I think the music sucks. I muted. Its not worthy to go along with a video that took so much effort.
Pentax_Prime: Websites based in the United States should probably work a little bit to give prices in DOLLARS. Just a thought.
You do the maths!
The title is misleading. Makes it sound like the rights to images themselves are being sold, being that a photography catalogue is normally a catalogue of images.
DenWil: In an America of clinical obesity the cameras get smaller and smaller. I have medium to smaller hands and I can't pick up one of these without wondering where my fingers go. What does a fat man or a man with large hands do? At 180#, 2 or 3 lbs of camera is just not a problem. I feel bad for all the sickly folks who depend on these soap bar sized bodies for a chance at photography. Particularly ironic direction for camera makers since the phones get bigger and bigger.
I would prefer this camera to be smaller still. Make it as small as possible. If you want big get the X pro 1, that is ginormous.
This is a very cool looking shot. Should be rated higher.
What is the focal length of the lens and thus the angle of view? What are the dimensions of the phone?
If you are going to delete 'trolling' comments then you are against free speech and you may as well not have comments.
Mattoid: Please do a direct image comparison (with foreground and background elements to show blur amount and character) between the RX100 II and the Ricoh GR wide open at 28mm 35mm and 50mm equivalents. (interestingly the GR cropped to "1 inch" sensor size gives 50mm equivalent)
I took a look myself and couldn't see much in it. The hair on the dummy looked pretty un-detailed in both at that ISO. The nex did look more flattering though. The 35mm crop mode would be best to be used with the GR in that situation. As for size, the 3n body is the same at 34.6mm but the 16-50 adds a further 30mm, so for jacket poketability they are similar but the GR is just slim enough to be pant pocketable, which isn't the case with the nex unless you transport the lens separately. But you are right that at that price it is very attractive, and I actually will now look at that as a serious option so thanks.
Please do a direct image comparison (with foreground and background elements to show blur amount and character) between the RX100 II and the Ricoh GR wide open at 28mm 35mm and 50mm equivalents. (interestingly the GR cropped to "1 inch" sensor size gives 50mm equivalent)
Announcing the DEVELOPMENT? Anyone can do that! They don't even have to release them for the statement to be true. I can personally announce today that I am developing a medium format compact camera with a 16-800mm f1.0 stabilized zoom lens that weighs only 150g and fits in a shirt pocket.
Way to big for the sensor size. They should be going for pentax q levels of compactness. Then the system might have a point.
Button Pusher: I think the burning questions that we have or would like to have confirmed by the DPR crew about the GH3 are if the sensor is a Panasonic or Sony sensor and is the GH3 sensor a multi-aspect sensor. If the sensor is not mult-aspect, why did they choose to remove that feature from the GH3 when it was a selling point for the GH1 and GH2?
its just a 4:3 aspect. 1:1 resolution is 3456x3456. 4:3 resolution is 4608 x 3456. The same height. you must only be looking at "other resolutions" and missing "max resolution"
So its not a phone. You got my hopes up.
Wait, conventional phase detect doesn't work in live view so you couldn't even record it! Unless you filmed through the viewfinder, which they didn't because they activated focus by touching the screen. Thinking about it, it is phase detect but live view has to be disengaged temporarily. the mirror comes down and focus is acquired. This takes more time than conventional phase detect.
farrukh: Lovely! Though very different to my set of Olympic event photos!http://www.flickr.com/photos/swamibu/sets/72157630793769412/
I really like the diving shot taken from high up. Fantastic shot. The only thing I would change is cropping that bit of black off the bottom. What post processing did you do? did you mess around with it a lot or is it just the dramatic tone art filter?
Bit stupid that you can't view the gigapan images full screen. The full zoomed out image doesn't even look sharp with all that over sampleing. It should be the best quality ever.
That last 5 years was a killer.
16-50 f2.8. stabilised. please make it happen.
mpgxsvcd: Basically Panasonic is the first manufacturer to figure it out. Even with the much larger sensor of the DSC-RX100 the shallowest 35mm equivalent aperture is F4.9.
None of these cameras will produce a shallow depth of field shot. So why not just make the sensor a little smaller and the the F number a lot better.
They finally got it right. Shallow depth of field is not important for these cameras. Low light performance is. They have a winner on their hands in that respect.
If only we could convince the novice user of this fact since they will need to be the ones buying this camera for it to be a success.
"By your logic, there is more reason to go with bigger sensor.Bigger sensor would definitely improve your low light performance."
not above gaining more actual exposure.
It would be great if they would just make a larger version of the lens for a larger sensor version. Then they would have both in a jacket pocketable package.
Kodachrome200: What is the actual focal length range so I can get an idea of dof
Too big* unless you mean it is too big by a factor of two.