martygervz: I have this book. Like everyone, I'd like to know more about this incredible woman. The photographs may be eclectic, but there is always that steady gaze in the eyes of the people she has photographed. They must've trusted her. Using a twin-lens camera, as she did, was the perfect snap-shooter piece of equipment. She had to be patient. Those being photographed had to trust her. There is a lovely gentle quality to these pictures.
I feel that same rapport that you note, that many of her contemporaries lacked. Maybe she felt like publishing them would betray some unspoken trust? These images don't have a hint of exploitation, which is really rare! Really really RARE!
Kwick1: So you suggest going to a bookstore, whose very livelyhood is being threatened, and read the book for an hour. Essentially stealing intellectual property. It's like standing at a magazine rack at the store, reading the articles that interest you, and then putting it back on the shelf. It's stealing, pure and simple.
Check it out from the library if you only want to peruse it. Otherwise, support your local bookstore and buy one.
At least he's compelling us to visit a bookstore. For a site owned by Amazon, that in itself is heresy.
We apologize, we were not able to offer this camera for a fair price while the inventor and our President were still alive. Now that they are gone, we want to lower the price before anybody else succumbs.
I'm imagining Yamaki just had an "A Christmas Carol" experience with apparitions of his old boss and Merril saying, "Ooooh, the 800E has no low pass filter and 36mp. lower the price or else you'll have to keep all the excess inventory sitting in the warehouse..."
How far ahead of the competition did they think they were, anyways?
This photographer doesn't understand anything. She should have said, "1000 dollars could capture the history, but 5000 dollars will permanently record the emotional truth of your love for all time. Not even a divorce can erase the love preserved therein. For another 2000 I can capture the emotional truth of your wedding night, but you'll have to sign releases, etc."
exdeejjjaaaa: that dude somehow forgot to mention that he is deducting his business expenses taxwise... so he is either stupid (not to deduct) or liar (in his calculations)
1099 ain't what it used to be.
Richard Murdey: Not all technology progresses at the same rate. Sigma bet on the wrong horse with Foveon, just like Hitachi and plasma displays. The difference is Sigma aren't willing to accept defeat and move on.
They proved it was the right technology with the DP1, here on this website, DPreview said that the resolution easily beat a 12mp Panasonic or Olympus image. Okay so, not 14mp, but 12mp... By Dpreview's logic the SD1 is 42MP, not 46MP, and those aren't crappy P&S pixels, either. Every snarky electronics guy knows if your technology is expensive to produce, the answer is to produce much much more of it. If your favorite camera brand had a foveon sensor version coming out, you'd be pooping yourself with joy.
Gene Hack: the problem is not only the steep price of the cam.If it were a superior camera to all existing DSLRs, people would at last accept it.The fundamental issue is, that they have issues with the sensor. 7F stops dynamical range is something NO PROFESSIONAL photographer, let alone ambitioned amateurs accept.Weak greens, smeared color transitions and lifeless color balance worsen this.No listening at all to the customer, and having a pitbull defending shilled user base over at the Sigma forum with passive support for this behaviour by the company kill this product.PR at worst.
That's pretty spot on. I'd add that there is a fundamental cheapness of mind in the Sigma management that refuses to allocate software and engineering resources to fully fleshing out the SD1. The reason there's no video is they didn't want to spring the extra $300/unit price for a video card. I was surprised to see them develop live capture (tethered) software for the SD1... It is at least 1mm closer to being a reliable studio camera. Although I haven't used the capture software, and can bet you it is crap.
Quality wise, in my tests, the SD1 more closely matched my betterlight in quality, against a 100mp image, than I could discern - blowing away the 5d mII (but at normal ISO, so...) the betterlight is more convenient... at least it can be tethered.
Why make a large sensor camera that is small and handy to use? This looks like another attempt on Canon's part to make a good camera. I am going to preorder this EPIC FAIL!
KODAK's major problem is their CEO. The guy is an EX HP cheif. Remember how well HP handled the digital camera market? There you go.
