Why can't camera manufacturers get it right first time by putting out a camera that actually works, instead of fleecing photographers again with an "updated" model that merely corrects a flaw in the original?
Couscousdelight: About sharpness, this is what the K3 is capable of :http://www.chassimages.com/forum/index.php/topic,193673.msg4265953.html#msg4265953
It's a well lit studio shot, but it does show what one can and should expect from this new Pentax. Crystal sharp, and shot with a zoom lens. dpreview's sample images really have done no justice to what the this Pentax can do. Begs the question, how did the sample images get past the Editor?
davids8560: I dunno. The X100s' 35mm lens reminds me of the year 1935, when, as everyone knows, the great T.E. Lawrence of "Lawrence of Arabia" fame died in a motorcycle accident in the English countryside. It's kind of a deal breaker for me.
I'd much prefer a 64mm lens, because 1964 was the year the animated cartoon series "Speed Racer" made its television debut.
I don't know whether you are one of the world's great thinkers, or simply weird. lol.
Is it just me, but none of the images in these samples really looks that impressive, which comes as a surprise. And I'm viewing on a full HD screen.
Any thoughts? Is it the sensor or in-camera processing?
Jeff Greenberg: Have been using Canon EF 17-55mm f2.8 on 7D bodyfor almost 4 years. (yeah, as if it was fixed lens)And as a stock shooter with very limited processingskills, never went above ISO 1000. Nearest camera store told me they'll sell ALL their RX10s as new & won't have floor model, so don't know how I'll test RX10 IQ in advance.
Obviouly increased zoom range would open upamazing amount of new photo opps.BUT ANY OPINIONS ON WHETHER THIS WOULDBE STEP UP IN IQ APPRECIATED. Also, I take afair number of wide angle f2.8 images usingonboard fill flash. Will RX10 at 24mm + shadecast lens shadow when using its onboard flash?
Am also surprised no one here reports they are conflicted between RX10 vs. A7r + fast lightweight zoom? I am...
Jeff, about a potential conflict, I did in my posting, which you will see if you check the comments on dpreview's news item, and not this first impressions listing. I was comparing it to the venerable R1.
The photo that was published is the one that does it for me, and I find it far superior to the one that was pulled.
The girl connects directly with the camera and photographer and her gaze is concentrated on them. But what lies behind that glaring look?
In the other image, this direct connection is missing, leaving me to wonder what she is looking at and what causes her to bring her hands up in front of her face in apparent fear of something we can't see. Or is she simply covering her face as a Muslim woman would in front of men?
peevee1: "Sony announces A7 and A7R: first full-frame mirrorless ILC cameras"
First of all, Leica M9 was the first full-frame mirrorless ILC camera, long time ago.
Actually, for digital, it was likely to have been the Epson RD-1 in 2005.
Wow! FF sensor with E mount. Full FOV with TP lenses via a myriad of lens adaptors. I think I want one, doesn't matter which!
As long as the Zeiss lens is of equivalent quality, this could be a genuine successor to the lovely R1. True this had an APS sensor of 10meg, but the huge advances in sensor technology and processing engines could even things out, and probably it will even be better. Can't wait to see a dpreview.
I have a gut reaction that my bank account will have a little dent in it soon! Oh, but there are the new full frame Alpha 7 and Alpha 7R E mount cameras. Choices, choices.
Zvonimir Tosic: Ricoh to Pentax is now same as what Asahi Optical was to Pentax. Neither "invented" Pentax, but bought it. Remember the times when Asahi letters were *engraved* above the Pentax letters on every single pentaprism, on millions of cameras?At least Ricoh is more subtle and is signing off at the back of the camera. So read it as a signature: "We at Ricoh, now recognised as world leaders in sustainable technologies and brand stewardship, are proud to deliver to you this Pentax camera, made to excite you and exceed your expectations". Ricoh is recognised as one of most ethical companies in the world; please check your facts guys.
To save everyone looking it up. by all accounts, the name "Pentax" was registered by VEB Zeis Ikon of the then East Germany, and was a derivation of Pen(pentaprism) and (Con) tax, so a Contax camera with a pentaprism.
It is this name that Asahi Optical acquired the rights to and started to brand its film slrs with a pentaprism as "Pentax".
I'm not into smartphones and so have no need of the latest all singing all dancing models, heck, I'm happy using an ageing Galaxy SII, but I did marvel at the panorama images posted here. They did look pretty impressive for a smartphone viewed on my 1080p monitor. Taken in good weather, but nevertheless shows what the latest iPhone can do.
