> Trek, believes the adoption of Wi-Fi-enabled SD cards could spread like a contagious flu, eventually displacing standard SD cards
But aren't WIFI SD cards likely to become obsolete soon, given that more and more cameras are including WIFI built in?
DonSantos: Well I'm about so sell my "gold" award x-e2 with the awesome fuji 35mm 1.4 and upgrade the the "silver" sony a7 + zeiss 55mm 1.8.
Am I crazy?
Everyone always makes a big deal out of the awards, which are really just a subjective mark of how much the reviewer "loved" the camera. It don't really give any kind of indication whether one camera is better than another. Take the Nikon DF, it got a better total score than either of those cameras but no award at all.
Also remember that the Fuji combo is worth $1750 while the Sony $2700, so the reviewer will be comparing the cameras to similarly priced models, not really to each other (Eg. the Fuji may be one of the best ~$1500 cameras while the Sony is more in the middle compared to other ~$2500 cameras.)
KAllen: You will not need to go a D800 to ask that question.I don't own MF digital but I would if I could despite all the comparisons people make with the D800 etc. It's not all about the number of blades of grass you can record But I can't justify it.I wouldn't go the Hassy route all the same, the 1/800th of a second top speed kills it for my needs.
@yabokkie "need a ND filter for landscape" what do you need an ND filter for? Surely landscapes would be shot stopped down at low ISO?
dynaxx: I am confused ; I thought CMOS used a rolling shutter unlike the CCD sensor that exposes the entire 44mm X 33m frame simultaneously.
How can the H system lenses with their central ( global ? ) shutters work with both CCD and CMOS ?
CCD colours have always been better ( like the Fuji X-Pro 1, the last DSLR with CCD ) so this seems to be the trade-off versus practicality.
Rolling shutter doesn't change a mechanical shutter; The sensor is powered up while the shutter is closed, the shutter then opens, closes again, and only then is the image read off the sensor.
mumintroll: I don't get it. Why nikon or canon just not add 4x FF sensors together in 2x2 square. And have medium format much cheaper.
> Why nikon or canon just not add 4x FF sensors together in 2x2 square
Because there would be a huge black cross in the middle of the image due to the gaps between the sensors.
Frank_BR: Ove Bengtson, Hasselblad Product Manager said: "… This CMOS sensor model represents a major leap forward in camera development and breaks new grounds for medium format photographers…"
It sounds almost ridiculous when someone says in 2014 that CMOS sensor is a "major leap forward in camera development". In 2000 the Canon D30 already had a CMOS sensor! That is, the sensor technology of medium format is lagged 14 years compared to other formats. The technology in the MF field develops so slowly that in 2028 Hasselblad (if it survives until then) will be bragging that its MF cameras can shoot 1080i video…
@Frank_BR I think that amount of MP is probably very important to the studio / product photographers that this is aimed at. Remember if you need to print large (advert banners etc) those 50mp will give you a print 1.5m wide at 150dpi.
jon404: 3X the price of the new Pentax 645D-II... same 50 MP sensor? What am I missing here?
@Robert Soderlund this is a professional tool, not just a piece of over-priced hobby kit aimed at gullibles like their Lunar series is.
It's a bit like saying a $100,000 industrial excavator is just for people with too much money. You pay that money to get a very specific job done...
bstolk: So, what is the physical size of the sensor?
@yabokkie, you do know they printed the actual size of the sensor right below the resolution and pixel pitch right? It's 32.9 x 43.8mm
Zigadiboom: The price is very reasonable as I believe paying a premium for a Hasselblad over a Pentax is well worth it... but the lack of wifi is a deal breaker for me as I need ready access to facebook and instagram to upload pictures of my kids and pets running around.
In all seriousness though, WIFI tethering is great. Now I have a camera with it I use it all the time, really handy being able to place the camera anywhere and see the VF on my smartphone or control the camera settings without having to touch it.
yabokkie: > Outstanding ISO performance - up to ISO 6400 - > will raise available light photography to new heights in this genre
larger format cameras are basically for adequate light/slow shutter applications, not low/available light which depends more on lens aperture.
either the one who told this nonsense has no basic understanding of photography or thinks that audience are fools.
