More than three decades of digital production
As far as I'm concerned, Photoshop and Lightroom are one.
I don't like companies that curtail my choices.
I like the concept of ownership, (license or otherwise).
I just purchased AfterShot Pro!
I think that society has taken privacy too far.
Cameras everywhere would bring about a new order of accountability.
I'm hoping this technology will be pervasive enough to overcome our privacy issues.
peevee1: "Looking at the data, we're not seeing the EOS-M users making use of a variety of lenses. "
Could it be... maybe... because... there is NO "variety of lenses" for EOS M? :) :) ;)
The EOS-M is a point-and-shoot on steroids. It is meant for those that don't want interchangeability of lenses.
There's no EFV, no tilting screen, I won't put my L glass on a camera that was designed for peaceful coexistence with their current product line.
Canon has enjoyed success for far too long—they have forgotten how they got there in the first place.
Yet another lens that is incompatible with my E-M5!
DickyUK: brilliant Hassleblad diversify from re-badged Fuji's to Re-badged Sony's
Stick on a Hassleblad badge and up the price ;)
Hassleblad must really think highly of their customers.
We live in a time of rapid change—and time waits for no one.
The press release makes no reference to Four-Thirds (FT), it just acknowledges that the E-M5 is not capable of utilizing existing FT lenses.
The solution that they are working on could still be something other than a new pro E-System.
Olympus would do better to develop a smart adapter for m4/3 that utilizes the existing pro-grade lenses. The adapter could actually help Olympus expand their market to sell more of the FT pro-grade lenses. Another pro-level E-System would only be sold to existing lens owners.
It looks like Canon is starting to show a small piece of their future vision with STM lenses.
If this new breed of glass has faster focus using contrast detection, then it will be indicative of what is to come from their mirrorless plans.
Design the new system to be mirrorless (short flange distance), bring out an smart adapter and now Canon can bring to bear their entire DSLR customer base!
What are their chances of success?!
Unfortunately, WiFi isn't going to win them much in the way of market-share.
SirSeth: Here is where I think it could be great.
1. Using smartphone, ipod touch, or tablet as a remote touch screen viewfinder.
2. Built in radio TTL for multiple flashes.
3. Streaming pictures I take directly to my PC or cloud based storage. (Never change memory card again during events).
4. Using my smart phone apps to post pictures to facebook/ebay/craigslist or emailing pictures to friends.
I could see how even professionals might find this very attractive.
Videographers would really love the remote commander/viewfinder.
Is Nikon making room for a lower end model?
ksgant: Would love something like a base camera system. Has a great sensor (at least APS-C sized), good lenses and then have a connection to plug in your smart-phone to control everything. Give us a great API to program to, and just unleash developers on it to give us all kinds of things.
OR, build in a device that can be programmed extensively. I don't care...and don't care if it's Android or iOS or whatever. But look at all the neat things that can be done on a small little camera phone on the iPhone 4. Now just imagine that control...and even more...on a big-sensor camera system.
I agree provide an extensible system via an API and let the development community dream up new possibilities!
And it shouldn't be Android or iOS or any other smartphone operating system.
Gee, let me think here: let's take an OS than was designed from the ground up for mobile devices and graft it on to a camera.
" 'Our present platform is more than capable of delivering a robust Smart Camera experience to consumers and we will continue to evolve that platform.' "
Why can't Sony develop a simple product line?
The A57 should have been their top-of-the-line with the 16.1MP sensor.
Is Sony afraid that this segment would cannibalize the A77?
The "great divide" seems to be between high resolution and high ISO performance.
The exclusion of the OLED viewfinder, IMO, is a deal-breaker.
That it can't accommodate an EVF is a deal-breaker.
This need for motion also existed in the 1970s. After I opened my photography studio, I found my self working with Super 8 film. I think still and motion images are, and have always been, inextricably tied. The big difference today is the unification of the instruments.
An appeal to the past is fine, but Olympus could have made better use of the hump. One way would have been to integrate a swivel EVF inside the dome.
Kabe Luna: My goodness this is expensive for an m4/3 camera, no matter how highly-specified. At the end of the day, it's the sensor that matters, and with the same relatively noisy 12-16MP chips as most of the rest of the current m4/3 brigade, I can't see a reason for the price premium over, say, a GX1, let alone the similarly-specified–and cheaper–G3.
"Image is everything."
"The chain is as strong as its weakest link."
That Olympus has put all into this iteration of their product will not make a dent into the Canon/Nikon market share if the sensor inside lacks in dynamic range.
tlinn: Am I the only one who thinks this is the ugliest camera I've seen since the dawn of digital? I'm all for throwbacks but...yuck.
I agree with Hen3ry—the design is of the function follows form.
If you remove the hump, you have a Pen.
But apart from this hump, Olympus has included all the right stuff.
The deal-maker will be in the image quality.
tommy leong: WELL DONE Pentax
this is something CANON or NIKON could have easily donebut they choose to sit on their ass....
Only a small company like PENTAX would listen to customersThey really handed one to the big boys !
Well said and expressed.