Andy Crowe

Mainly because most (all?) of them have to close the shutter briefly before taking a picture (so it's open for liveview, then shuts, opens again, shuts again, then finally opens once more for...

Mainly because most (all?) of them have to close the shutter briefly before taking a picture (so it's open for liveview, then shuts, opens again to take the picture, shuts again, then finally opens...

According that lens rentals blog post that Andy W linked to the cine version of lenses are more expensive because they're built to considerably better tolerances than regular consumer lenses

@photonius

Just because the optical layout is the same doesn't mean the cine version isn't built to better tolerances.

> Then of course shooting underwater adds a bit of length to a lens' focal length

These lenses look like they have a flat glass front so their focal length shouldn't change underwater.

Maybe they can't integrate the PDAF sensors into that chip?

There are a lot of people making APS sensors, it can't have been that hard to source one :)

There are a lot of people making APS Bayer sensors, it can't have been that hard to source one :)

LR has had good X-Trans support for months now

Fuji releasing a cheaper and lighter alternative to their 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 lens? How dare they!

And with IR you don't capture the natural colours either.

With a bayer sensor it is advantageous to be able to record an image at higher resolution than you "need" because it makes up for the sharpness loss of having to spread light over several different...

And now show us a sensor that can record at 0.01 lux.

It's only a 2 megapixel sensor so it's far more suitable for video than for stills.

On the other hand the 20mm is half the length, less than half the weight and sharper wide open than the Nikon 35mm, so that's what the extra money is paying for.

> The thing with m43 is that it is heavily dependent on software correction, without it, the lenses are horrid. e.g. have you seen the 14/2.8 uncorrected??

First of all there are plenty of m4/3...

@ nerd2 "Based on your logic, nothing will beat iPhone then."

Well, the iPhone 5, 4s and 4 are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd most popular cameras on Flickr...

@yabokkie you're assuming that both sensors have the same efficiency at capturing photons. Sensor efficiency is improving all the time, as proven by high iso becoming less and less noisy on newer...

Physical aperture size isn't much more useful than DxO mark scores at determining overall image quality - it'll give you a ball-park noise level to expect, but sensor technology and lens optical...

This idea has been posted here many times before, and it kind of falls down because there is too much overlap between the two systems. For example if I was posting about using a Panasonic body with...