Samsung's Marketing VP is Ben Hur?
That's pretty awesome.
steelhead3: Finally...I wonder if the new cameras will have radio built in instead of having to use a dongle?
@abortabort: That simply doesn't follow. Until the flash portion of the flash unit becomes outdated or stops working, there's really no reason to replace, unless the price of a separate radio receiver is prohibitively high (unlikely, as it'd gut the sales of their transmitters and the system as a whole).
Sure, they may choose to buy flash units with radio receivers built-in for *future* purchases, but again, that's not really a relevant third case to the point I'm making. Related, sure. But certainly separate.
Point: Why include it in the package if you can force them to buy something else?
Counter-point: Why give them the option by having it separate? Force them to buy it as part of the body whether they want it or not.
Usually the decision comes down to how well the "parent unit" (in this case, the camera body) is selling. If they're going like hotcakes, the "child unit" will be separate. When sales are slow, then it will be integrated as a feature in a future update.
shutterbobby: Wonder if Picasa will still work? or will they kill the web albums as well :(
Well said, Nimbifer.
I dropped G+, Picasa, and Picasa Web Albums years ago, as soon as Google decided that they should automatically link together, and that G+ should share your pictures with everyone else on G+.
I was an early G+ adopter, and quickly grew to hate it, going back to FB. When Google forced me to use G+ or not use their Picasa products, I cancelled both.
Now, aside from Gmail and GDrive, I don't use anything they offer.
Biowizard: Curious how, with smaller-than-35mm sensors, every focal length is usually quoted with its "35mm equivalent" length alongside, but with larger-than-35mm, this is not the case. No-one has ever said of a Hasselblad 70mm lens, "50,mm equivalent". Nor should they!
So why is this always done for smaller-frame cameras?
Because for the vast majority of consumers, 35mm is the largest film format they're familiar with, and as such, they can readily relate to the fields of view achieved by lenses of popular focal lengths for that format.
Also because the vast majority of consumers aren't smug and pedantic.
Andreas Voigt: "The company cites pressures from increasing costs of raw materials for the price rises,...."
Unless Nikon has been so unfortunate – in anticipation of further price hikes - to sign long term contracts at the peak of raw material prices, citing raw material prices to justify price increases is probably just nonsense.
Somebody in this thread mentioned high rare earth material prices… well, rare earth prices peaked in 2011/12 and have been in free fall ever since.
Increasing the prices of lenses and cameras (trying to set higher prices at the introduction of a new model) is probably nothing but a desperate move to compensate for the declining camera market.
And this disturbing trend is not unique to Nikon. Sony has been one of the first to increase the prices with each new model (RX100 series, a7 series)
Good points all around.
Also, not just picking on Nikon, but just about every company in the western world...everyone made blatant, obvious price hikes in the late 2000s citing the sky high oil prices as cutting into their bottom line forcing price hikes to cover costs.
Apparently none of them remember that now, with oil prices at record lows...
On a more focused perspective, perhaps this is indicative of a changing business model imitating other producers like Panasonic with their mirrorless stuff, where they price high in Asian markets early, to make maxiumum profit off of the eager mirrorless consumers there who apparently are eating up mirrorless and want the latest and greatest. Once they pick up those sales, then they have no problem making quick markdowns for the rest of the world.
AV Janus: There is a typo in the article.The flash is built-ON not built-in
The hyphen matters.
In your example, it'd be more likely to see the phrase "built onto".
As a hyphenated phrase, I've literally never seen "built-on" ever used, though to be fair, in this situation, it would be rather appropriate, were it seen in common usage.
Honestly, the only phrases hyphenated with "-on" that I can think of that would work in this context are "add-on" for mechanical or electronic accessories (though "add-on' implies that they're removable), and "bolt-on" for parts designed to be a permanent addition, though this one is usually reserved for parts that are literally bolted on...or breast implants.
brownie314: This is the first leica I really want. It would be a spectacular hiking and take everywhere camera. But unfortunately it is a leica so probably have to sell a kidney to get it.
That's why you were born with two.
utphoto: An aluminum top plate with some normal wear and tear abrasions, won't do well in salt water. Salt corrodes aluminum and a protective coating or a hard anodize won't be 100% secure forever.
In a different industry, high end fly fishing reels intended for ocean use are almost always made of anodized aluminum.
A quick rinse in tap water after use ensures decades of performance, and these are moving mechanical parts.
I'm sure a similar degree of maintenance will be sufficient to head off corrosion problems for the functional life of the camera.
StevenE: Micro 4/3 is a good sensor size for video since you often need a little more DOF in order to keep subjects in focus. But for photography it sucks. There are very few lens options to get truly shallow DOF on micro 4/3. A micro 4/3 25mm would have to be f/1.0 or better to be interesting for photography. Even a Canon Rebel with 35mm f/2 IS would be miles ahead of this at about the same price, and you have tons of options for other lenses
I don't own or use any m43...I'm just not an idiot that blindly repeats the same nonsense that convinced me to go with the format I eventually chose (which is 135 anyway, not that it matters).
pca7070: M43 lenses all have huge distortion, I bet this is no exception.