Sevventh: Kodak's value is rarely seen by the consumer anymore, they make the sensor for the Leica M9 and have patents which are worth a fortune however.
they sold off their sensor division to Platinum Equity last month. However, most hollywood films are shot on Kodak film, and not even Red has come close enough to the quality to cause Hollywood to shift... We're talking millions upon millions of feet a film a month.
photo nuts: Sample images from Fujifilm here:
Expecting to see pixel sharpness rivaling that of Sigma SD1/9/10/14. Didn't happen. Nothing particularly exciting... All hype....
They are Jpegs, so it's hard to say if they resolve higher from raw. Inspecting Jpegs from the SD1 (from camera not photo pro) can lead one to think there is no more to resolve... Not the case with the SD1, far from it. Sadly you have to us PhotoPro to draw the giant images from the RAW, a bad program that they somehow have made worse for the SD1.
Zvonimir Tosic: Filling a gap in the market?
Better Ricoh fill up gaps in their reasoning. GXR system is the most ludicrous approach amongst mindless contributions to the depreciation of any camera value humankind has ever seen.
It wasn't enough we have millions of $100 P&S cameras with tiny sensors weld on lenses thrown each year — now we have $1,000 chips+lenses packages too!
If that was the price of not inventing their own mount, then they'd better be doing something else and actually inventing, like Fuji did with the X100 and invented the OVF/EVF hybrid.
Hope someone from Pentax will start opening windows in their new quarters now, to let in some fresh breeze of reason, start from anew. A mirrorless APS-C mount, a clever and less wasteful system that actually makes some sense for the future.
I guess I needed to finish the thought. My RD1s is nice but large, and I worry about wearing it out, The M8 & 8.2 require filters and they are still quite expensive. The Ricoh M-Mount may depriciate, but I am enjoying using my M mount and m39 lenses now, not just waiting around to afford an M9. That is the niche, a need in the market which was not fullfilled prior.
on the announcement of the m-mount I was sceptical, because I'd tried the m to 4/3 and m to NEX adapters, and always had trouble getting critical sharpness. Ricoh has the first non-rangefinder digital solution that doesn't have me blowing up the focus area to 100% to make sure it is in focused. That made it worth the 650 right there. Even with automated focus assist on NEX and M4/3, the method interupts compostition, you can focus, then you can compose, so don't use a very large aperture, because your subject is out of focus again, so check focus again, and compose. The Ricoh solution is a virtual rangefinder, only backwards. The area in focus highlights and you shoot. It is as though the camera designers at Ricoh also take photographs.
Prognathous: I agree that the welded-lensor concept doesn't make much sense (at least not with APS-C sensors). Ricoh should focus on a adding more mount modules, with K-mount being the obvious first choice, now that they've bought Pentax.
As for the claim that flange distance from the lens mount to the sensor makes such modules too large, the solution is simple - make it collapsible. When the camera is turned off, the module should fold back for "coat-pocketability" with pancake lenses. When the camera is turned on, the module should expand for correct focusing all the way to infinity.
The same folding mechanism can be used with manual focus lenses to provide AF (by moving the mount back and forth).
Lastly, with new lenses designed specifically for this mount the module can stay folded and still provide focus to infinity, without compromising size.
In short, Ricoh can and should use existing mounts - even with long flange distance. Compact size can be maintained with the above solution.
The limited pancakes are amazing lenses, but those would be the only ones you could use with it, and be pocketable. Forget pocketable. Even with a collapsable mount, they'd have to allow room for the aperture pin, which come down quite a ways. That aperture pin is the spoiler to your plan. Don't get me wrong, I own a GXR, and I would jump at a K mount (though a k to m adapter would serve me just as well). I think APS-c sensors can remain quite flat without much trouble versus film.
What I'd like to see, since nobody asked, is like the boroscope idea... only a bellows with m39 mount for using enlarger lenses: 35, 55, 75 for macro, 100, 127, 135 for portraits.
The module could include a motorized tripod mount for taking stacked images. The ultimate macro digital camera. I would take that over the LYTRO any day.
here 2 infinity: Thanks for the interview. Was waiting to see if he mentioned a lower priced version to compete with the Panasonic AF100 (AF102 here in New Zealand), as the low cost XL1 was their low cost claim to video fame back in the day, and for my thinking, for 20K, the RED Epic is still a much better camera body.
The scarlet is 4k resolution, for $14,000 - ef mount and a few extras. You must not have checked recently.
so glad I bought the GH1. Poor Woodford.
Canon's got the ball.