Marijus: HmmSONY NEX--6 78% - Silver award.Fujifilm X-M1 77% - GOLD award.Can you explain why?Price is almost the same.NEX-6 has viewfinde, Fuji - doesn't;
Valid point. Inconsistency in marking. In my school days, too long ago now to remember, lol, 78% was better than 77%. Odd then, that the higher percentage is only deserving of a Silver Award.
But when it boils down to it, whatever we may personally feel, these marks are still subjective, that of the reviewer. Others will undoubtedly think differently.
guyfawkes: It is irrelevant now as you're moving to a new test target, but I was somewhat taken aback at your comment that the scene had to be shot at very small (diffraction limited) apertures to ensure that all the key targets were acceptably sharp. I am assuming this was to allow for sufficient depth of field.
However, does this mean that the lenses used for the tests may not have been at their optimum apertures and that you may have shot at slightly smaller apertures but before noticeable image degrading diffraction played its part? I'm a little confused as could it be interpreted that not every camera/lens combination was at its best?
Thanks. So your new 2D test target could enable you to shoot at the lens' optimum aperture, or would this be too time consuming to always have to work out what it is?
Though I suppose you could keep one test lens for each brand of camera you test, but I can see it would take time to ascertain this where you were testing a fixed lens camera, especially a zoom where I can appreciate that the optimum can shift depending upon focal length and with the requirement to capture the test target.
I'm glad you test cameras and not me. :-D
DaytonR: I will really miss the Martini and Baileys from the old studio scene :)
Aha, but don't overlook that the real things are available for purchase. lol.
It is irrelevant now as you're moving to a new test target, but I was somewhat taken aback at your comment that the scene had to be shot at very small (diffraction limited) apertures to ensure that all the key targets were acceptably sharp. I am assuming this was to allow for sufficient depth of field.
Fraud is a crime, and the perpetrators need to be punished.
The Japanese legal system simply gave them a rap over the knuckles. Justice for US, UK and other nation's citizens needs to be seen to be done. Think of those whose pension funds were hit, or whose savings were affected, and the impact on long serving employees' pensions.
So peevee1 and others with a similar twisted sense of duty, please take note.
utomo99: Instead of just rebranding products, why Leica did not do some smarter way ?1. Put Faster Lens. 2. Read the user comments about that cameras and improve it based on that. and other improvements. And I believe people will respect better
I fully understand your point, well made, and not rude.
How much more should a Leica re-worked (I prefer this to badged, as there is more to it than this) Panasonic cost? Does Leica pitch it at cost +, or where it feels its target audience will accept? To some, it will come as no surprise that it is more likely to be the latter. To others, well they get upset because it is not what they personally think it should be.
There is undoubtedly a lot of commonality between the Leica and the Panasonic, but I can see that the top plate is completely different, so this bit does require separate tooling and machining, and on a low volume product just how much does this add to the price? Like millions more, I have no idea. Nor do I have any idea of how much extra attention Leica may be giving to QC, if indeed they are. But if they are, this is a highly labour intensive part of production and will have to be factored into their pricing.
Was it only a few months ago that Olympus was saying they wouldn't be forgetting their loyal 4/3rds followers? Well, they haven't, unless you honestly believe that an EVF is a legitimate substitute for an optical slr viewfinder and with, hopefully, full compatibility for older 4/3rds lenses. The obvious problem here is no new lens designs for 4/3rds users who will be forced to move over to ILC to benefit. Does this new model herald the end of the road for 4/3rds slrs?
Despite this slight gloom, I do believe it is uneconomic for Olympus to run two production lines for 4/3 and M4/3, and given that 4/3 never fully delivered on its promise and M4/3 is producing better IQ anyway, it seems a brave move for Olympus to finally concede the lack of viability and cost effectiveness in continuing with 4/3 which would be competing against more advanced APS-C contenders. To continue would only be money down the drain and which Olympus can little afford at present.
I doubt it really matters what Leica do; those who have no respect for Leica as a company are unlikely to be swayed. Leica prices will always be high, and as a result they will always be out of reach of many who get a kick out of ranting both against Leica and Leica owners. It's jealousy or envy, take your pick, but it is seldom based on reasoned argument.
Do people hate Ferraris or Bentleys because they are expensive? No they don't, but in some small minds Leica is fair game. It never ever was so, so I do not understand the modern mind change. As for Leica prices, well, even Canon and Nikon have admitted that some of their lenses are in Leica territory, and have to be so because they are made in very limited numbers. I don't see anyone ranting about the prices of these specialist lenses.
They say a fool and his money are soon parted, and the pricing structure does look odd.
$200 gets you the enlarger; $250 gets you a "nearly full kit" of enlarger, trays, safelight and paper. So what more do those shelling out $450 get?
But one has to admit that the enlarger does have a certain Bauhaus style to it. And in the days when I did my own D&P even I didn't come up with the idea of stacking my dishes as here.