email@example.com: Sounds like a good move.(I've never heard of either of these companies)
ARM based-processors are the most widely used in the world for mobile devices. You've probably half a dozen in your house (and one in your camera).
Juck: That slow zoom had better be a hell of a performer for $1000.
I agree with Juck, and we need to wait for the reviews, but surely the closest comparison would be the (also) weather sealed, OIS, Tamron 28-300mm? Much cheaper and much lighter and pretty good reviews. In fact a 6D+28-300mm is pretty much the same weight as a A7+24-240mm.
Maybe... yes?There's a new body, an ultra wide, a standard and a tele zoom. All good lens too. And an excellent prime. Sure it's could do with a few more but that's surely a good start. AND you've got an excellent third party fish-eye and a travel zoom. AND you can put on canon's other primes if there's one you really need. Not saying it doesnt need developing, but it's a good start?
G L: Not bad, but not very covenient too.And also not cheap.Not decided yet if it is worth it
Have they released weights? For me that is far more important than size... and you can cram a lot of glass into a lens!
If Nikon sold this lens for their 1" cameras I'd think of buying into the system.
Does an angle of 185 degrees mean it can take a picture of what's behind you?
Maybe it's not the camera for me.... Too much for a 'one-trick' pony. HOWEVER, it shows that much of the kit needed for a FF camera can be squashed into a body about the size of an old 35mm camera (who'd have thought!). OK there's little things like a mirror box etc missing, but even bolting them on (or having an integrated EVF) it looks promising to me.Next generation with SLT? Might make the plunge into Sony-world.....
Honest question. One reason for the lower score (over the D600) is the autofocus system is 'less robust'. Can you expand on that? Granted there are less points, and not as many cross type (by a long way!), but the Nikon review hints at poor low light accuracy and failure, whereas the same section of the Canon suggests (even on the non-cross types) that auto-focus is accurate even in low light. Reading what is written in the two comparable sections I would probably conclude that the Canon has the 'more robust' system. Obviously this is not the case? Which has the FUNCTIONALLY better AF system?
So what's better? A Nikon D600 or a Canon 6D? There's only one way to find out.... Fight!*
* Or perhaps a Challenge?
davidodd: 337 comments and counting..... What's that about 'no such thing as bad publicity"?Love mine. Love the way it feels, and functions. Great pictures. Good range of lens. Just about light enough to carry up a big hill without regretting it. Love the GPS and Wifi. Sounds mad but why not try one first???? Oh yes, because all the camera shops have closed....
Two very different answers. Isn't diversity wonderful!
@agentul: Are you asking me? Yes indeed I've seen them. Got two in fact. Very useful tools, and for some purposes light, cheap and ideal. My GF3 with the Samyang 7.5mm has produced some of my nicest pictures recently, and all for less weight than a FF fish-eye.On the other hand if you want shallow DOF then m43 isn't ideal, and can work out expensive (e.g. Panasonic 12-35mm for example). You can buy a second hand Canon 5D with an F5.6 kit lens and get SIMILAR (please let no-one start an 'equivalent' argument!) FOV/DOF pictures for £500.If I was only allowed one kit? I'd keep the m43 because of the weight. What am I taking to on a photo-trip to Rome next week? Both!
337 comments and counting..... What's that about 'no such thing as bad publicity"?Love mine. Love the way it feels, and functions. Great pictures. Good range of lens. Just about light enough to carry up a big hill without regretting it. Love the GPS and Wifi. Sounds mad but why not try one first???? Oh yes, because all the camera shops have closed....
Some of the random comments beggar belief! Bought one for a Rome trip and it's a great camera and it produces amazing images. So does the D600 I'd imagine. I think people need a little perspective sometimes......
Certainly gives versatility, however at 200g (+ a mirror-less camera) is probably about the weight of a 6D? So not sure it's a game changer even if the rest (ergonomics, speed, IQ) was the same.
Probably, no one will care, but I'll share WHY I'm staying with Canon. It's not the lens I've got (looking to upgrade from a 5d and a handful of lens): it's that it FEELS better. I went down the the local shop and spent 15 minutes playing with a d600 and a 6d.... I really wanted to like the d600 but it just didn't fit in my hands. The grip's sculpted but hard, so if your hand fits it then great. Mine didn't, so it just didn't feel right - and the reason I sold my d90. All the specs in the world can't make up for comfort..... Mind you, don't remind me of that when I really need a fill-in flash!
guyfawkes: Photographers don't seriously use cameraphones, and this is understandable. Cameraphones are primarily used by non-photographers who are primarily interested in social networking, and this is fine, and perfectly understandable.
There is really no point in knocking Nokia, or any other phone manufacturer come to it, for pandering to this market with ever increasingly versatile phones.
@guyfawkes: You say that but.... OK I may not be a 'photographer' by your definition, but actually if I take out my 5D with the 70-300mm and need an (unexpected) wide-angle view I'm often glad of my Nokia N8. In good light the resolution (and depth of field!) is fantastic......
Honest question. Why would you need IS on a fast lens with a max reach of 70mm? The extra weight etc is significant for limited utility? How many would want to shoot <1/70 for portraits etc?
In a perfect world I'd have a full frame DSLR (?medium format) and a quiver of lens. Oh and a camera-caddy to carry them for me while my 2 year old son tries to run in the wrong direction.In the real world I have a full frame DSLR AND a m4/3 system (and a Nokia N8 phone). OK, so I have to balance quality against size and, yes, I sometimes grumble over the quality of the pictures (but not often). BUT I've got a camera with me all the time (and the best photo from the last wedding was from the N8), and my back is still intact. Not willing to suffer for my art? Not that much...
The system is all about giving options for all types of shooter. IMO this is a fabulous option. I bought the GH1 (and then a GF1 on sale) so I could still take good photos: but could also take it out with my new-born son without annoying the wife with a load of kit. OK, if I'm off to photo something: I wouldn't take this.... (currently loving my 50mm Sigma OM macro lens!) but if I was off to the park I'd put this on, chuck the GF1 in the bag (I hope it will fit in the leather retro case for the GF1/20mm lens) and if I need it I've got it. In fact give me a small hard case for this and I'd take this and the 20mm out as my 'just in case' camera kit. I'm sure that will give you better pics than the wife's point-and-shoot......