Peter Bendheim: The haters are out in full force today I see. Good morning to y'all!
The point that I don't get are those that complain about sensor size. There are plenty other options out there in the Fuji range for larger sensors starting from the X100s. So go get one.
It's like being mad at a car company because their compact car doesn't come with a V8 like their other models. Choose another model or another brand. Cameras are not swiss army knives--they can't possible have every feature in every model. There are plenty of people who will more than like the X30, as there are plenty people who do like Canon's G16. Such a fuss about nothing.
Totally agree with you Mr Bendheim, for me also I think this will be a very good camera for street photography, overall I like what I'm seeing and reading.I personally love the styling.
Thanks DP Review for showing this video, I'm into aircraft in a big way ( military mainly ) but what a great job Larry Reid Jr has.To pull nearly 9g and still take pictures like that is just brilliant so big kudos to the man.And a big thank you to Mr J Schneider for making the video, fantastic stuff.
Thunderbirds are GO.....( after the Red Arrows of course ) =o)
This is going to be my travel camera of choice as well as everyday useage.I have Pansonic G6 for my main camera and I love it but this FZ1000 ticks all the right do daas for the time when I don't want to schlep all my gear around also, I only shoot in raw and from what I've read it seems to do well in that department.Well done Panasonic.
Again some comments on here border on the laughable. Yes of course everyone has the right to an opinion but please....there's even someone on here talking about shares in Sony. For what it's worth G.P.S is a gimmick whether it adds to the price I don't know. The built-in viewfinder is a good idea and overall I might be tempted to buy one. Be nice to have on my travels abroad.
I like the comment..."Though a little long in the tooth, the Panasonic Lumix GF6"This camera only came out last year ( about September? ) and its already being classed as long in the tooth.You can see why manufacturers keep updating their line ups for no apparent reason when you get reviews like this.The " I must have the latest gear" brigade must be throwing out their G6s in droves because its a bit long in the tooth after reading this.Dear life....whats the world coming to??
tmurph: I had a Olympus OM 20 once, but that wasn't an April fool....no wait!And another thing....go on then....explain 6 Axis.....go on...go on..ah! see yer no good.
Hold on Revenant, you just described a Michael Jackson dance routine....left/right...up/down...forward/backward...rotation...pitch/yaw and roll...don't forget slide....yeehee...Billy Jean not my lover....ahem...never mind.
I had a Olympus OM 20 once, but that wasn't an April fool....no wait!And another thing....go on then....explain 6 Axis.....go on...go on..ah! see yer no good.
Just a question, why isn't the Lumix G6 not on the list of camera's to compere with the E-M10?
As already mentioned, could you get away with photographing people in that manner today?The answer is yes, in a city like New York or as seen in the film around the Los Angeles/Hollywood area because of it being a tourist attraction. Try doing it in your local town and see what kind of reaction you get. Of course it's all down to the way you approach the subject and it's also a question about confidence but even so, today it's become harder to go about taking pictures without someone causing a fuss and calling the police.
Chris_in_Osaka: Mine is bigger than yours!
Well said, I've spent a while putting some comment together but you sum it up in a short and to the point paragraph.Totally agree.
I'm off to the photography show this weekend, I've been to others over the years and always start to drool over what's on show, but what blows my mind every time is the quality of the photographs on show. I don't stand looking and thinking what gear did the photographer use; Although Some info on the lens is always helpful but not essential, to me anyway. I've said it before but the camera is a box, a clever box, but just a box, the lens is the important thing so forget the gear freaks who will discuss to the minuscule degree the pros and cons of this button or that button and the tonnage of the body compared to say.....A feather...just go to a gallery or a photography show and look at the quality of the photographs it's the end Result that counts.Me, I'm going to look at some paper, inks and lovely lenses and the photos of course. Keep reading the gear freaks who want to put glass eye's to sleep and give an aspirin a headache or....go out and use the camera you've got and enjoy the end result.
The nearest competitor is the Panasonic GX7...not the G6 then, strange one that, considering they are both DSLR type cameras whereas the GX7 is more like a Olympus Pen.
yonsarh: why Hasselblad cannot make their own camera? instead borrowing technology from SONY?