John, isn't it true that all m43 lenses (or the majority, at least) do indeed have a lot of distortion, but it's corrected even in the in camera processing to produce RAW output?
I don't own any m43, so I have no idea, but that's what I remember reading when I was considering getting into the system.
Wow, you're a special kind of delusional!
Drewpy: I have to agree, flap bags are ridiculous when you want to get to your camera. When I had my Nikon FM2 I used an Army medical bag which I bought at an Army Surplus store for 15.00. Now it's become a Think Tank bag and costs 100's of dollars. I bought a Derek Alexander 'top zip bag' in which I carry my E-M5 and 17 1.8 with an extra battery, SD card and micro cloth. There's side pockets for a small book and pad and pen also. That's all I use when I travel, 'easy-breezy'.
@Drewpy: Did you use an insert with that surplus bag? If so, what one? I have a perfectly good military bag that I'd like to eventually refit for camera duty (an FM2 or FE2 w/ lens plus another 1-2 primes and a few rolls of film...probably sliding an A5 notebook in beside).
This far, I've browsed around, but have yet to find an insert that seems like it'd do the job well.
Richard Franiec: I can see Kick starter as a tool for raising funds for charitable cause. Start ups should use their own money, take risks and enjoy the rewards. We have banks to provide funds. It is no longer 1990's when creation of $100M company took no more than the announcement.Or it is not?
So basically, "Don't innovate unless you can get the bank to fund you or you're independently wealthy."?
Drazen Stojcic Buntovnik: The only thing that's actually good about this camera is the 30 meter rating. Unfortunately, it's also completely pointless to rate a camera for 30 meter depth when it's lens and sensor can't capture anything worth saving at low light conditions that are present at 30 meters. I would never ever recommend this camera for scuba diving. Overall, I'm really disappointed that year after year manufactureres churn out these half-effort cameras. What this world needs is a Sony RX100 III with a 2.0 lens packed in a rugged case with 30m rating. With raw support. Then it would make sense.
While I normally roll my eyes at the comments here for any new camera that say "If this had (insert features list), I'd buy it." in this case I kinda get it.
For my waterproof compact needs I have an old Pentax WS80 that is still 70% the camera that this thing is. RAW is such a no-brainer for a rugged camera that I'm absolutely stymied it's not offered.
While the RX100-esque camera would be ideal (and I'd likely sell off all of my other compacts to fund that purchase), I'd even settle for a 1/1.7" or 2/3" (a la Fuji) sensor, full PASM controls, and a nice lens that was at least f/2 constant or f/1.4 at the wide end, and variable (like an LX7).
electrophoto: welcome to the plastic styled fake world. and another useless app that should bite the dust.
So by that logic, you're basically saying that any app that doesn't give exactly the results that you, personally, find attractive should "bite the dust"?
It helps achieve a look that many find attractive, regardless of your subjective tastes. That doesn't make it a bad app, just not for you.
And based on what we're seeing, you're in the minority when it comes to photographic tastes regarding skin smoothness.
Wye Photography: In the not to distance future...
Voice 1: If you move a little to the left the composition will be better.
Photog: Yeah! OK!
Voice 1: May I suggest Ansel Adams mode!
Voice 1: Your horizon is not quite straight.
Photog: Oh! OK!
Voice 1: Just wait until those people have move out of the frame.
Voice 1: Now is an optimal time to take the photo.
Photog: Fine! (taps shutter).
Voice 1: I think you have a really great photo there John.
Photog: (smiles to self).
This just may your photography in the next few years. Voice 1 of course is your camera. Camera51 may be a step in this direction. Do you want this scenario?
Now all I need is an app that says "Yeah OK" to this one, and can electronically trip the shutter...we're almost there!
PhotoKhan: This is SO funny...
Brands are so embroiled in competing at any cost that they actually end up cannibalizing their own line-ups most probably, because in glorious corporate tradition, groups of persons inside are more busy taking care of their own "clout" then actually looking for the company interests....and then comes a photography site diligently and engagingly trying to make sense of it all by deeply analyzing (mostly) non-existing differences.
...to say nothing of the commenters.
Mike_PEAT: It still has the same fault of other similar straps...it goes in front of the neck causing me to gag (I can't even wear a tie). Another company came up with a gadget to pull the strap away from your neck, but then it feels like you're wearing a bra. No thanks, I'll stick with the tried and true traditional neck strap which doesn't bother me at all, and it's FASTER to pull the camera up to a shooting position than the neck gaggers!!!
Sling straps gag you?
You may be strapping wrong.
Jogger: "a work owing its form to the forces of nature and lacking human authorship is not registrable." .. a lot of remote photography would apply to these.. e.g. those camera traps that are triggered by animals braking an infrared beam.
If ownership is dependent upon intent, and I accidentally drop my camera and it clicks a frame, I don't own it?
How can the photographer bringing his gear to the area to take pictures of monkeys not constitute intent to obtain pictures of monkeys? What if he'd specifically left his camera sit out to get the pictures?
Are you saying that because he didn't specifically intend to get that exact frame in those exact circumstances that he doesn't own the product of his equipment, effort, and presence?