A day early for April Fools Day.
Nice interview and story. Inspiring. And very nice photos on Flickr. Thanks!
Some of the images are a bit campy for my tastes, but nonetheless very well done. Thanks!
KodaChrome25: What's next? This. Only $45k!
But, still... only 1/10th a Hubble. Toy.
I assume you've been meaning to get a life. Now would be a good time.
Nice photos. I also very much like that first image.
Nice location change up.
How does it compare to Snapseed?
What's next? This. Only $45k!
retiredPhil: What I like: the industry leading zoom (of course), the articulating screen, the high resolution screen, macro focus range, EVF (optical would be better, but I've given up on that), time lapse.
Meh: ISO, built-in flash, continuous drive, video, USB 2.0 (when will they go to 3.0?), HDMI (does anyone actually show their pix/video directly onto TV?), no environmental sealing (would have been nice), wireless, remote control with smart phone (don't own a smart phone, the Nikon remote would have been nice)
What I don't like: small sensor, 2.8 max aperture (couldn't they do 2.0?), no RAW, no mic port (if you're going to do video, do it right), no GPS option.
The article says yes GPS. The specs say no. DPR?
grasscatcher: So, in their promo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8Ece4w3xx0 they show some decent (for a 1/2.33) pics shot with this cam, even up to 8000mm. They even shot some surfer action (reminded me of DPReview's A6000 hands-on vid). It would be nice to know what their keeper rate is/was! :þ
The photos and video do look good.
Huds: While everyone is bleating "No Raw?"I'm goin' "No Hotshoe??" .. "No manual zoom??"
Well, a flash that works at 20 miles might look like a searchlight. Forget the hotshoe. Just mount the camera onto the Klieg.
8000mm? 4x extender on the filter ring?
MediaDigitalVideo: Anyone knows there's a audio line-in (stereo) ?
With a 20 mile cable?
@Huds No hotshoe? For a flash? Lol!
mpgxsvcd: I would be willing to bet that no one is ever able to take a truly good picture with this camera at the 35mm equivalent of 2000mm.
My 8 inch F4.0 telescope gives me the 35mm equivalent of 1600mm. That perfectly fills a 16:9 aspect ratio with the moon. However, it has to be on a tracking mount in order to follow the moon’s motion at this focal length. Therefore, it is unrealistic to think that you are going to get great images or even videos of objects in space while hand holding this camera or if it is on a non-tracking tripod mount.
The lack of RAW is a good indication that these images are useless without massive in camera distortion correction. Even with the correction they are probably still close to useless. That is a tiny sensor with a ridiculous zoom range.
This camera would have been so much better if they just gave it a 25x zoom and a faster aperture instead.
I'm thinking some of you guys are not the target audience.
n3eg: Ultrazoom, superzoom, megazoom, and now Ludicrous Zoom.
Waiting on the Hubble SuperFly Zoom.
Very nice! Congrats on the 2014 DPR Readers' Best Shots: Things
Lee Jay: I like number 2 since I like airplanes. Number 10 is just disgusting.
I also agree
Very nice! Congrats on 2014 DPR Readers' Best Shots: Places.