GaryJP: The ape may have pressed the shutter. But there is more to taking a photograph than pressing the shutter. I doubt that the ape set the aperture, focal length or time, chose the lens, or took the camera to the location, or cropped the image. I am surprised more photographers don't seem to know this.
I gave an argument which is perfectly logical - what in my argument is false? Please tell me?
That he setup the camera settings - sure but not for these shots - he didn't anticipate them even.
Everything else was an act of nature. How am I wrong?
Animal-triggered photo? what is that - there are photos that are shot by animals pressing the shutter button and holding the camera? And all by accident?
This was not a setup by photographer - this was an accident. The photographer did not setup or control any aspect of the incident - I don't know how you can argue with that logic.
As such the photos have no copyright owner - it was not his creation - he is not the artist behind the camera - period.
He didn't setup the monkey to take the shots and he didn't control any aspect of the shots that were taken - the camera just happened to have certain settings and they happened to have worked for the shots - it might as well been in auto mode - the photographer had no control.
If someone take the pictures for me, and I edit them and upload - guess what - they are still not mine - they belong to the person who took them. Same logic applies here - I disagree btw but defending this according to the logic of the copyright law which is flawed to begin with.
But if that's the standard we accept than that's the standard we live by and we apply it here too whether we agree or disagree. The photographer has no copyright on these images.
LOL - love the story and the photos - never heard it before. The way that monkey looks and smiles at the camera is ridiculously amazing. Hey I think it's fair - I've had this discussion before. If you hand your camera to someone to take your photo - in theory that person hols the copyright - which I think is a bunch of BS. I also happen to think that if I pay someone to take photos for me, I should be the owner or a least a co-owner of that work. The author deserves the credit as the author but I should be able to control the work as I please. But that's not the case...
So I say to those who disagree with this - well it's a taste of your own medicine - the stick works both ways.
And @GaryJP too bad - he didn't setup the monkey to take the shots and he didn't control any aspect of the shots that were taken - the camera just happened to have certain settings and they happened to have worked for the shots - it might as well been in auto mode - the photographer has no control.
munro harrap: The reason they do this is money: create a system that obsoletes the previous one by making everything in all old systems completely incompatible- they are all doing it. Nikon and their G mount. Olympus invents 4:3 system scraps it and devises micro 4:3 system, then ? Reverts to full-frame system to compete with Leica having mastered necessary technologies leaving stranded everyone who bought all those dinky micro-4:3 system lenses whilst Nikon and Canon rewrite their firmware to outlaw use of Sigma, Tokina and Tamron Lenses?? All of which will self-destruct adding massively to our eco-meltdown since they took the lead out of your pencil (sorry, I meant solder) resulting in the tin sprouting"tin whiskers" after a decade or so and shorting out all said circuits (see Ken Rockwell, NASA, Toyota "tin whiskers").To get you all to buy even more adding to our economic dependency on China, Japan and Korea...
What a pointless rent. First of no one is loosing any copyright by manufacturing overseas - that is a load of nonsense.
Second you know those folks who keep predicting the end of the world every couple of years - they are always wrong and so are you.
There is a place in the market for more the one thing and no single thing will satisfy everyone. It's always been that way and it will continue to be that way (end of the world or other cataclysmic events aside).
And no there will not be a shutterless 1000 fps camera that has a super focus and a super sensor and will blow away all other cameras in all categories and will be affordable to everyone - wake up - most DSLRs today can't even handle proper AF in the movie mode and barely go over 10fps with continuous AF - what have you been smoking?
And have you not noticed crowds of former P&S folks walking with DSLRs around their necks? You know why? Because not even the best phones can compare to a cheap DSLR and that's a fact.
Edmond Leung: The announcement of these FF cameras is equivalent to the announcement of the death of APS-C and 4/3.Who will buy the APS-C and 4/3 anymore?Good bye APS-C and 4/3.
Yeah because these cameras are cheap, small and light...oh wait expensive - check, small? - not really with the full frame mounted - check, light? - compared to DSLR maybe but not APS-C NEX or m43 and not with a full frame lens on it...death of APS-C and m43 - give me a break
I have been through this discussion so many times my head is going to explode from all the thinking BUT please explain:
"...and total light on the sensor (which is a major determinant of image quality)"
Why does total light on the sensor matter? What does that mean total light? By area a larger sensor will have more light - but the light intensity (signal strength per pixel or photo diode whatever the technical term is) is not determined by the sensor size...so f2.8 is f2.8 when it comes to light concentration and nothing else. When considering lens brightness nothing else should be counted for.
