Jorginho: Well...very niced cam for the size. But I have to wonder what it gets us over a GM1 or GM5 basically...Selfies?
It's a bit cheaper too.
munro harrap: Faking the film of the Moon landings was necessary because in those days there was no way to get a good enough signal back to Earth.
Think how bad mobile coverage is now at times- and it uses satellites in space.
So, according to this idea they went, but the photographs and the filming was done on Earth, so that we would have something good to look at, at the time. It worked, looked really good and everyone was happy.
As a kid I was thrilled, just like in the movies!!
But you cannot be allowed to get away with it in photographs, because evidence depends on facts, not facts modified or fabricated. Press pictures are EVIDENCE, to get which men risk their lives frequently, so he is definitely NOT worth a prize at all.
munro mate, mobiles don't use satellites, they use ground based radio towers (google "cellphone tower"). You can go out and buy a satellite phone today and it'll work perfectly in places where there is no mobile reception, it'll just cost you a lot more.
Also strap that Canon 5200mm lens on your camera and you'll have spy-satellite resolution ;)
Talk about Poe's law, I have no idea whether you are joking or seriously wrong (about both the moon landings and mobile phones)
Nordstjernen: Focal length is a given factor, but you could copare to whatever you want to make the spect more impressive.
So why not say 3000 mm focal length, equivalent to FF systems compared to aps-c! :-D
But FF-equivalent focal length is a thing, every other crop comparison isn't...
tom1234567: Yet another 1/2.3'' tiny sensor camera...
At least with a 24–2000 mm lens there is actually a USP
bogdescu: This looks like a concept car, never meant to be produced.No camera can work with so few buttons. (well, except a soap-box idiotenkamera.Physical access to ISO? exposure compensation? and so on?
Plus, if you make it for the m-mount, you are already targeting it towards a certain group. This group (the people who own m-mount lenses) will not settle for a childish point-and-shoot.
Well, they've got direct aperture and shutter speed controls, maybe the rest is via a touch-screen? If it's cheaper than Leica they might get away with it.
The Squire: I prefer to use Deluxe Paint III - It's subscription free and 32 colors are enough for anyone.
Deluxe Paint IV, HAM 4096 simultaneous colours baby!
flysurfer: Okay, let me summarize what I have gathered so far:
You used the old X-Pro1 to eliminate the Lens Modulation Optimizer (LMO), you used Capture One to replace Fuji's colors with a dull default conversion, and you turned off RAW metadata based(!) CA correction, distortion correction and devignetting in Capture One (which is all part of the overall lens design). And then you sometimes used shutter speeds without a tripod that sometimes resulted camera shake and blur.
So how "real-world" are these samples after all? Because in my "real world", I certainly use my lenses as intended, with LMO, on a tripod (when necessary), and I certainly don't turn off any lens corrections that are a part of the lens firmware (and stored in the RAW metadata). I also don't use C1's default conversion.
RAW processing obsolete? Better hope you always have perfect white balance and no blown highlights or deep shadows ;)
Couscousdelight: The H-res mode is not impressive at all... pretty disapointing.http://tof.canardpc.com/view/e426f924-0969-4b13-9827-da97dc9afe54.jpg
It's soft for sure, but there's definitely a lot more detail than in 16mp mode and it looks like it should sharpen up nicely in post.
photogeek: I'd buy one, but the lens is not quite large enough. Can they make it twice as large (and heavy) as the body? I'll pay extra.
JRFlorendo: This is a SLAM DUNK class action law suit, an engineering flaw by Nikon engineers, can't get any easier than that. Nikon just needs to slow down, it seem like they are coming out with a new FF camera every six months, at that rate, something is bound to get neglected. Sony and Toshiba already providing you with top grade sensors, slooow down and get the engineering and quality control right.
Well looks like DPR have found similar flare on a Canon 1D X at leasthttp://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d750/9
Swingline: I was hoping for a LX100 style body in an ILC with 16 meg.
Wouldn't that just be the GX7?
Surely it would only have been class action lawsuit material if they weren't fixing the issue for free?
blue hour: Nice but it lacks 4K, therefore i'd rather choose the LX 100, which has also got a viewfinder.
Panasonic, where is the G 7, by the way ?
I think for the target market a built-in flash and 180 degree swivel screen is far more useful than 4k video and an EVF.
photo perzon: Does the flash tilt up to the ceiling for bounce?
Looks like the same kind of 2 part hinge design that can be tilted back to me.
Thatcannonguy: Getting pretty $#%#$^- off by now. Searched everywhere but i can't set my GX7 to 60p... Anyone ? Please ?
@Thatcannonguy yeah for some reason Panasonic don't allow you to change between PAL and NTSC recording, so your PAL GX7 can only do 50p/25p/24p. There is hacked firmware for older cameras (GH1/2 era) that let you switch between PAL and NTSC framerates, but so far no sign of any hacks for newer cameras.
The Squire: Would be great to have a file format with a size somewhere between JPEG and RAW, that holds enough data for a bit of post-processing.
I'd love a standardized compressed RAW format. 14bit, bayer data but with varying levels of loss-less to lossy data compression.
DNG is an open standard so there's nothing stopping camera makers from using it, or browsers supporting it for that matter.
samfan: In the past few years, both Google and Microsft introduced their replacement formats and both failed miserably.
It's weird. Is there any other file format as old as JPG still so widely used? Besides plain text I mean.
JPEG became standard in 1992. Same year as Intel Indeo came into existence as a video format. Remember Intel Indeo? We've probably had 20+ major video formats between then and now. That's how old JPEG is in computer terms.
Well, considering that even GIF is still a thing, I hope for an image format that can replace JPEG, GIF and PNG all at once. Heck ideally it could have some compressed RAW capability, maybe that would give it traction at least in cameras.
> Is there any other file format as old as JPG still so widely used? Besides plain text I mean.
MP3 comes to mind, it's the same age as JPEG.
We already have that - DNG has supported lossy compression for a few years now
Boss of Sony: I thought this was the ideal camera until I realized it was the same size as the A6000 with one of its small lenses on it. A6000 has twice the sensor size, twice the megapixels, and the option of changing lenses, plus it's cheaper.
@Boss of Sony the "special" is the size :)