700 and D800 bodies (especially wide angles). Could be an important point when this camera is promoting compatibility with old lenses - I'm keen to buy one just for low light work as a cheap D4, but lack of AF microadjust would be a critical factor.
In the 80s and 90s I used to change the screens on my FM2, F3 and F4 to B-type plain focusing screens as I found microprisms and split-prisms getting in the way. The only time they were of use was focusing with 'ultra' wides such as 24mm and 20mm lenses, and even then their accuracy was dubious. I found the focusing confirmation light in the F4 much more useful.
I've never had a problem with the plain B screens of the D700 and D800 with manual focus.
I'm interested in the lens. What could it be? Existing AF-S lenses restyled to look like Ai-S lenses, or a new series?
At first I thought it was an old AF-DC 105mm f/2 but it's too short and there's no aperture ring.
I would argue that these kinds of hype-based marketing strategies for products aimed towards niche enthusiast markets are of limited benefit to manufacturers. They could even be counterproductive when the product doesn't meet expectations when the hype gets out of control. Look at the Leica X Vario for a case example. A simple press release is probably sufficient and will generate its own inertia amongst the blogosphere based on its own merits, e.g. Fujifilm and Sony.
Jos van Dijk: I don't understand why Sony that bought Konica Minolta Camera branch never brought a digital Hexar on the market. Great camera, great lens, great aperture, great settings... They could have done it for a less ridiculous price than what we'll have to pay for this one...
Someone else made it - it's called a Fujifilm X100
I hope Impossible start releasing similar materials for the 4x5" format... fingers crossed
I'm disappointed that Nokia Australia isn't bringing this phone into the country. I was hoping to get one of these to replace an ageing iPhone.
I think Hipstamatic is great. I like how you can keep the images offline, unlike Instagram. I think the lack of RAW file / post-capture processing in Hipstamatic is one of its virtues as well - the presets are selected in the same way I might select a type of film.
I also think that it's the iPhone that holds Hipstamatic back, not the software itself - the iOS interface requires too much stuffing around to get the app ready for taking a shot. This is in contrast to something like an old Nokia which has a dedicated shutter button and is ready to shoot at any time.
I admire Lowy's project. His images have a quality that transcend the technical considerations.
I like my Selphy - great for proofing and storyboarding a concept prior to final printing at a proper production lab. The prints are durable and colours are reasonable for its purpose (I have found a good colour profile for it via Google). It works out to cost 41c per print in AU. No mucking about with ink.
Local labs charge $0.35-$2.00 per 4x6 print depending on volume. Cost is therefore not an issue, even when discounting the convenience factor.
Yes I couldn't use my first Selphy (CP220) with Windows 7 but it was 9 years old! My replacement CP800 cost less than a spare memory card.
They were going to shoot the demo with the Stone Roses but technical difficulties led to a change of venue :)
I would love to see ACR incorporate film negative linear gamma 'raw' scans into its algorithms. Currently I'm fudging about using ColorPerfect plugin via VueScan, and the neg scans are messing with the Lightroom digital file workflow. It would be great to incorporate this into ACR :)
Changing technology might have something to do with this. "Back in the day" during the 90s when I was doing music photography it was pretty damn hard to get a usable shot on a roll of Tri-X in optimal conditions - media pit, no flash, and fast lenses. Forget colour! People in the audience had no hope. Dissemination of images was also slower and more difficult. So I guess that photographers back then were more valued by band managers and promoters. Internet and social media has changed all that.
I don't remember signing any dodgy contracts like the one mentioned here though. It was either a simple "yes" or "no", with venue security making it pretty clear if I tried to sneak in a few shots!
PS. It isn't management and security that I dislike the most in stage photography. It's microphone stands.
Nothing wrong with using "cheap" lenses on a camera like the D800. There happens to be a guy out there shooting a Holga lens on a Phase One back.
Don't forget that current low-end DSLRs exceed the megapixel count of the first full-frame DSLR, the Canon 1Ds. Even back then there was muttering about non-L lenses not being worthy of this camera, which in hindsight is a bit silly.
I wouldn't have any problem using the new 24-85 on a D800 within its limitations - in fact, I'm looking forward to checking it out.
It's nice to see Fuji still coming out with neat accessories for the X100. It tells me they haven't abandoned the model just yet.
I've used these kinds of converters in the past and found them impractical for actual use. It comes down to two things - bulk and lens mounting. Now we would need to factor in extra button pressing to select the correct framelines.
On the other hand I can't think of many other manufacturers offering a 28mm f/2.0 equivalent viewing angle for $350 or less. To the people saying that 28mm isn't wide enough - 28mm offers a true wide angle viewpoint with less of the stretchy field distortions you get with 24mm for close subjects and elements towards the edge of the frame. (I remember when 24mm was considered a superwide.)
I'd be interested to know how much native linear distortion is introduced into the RAW image, as the firmware update notes report some 'fudge factor' correction being applied when this lens is attached.
The sample images look more Kodak Technical Pan than Tri-X to me - great potential for excellent results, but extra care in exposure required.
I would have committed unspeakable acts for Tech Pan at ISO 10000 though, back in the day!
Very nice ISO100 images in the RAW samples - amazing resolution. A shame about the write speeds and lack of current third party RAW software support though, otherwise it would be in the running on my wishlist.