Nikon use Sony made censors for their cameras and then tweak them. Hasselblad has decided to cut manufacturing costs by using an off the shelf design by Sony. Nothing wrong in that but, in this case all they are doing is pampering the people with money. A pro wouldn't fall for the hype because he/she is already using either a top of the range DSLR or a Hasselblad which are the tools of their trades. Hasselblad have always been a top marque for professional photographers and now they are trying to get into the amateur/enthusiasts market by using rebadged Sony designed cameras, be interesting to see how that pans out.Maybe their previous CEO left because he didn't believe that's the way to go regards market strategy but there will always be people who buy stuff just to hang around their necks as baubles to show how rich they are.
Something bothers me about the design behind these cameras. When you look at the spec it's a bit mouth watering...20/1200 zoom lens being the wow factor and also all the usual bangs and whistles that are now common in any new camera that comes along. But, and here's the baffling thing for me, and it's this.Sony bring out a full frame mirrorless camera. How close to the censor is the lens on these cameras compared to the super zoom bridge cameras. I would like to know because if you think about it, imagine a bridge camera with a full frame censor, surely isn't that the whole idea behind digital? an all in one camera rather than a full bag of lenses and other paraphernalia.
What's stopping the camera manufacturers from designing full frame bridge camera? Why do they bring out a camera with a huge zoom lens and put it in front of a censor the size of a knats testicle. The reason I ask this is because I read somewhere recently that a top fashion photographer took an i- Phone On his latest assignment and all the photos on it. When someone asked him about the sharpness of the pictures he said " they don't look for sharpness, they look for impact " so don't mention quality of a DSLR and a prime lens compared to a bridge camera because that doesn't come into it.
Timmbits: Is there a software hack to allow the D3x00 series to do bracketing?
Because that, which costs nothing, and the hinge on the screen, are mainly what set the D5x00 series apart from the D3x00 series.
That's $5 of manufacturing cost for $hundred$$ more in retail price. I'm not sure they'd sell any d5300s if this thing had a hinge.
I point it out, because I'm against manufacturers that have nearly identical equipment, intentionally handicapped, to make you want to sell, instead of keep, when you yearn for that little extra feature. I don't like the feeling of being scammed when I know a D5300 doesn't offer anything more with relation to the extra money it costs.
Totally agree, most manufacturers get up to that kind of scam. Personally I can do without the movie mode if they put in a bracketing facility. If I wanted to make movie's I would buy a digital camcorder. I know it's a choice thing but why bother with some unimportant gizmo for the sake of something that would be more helpful.
Some of the comments on here are so negative it makes you wonder why they bother. There is actually someone on here who has compared this entry level camera with a pro spec Cannon....WHAT!! Then you get the one who hasn't got a clue about card speeds but derates the D7100 buffer, go figure. To have an entry level DSLR with that kind of spec has got to be applauded no matter who brings it to the market so, if you're one of those who's a gear freak but never takes any photos stop boreing everyone else on here and get a life.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion but a lot of stuff on here is just childish claptrap.
Got to say, I like the way it looks. The shutter being on the top plate again would'nt bother me.Shame they had to put program and shutter priority in it. Apeture and manual would have been my choice but thats just a personal thing.Glad they've done away with the silly movie mode, and the lenses look the part.Lets see what the full review brings but for now I think I'll start saving.
Ever since (well not "ever since" ) but at least for a while since digital has got bigger and better I've been thinking why the camera manufactures out there have not brought out a fully manual DSLR?Having all the bells and whistles is all very good but the age old question comes into it "do I need all this auto stuff?The auto bracketing option, yes ok, a good meter of course ( I wonder how many out there still use a hand held meter) and good auto focus.Movie mode, personaly No. Never use it so whats the point, and some of the other auto gizmos too many to mention.Now Nikon have hopefully thought along those lines and are bringing out the 21st century version of the old Nikon FM or FE....happy days.
Brilliant, the work that went into that shoot is just amazing.What a job he's got, imagine having to get up every morning and enjoying the work that you do. Not many people can say that.
Murray Rothbard, so what you're stating is that when someone or some organisation sees an image taken by someone else they have the right just to take/use it for their own needs. They never bothered to get the equipment together, use their own transport or payed for the travel to get there. Didn't do all the hard work but think they have the right just take someone else's work and more than likely made money out of it.Yes he does own the image, he bothered to do all the hard work to get it.He stopped a moment in time, its part of history now and it most probably brought a lot of enjoyment to people who have looked at it.To your way of thinking Ansel Adams is just an insignificant little person who took some of the most iconic photographs ever seen but, realy shouldnt have bothered if he doesn't want anyone to look at them.