The sensor size will matter in signal to noise ratio but we already know RX100 sensor is an excellent performer. The multiplier is relevant to DOF only and says nothing about light gathering. RX10 will have more light per pixel at any focal length then a Canon with 18-135...it's the combination of that light and sensor performance that will determine the end result.
Oh my...they did it...Ive been whining for RX100 sensor in a super-zoom and a fast lens and they did it. I would prefer 300 or 400 mm on the long end but an f2.8 across the range up to 200mm sounds awesome...
Steep price - very steep but I will anxiously await the reviews...wow...I feel like Sony is listening...crazy
Chekr: What matters is image quality. Not the size of the sensor, not the number of pixels.
IQ is about the sensor, the lens, the software and the ability of the photographer to use these together to create an image.
I understand why he says sensor size is the bees knees though, when all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail
Until post processing catches up to fake a shallow DOF perfectly a larger sensor matters very much. Even if a smaller sensor could produce as good an image as an APS-C one - the image itself would always be flatter or in case of 1/2.3 just freaking flat which is fine for landscapes and other purposes but not as good for nice people photography.
Not only that but if a small sensor could achieve the quality of today's APS-C or m43, then same technology would be applied to once again bigger sensors maintaining the gap.
I agree with Aptina 100% - larger sensors in compact and super zooms is what camera manufacturers need to stay alive. I am tired of 1/2.3 or 1/1.7 - those formats have nothing to offer. Each generation of those brings a little better low light, a little better DR way more zoom then most need but no real improvemens that can match even the 1" sensor from Sony. All those cameras have to come up to 1" or they will die - maybe the super zooms will survive but I want them with 1".
But megapixels matter too - just think of the latest Nokia phone. Stick 41mpx and then downsample for better quality. That approach is not to be discarded by the compact camera makers. If I had to buy a super zoom today I would go Sony because 20mpx on a 1/2.3 at least gives me some room to scale down to hide imperfections.
Adrian Van: Very good photos overall. Image quality similar to OMD. What is the point of taking photos at 12800 iso, to show how noisy it is at an iso most of us would not likely want to use anyway, and would get a prime for a lower iso? It cleaned up fairly well in ACR though in second image. I would rather see more images at 1600, 3200 and 6400. There was some night photos taken at 800 iso with F1.8 or longer exposures looked very good. All in all a great camera though. Robin Wong also has great examples on his website blog.
@ R Butler - I think those images show amazing amount of clarity and detail and I prefer the second one with noise reduction. I think you did a great job with those and I don't know what Adrian is complaining about.
My first reaction was - darn I don't get images like that with my NEX-6 at 3200 ISO but then I saw the f1.8 and felt better. I only have kit and tele for the NEX.
rfsIII: What they're not telling you is that "organic" is just another word for "carbon-based life form." Bottom line: this sensor is alive; it's a creature that was either discovered or genetically engineered to live inside your camera and translate photons into images (remember the bird that lived inside Fred Flintstone's camera and chiseled pictures onto stone tablets? Same principle, different species). Nobody tell PETA or they'll put the kibosh on the whole thing.
I've read your comment and it didn't sound right so I looked it up and I think what you're saying is nonsense.
Organic is carbon based indeed but NOT a life form - not a living creature. If organic compound means life form then cow's farts are alive - methane which is per Wikipedia is one of the simplest organic compounds.
Here's a link to the Wikipedia article http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound
Just in case folks care the new NEX-6 and 5R have an app available called Cinematic Image or something along those lines. From the demo I've seen it is very easy to do right in the camera with the app.
Leica is kidding right. I am not even a pro but who on earth would want this overpriced thing and why?
Slow non-power zoom means this is not even compact - 3.5-6.4 - really? That's slower then the 16-50 PZ which is also compact. 16.1 mp sensor - is that from NEX by any chance? No EVF? And someone would want this over NEX-6 why? Or better yet the upcoming 7n? You'll still have loads of cash left to buy some nice lenses.
Can someone enlighten me here?