> There would be a noise (shutter) issue due to the shutter
Actually a lot of the lenses it takes have leaf shutters which would be almost silent.
He said *in this genre*, which means compared to other medium format cameras using the same lenses.
citrontokyo: The price is okay, but let's just say it's no Lunar in the looks department.Pass.
I don't think the market segment this camera is aimed at care about looks...
T3: The SL1 might have a small body, but the included kit lens is larger than previous models. And the SL1 resides in a system of relatively large DSLR lenses. What they should have done was make the SL1 a mirrorless body for the EOS M system. That way, you can have a compact body, but you can also put compact lenses on it. But as it is (a compact body in a big-lens system), it's a half-@assed solution. So I think a lot of Ameicans simply think, "Well, if I'm going to put big Canon DSLR lenses on it, I might as well get a bigger DSLR body than what the SL1 has." Plus, Canon sells other Rebels that are cheaper than the SL1. So, again, I think a lot of Americans looking to buy a Rebel simply say, "I think I'll just get the slightly larger, cheaper Rebel rather than the SL1."
Donnie, @T3 is pointing out the rather large hole in Canon's lineup, which is for a small camera and lens combo. Other than the 40mm f2.8 (which ends up a bit tight at 64mm on an APS body) all their other lenses are rather large.
maaggyr: This gentleman should be dismissed due to poor video quality in Olympus cameras.
@BarnET You can get round the framerate issue. I have a hacked GH1 that is PAL/NTSC selectable. For some slow-mo (ish) work I had it running in 60fps mode in a 50hz country in-doors. It worked fine with a 1/100th shutter speed, no problem with flicker.
Richie Beans: What's the plan for compatibility with cameras that don't have remote shutter capability, i.e P&S cameras or the Sony NEX and new Alpha line?
From the review: "The shutter release cable is not necessary if your camera has its own built-in time-lapse mode, but life is easier using the cable."
Max Savin: Sigma f1.4 for Nikon: 23.46 oz (1.466 pounds)
A7r camera: 14.36 oz35mm Sony FE f2.8: 4.23 oz.
Backpacking 20-30 miles on rough trails and overland. Which would you carry?
@yabokkie no you haven't, you've just been saying we should be happy to carry 50lbs around, and I'm also pointing out how silly your "image quality is everything" statement is because that's also leaving out other performance characteristics as well as weight.
So, can you answer why you don't carry a large format camera around if image quality is the only thing important for you? Or is image quality actually not the only thing that matters?
@yabokkie if image quality is the *only* consideration then why aren't you carrying round a 48"x48" glass plate large format view camera?
raztec: Lack of a built in screen is an absolute deal breaker in the GoPros. Not so much for playback as for setting up the right point of view.
Too bad GoPro doesn't get that one simple fact.
How are you going to set up the right point of view if it's bolted to the top of your helmet? :) GoPros are not made for taking carefully composed images, they're for action filming attached to stuff. It has an extremely wide lens so you /don't/ have to aim carefully.
Timur Born: I see a screw on filter ring on the 8.5 mm lens.
Their industrial version of the same lens (LM8XC) takes 72mm filters
Francis Carver: Kowa Prominar 8.5mm F2.8 MFT
Focal length: 8.5mmMax aperture: F2.8 / T3.0TV distortion: 0.12%Angle of view: 93.5° x 11.7°Minimum focus: 0.2m
Something is wrong with the posted specs of this lens. If one of the angles of view is 93.5°, how the heck can the other corresponding angle of view be only a minuscule 11.7°?
I can see it being 71.7 degree, but for the life of me cannot see how a lens can give you angular fields of view of 93.5° x 11.7°.
Quick, someone solve this, pls.
The lens looks like it's based on their existing 4/3" machine vision lens LM8XC, which gives viewing angles of 93.5° x 77.1°.
So yeah, someone's swapped their 1s and 7s :)