YetiYeti: Raw Therapee seems also an obvious candidate for this comparison. In latest V4.0 edition, it is stable, fast, free, and becoming more and more Lightroom like in workflow and experience (but has no "catalog" concept, like Lightroom) . In some cases I get better results with RT, than with Lightroom. It even supports Adobe lens profiles. Available for Win, Mac, Linux.. 32 or 64 bit... Lively community participating on their forum too.
If you find it hard to believe, go and try. I have no affiliation with them, I just admire their work...
I've tried RawTherapee briefly and Lightroom. I am a noob to more advanced photo editing. While I found Lightroom to be easier, RAW Therapee does look like an amazing free alternative.
And the fact that it supports Adobe lens profiles should have certainly placed it in this list.
CosmoZooo: The camera I wanted...I am happy and sad. This is what I wanted when I was making my decision btw OMD and NEX-6.
OMD was too expensive and lacked built-in flash. The PENs of the time lacked 5 axis IBIS. I've posted that my perfect PEN would have 5 AXIS IBIS and a built-in flash and a touch screen (as other PENs and OMD already do).
This could have been my perfect camera as coming from P&S I never cared too much for EVF although with my NEX-6 I learned how useful it is especially in bright light.
This looks like a great camera - one I could have picked over the NEX-6 but it's too late now...I am happy for Oly though - I feel like they listened.
I do wonder if movie AF is better then OMD...
to ptox - it would not be smart of me to take the hit on the NEX-6...I have the camera with kit and tele for a great price and I have a 4 year warranty with accidental on it.
If I try to dump the system now I would take a huge hit - E-P5 is unlikely to be worth the loss + cost...that would probably put me over OMD pricing. Would not be a sensible decision...so yeah too late for me :)
The camera I wanted...I am happy and sad. This is what I wanted when I was making my decision btw OMD and NEX-6.
LOL...I find this all very funny...it's like Adobe took a shotgun and b-a-m shot off a foot. There is still aonther foot in place to hop around for a while but eventually they will fall flat on their face unless they change their minds about playing with firearms :)
Let's face it...no matter how good the software is - it is still software. It can be mimicked by other software and it can be challenged. There is already competition out there and even open source alternatives. Until now the price for some folks was worth it but as the cost model becomes prohibitive those people will reevaluate their choices.
This is an opportunity for another company to step up and take the market and if Adobe doesn't change their minds quickly enough it will happen.
FoolyCooly: There is not enough available memory on my iPhone for a project like this. 75% of 16 GB is occupied by games for my kids. :-( Neat apps but I'd have to clean off my phone to use one.
I do however have an old pocket camera that is running CHDK. My Canon SD780IS plus a 32GB card should be enough for few projects like this. I'll have to give it a try some day.
I like iPhone and iOS more so then Android devices I've tried (I am not an Apple fanboy and do not own a Mac).
But I've got to say Apple needs to get a freakin clue and put a MicroSD card slot into the freakin iPhone.
That's all I have to say...
IgorKiev: Staged photo. If the image was random, then it would be interesting. And this photo is staged - not interested ....No normal girl would not paint her nails on the toilet - she will not be able to wear pants! :)))
That is not necessarily true. These days (although I am not a chick) I imagine that plenty of nail polish types are very fast drying. She could do her nails and it could dry in a matter of minutes. So let's not jump to conclusion.
CosmoZooo: If this is aimed at the entry level and upgrade market, Sony has lost their sense of touch with reality. Many users at that range want touch screen. Heck I want it on the Nex-6 but this is a slap in the face. Not to mention the question if they have dealt with video overheating in the smaller body. They haven't in 5R.
The way I see it (and I am an NEX user) this still looses to m43 like the e-pm2 which has a touch screen and no video overheating issues, although the built-in flash is a nod in the Sony's favor. Add a touch screen and no overheating and this is a winner. For now it's a worthless replacement of an f3 offering a slight reduction in size and nothing else.
NEX-6 is the first one that doesn't seem to overheat. Many have done tests, including myself, and multiple 30 min consecutive recording at room temp don't even cause a warning.
Touch screen is not about menu control -it is about touch to focus and touch to focus+shutter functionality, which help you tell the camera what to ficus on rather then missing focus or having to recompose which is hard with moving subjects. It is also a huge aid in shifting focus in video between subjects as well as focus shift from foreground to background etc.